Nope, just a typo in the address. There's no such thing as
club-intrenet. However, there is a provider called : club-internet :P
I have answered to the guy on his talk page and will be sending him an email.
Best,
Delphine
On 10/4/05, Anthere <anthere9(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> je pense que ceci résout le problème...
>
> Ant
>
> --- MAILER-DAEMON(a)yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > Hi. This is the qmail-send program at yahoo.com.
> > I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to
> > the following addresses.
> > This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it
> > didn't work out.
> >
> > <zivax(a)club-intrenet.fr>:
> > Sorry, I couldn't find any host named
> > club-intrenet.fr. (#5.1.2)
> >
> > --- Below this line is a copy of the message.
> >
> > Return-Path: <anthere9(a)yahoo.com>
> > Received: (qmail 47074 invoked by uid 60001); 4 Oct
> > 2005 11:45:51 -0000
> > DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
> > s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
> >
> >
> h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
> >
> >
> b=h8klirIjqTMjZaFQj+cipeNvudZrAntEbrYfOfVYlQQD0HP7q/Lx10owTNb4LdqVrNrr+oLm8r2s506WvVOeSWVchWyF7yluMJxTFhoxSd0ddOeZuhZVH9eBh1qt5fbNbt4ayiTHdpoHrilb4ev91SdeL++u/T5sKCyzHec7Tgk=
> > ;
> > Message-ID:
> >
> <20051004114551.47072.qmail(a)web32907.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> > Received: from [83.205.50.250] by
> > web32907.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 04 Oct
> > 2005 04:45:50 PDT
> > Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 04:45:50 -0700 (PDT)
> > From: Anthere <anthere9(a)yahoo.com>
> > Subject: Re: courriel envoyé depuis Wikimedia
> > Commons
> > To: Zivax <zivax(a)club-intrenet.fr>
> > Cc: commons-l(a)wikimedia.org
> > In-Reply-To:
> > <200510041043.j94AhhAJ001690(a)srv15.pmtpa.wmnet>
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> >
> >
> > Bonjour,
> >
> > Je crois que les habitants de Wikicommons ont une
> > politique très "ferme" vis à vis des licences.
> >
> > Je ne sais pas trop ce que tu as fait... tu ne
> > pouvais
> > déjà pas éditer sous ip, puisqu'à priori l'upload
> > des
> > images requiert un compte utilisateur.
> >
> > Y a t-il un francophone qui puisse aider ?
> >
> > Anthere
> >
> > --- Zivax <zivax(a)club-intrenet.fr> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > J'ai implantÃ(c) des images de wiki Anglais sur
> > > commons...j'ai eu mon I.P de retirÃ(c), et depuis je
> > > me retrouve dans la panade complète, car
> > certaines
> > > photos m'Ã(c)taient donnÃ(c)es par leurs auteurs.
> > > Les articles crÃ(c)Ã(c)s sur wikipÃ(c)dia n'ont plus
> > > d'images autorisÃ(c)es...j'ai commis qqlqs erreurs
> > > mais tout retirer je trouve cela peu
> > diplomate...je
> > > suis nouveau sur wiki mais honnête. Je fais mon
> > > mea-culpa pour les erreurs mais j’apprends au
> > fur
> > > et à mesure.
> > > Comment rattraper le coup.. ? ? ?
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> Commons-l(a)wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>
--
~notafish
--
~notafish
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
[I'm cc'ing this to commons-l, as it should be seen/discussed by the
community.]
On Sep 27, 2005, at 12:20 PM, Erik Moeller wrote:
> I've assigned you a couple of new slices.
OK, thanks!
> Benjamin Esham wrote:
>
>> Also, I was thinking... should we have a tag (probably {{flickr}}) to
>> mark images that have been taken from Flickr? That would make the
>> FlickrLickr images a lot easier to find, and I think that having a
>> consistent template for information like original image URL, original
>> uploader, etc. would be a good idea.
>
> Yes, feel free to give it a try. The important thing, I think, is
> to keep it
> simple so it remains pleasant to edit through the FlickrLickr UI.
> But [...]
> seems simple enough.
I've created a template {{Flickr}} (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/
Template:Flickr). There's an example up at <http://
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Bdesham/temp>. It would be nice if
the Flickr logo were included, but we can't use fair-use images on
Commons AFAIK. Here's the template syntax:
{{Flickr|
| photographer = [<user's url> <user's name>]
| photographer_location = <location>
| title = <title>
| description = <description>
| taken = <date>
| flickrurl = <image url>
}}
This seems like it should be reasonably easy to edit with
FlickrLickr; if you got really crazy, you could use a text box for
each value and have the script assemble them. That's probably
overkill, though.
How does this template look?
- --
Benjamin D. Esham
bdesham(a)gmail.com | http://bdesham.net | AIM: bdesham128
Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia ∙ http://en.wikipedia.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFDObZjzOC3TdZ2u5oRAqx0AJ9JAy0jx2/EKyQTWseiaqGs0hPMJACgpRX+
kGfD4LATm5QXkardQ5se1FU=
=WtRG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
A total of 14,000 CC-BY-licensed photos on Flickr has now been reviewed
using the collaborative process described at:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:FlickrLickr
A total of 1,284 photos has been uploaded to the Commons so far, i.e.,
less than 10% of the reviewed photos on Flickr have been deemed useful.
I have collected some of my personal favorites on
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:FlickrLickr/Highlights
We're splitting the ~500,000 CC-BY images into slices of 1,000 each,
which are reviewed one by one by different people. The reviewers so far:
- Andre Engels: 5 slices
- Angela: 1 slice
- Benjamin Esham: 1 slice
- myself: 7 slices
We need more FlickrLickr reviewers! Just email me to get an account for
http://epov.org/cgi-bin/flickrlickr.pl
and I'll set you up. It's very easy: All you need to do is select the
images you want, and edit the descriptions and categories.
The decision what photos to keep is often very subjective, of course. I
think the best approach is to take into account
- uniqueness
- usefulness for Wikimedia
- technical quality.
If a photo shows a very common object, animal, place or process, then it
should probably only be picked if it is of very high quality. If it
shows something more unusual, the first question is whether it is at
least theoretically identifiable, and potentially useful for one of our
projects. Technical quality isn't quite as important for these.
We also need to be careful not to let mood affect our judgment. For
example, if you're very hungry, you might select hundreds of photos of
food ;-). So far I'm acting as a final reviewer on all slices, but I'd
like to delegate that role to someone else at some point.
Again, if you're interested, please email me and I'll give you a slice
to look over. It can be very addictive.
Best,
Erik
Eine deutsche Version meines Artikels über die Creative Commons
NC-Lizenzen ist nun verfügbar:
http://intelligentdesigns.net/Licenses/NC/de
Der Text legt die Gründe dar, die dagegen sprechen, "freie" Lizenzen zu
verwenden, die eine kommerzielle Nutzung der Inhalte verbieten. Das ist
für Wikipedia und Wikicommons wichtig, da per Jimbo Medien unter solchen
Lizenzen in allen Wikimedia-Projekten verboten sind.
Ich hoffe, dass diejenigen von Euch, die sich damit befassen,
Institutionen von der Anwendung freier Lizenzen zu überzeugen, daraus
einen Nutzen ziehen können. Der Artikel wird voraussichtlich auch im
nächsten Open-Source-Jahrbuch erscheinen.
Über sinnvolle Bearbeitungen oder Hinweise würde ich mich freuen.
Viele Grüße
Erik
Hallo,
Commons:Licensing currently says that "trademarked logos" should not be
uploaded to Commons. I'd like to propose to change that.
Short version: Trademarks are very different from copyright. They are
more like "other laws which restrict the free use" of (any) content and
Commons does already allow seals, flags, coats of arms, Olympic symbols,
the Red Cross and Crescent (all of which are protected quite like
"commercial" trademarks) as well as Nazi symbols (the use of which is
extremly restricted in some legislations such as DE, AT, HU).
Long version:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Licensing#Trademarks
Claus
--
http://www.faerber.muc.de
Is Wikimedia bound by local laws regarding images? Eg. if the place
where the photo was taken says I'm not allowed to take a photo, or that
the thing I'm taking a photo of is copyrighted, is the photo allowed to
go on Commons?
Oh, and on a related note: If something vaguely looks like something
which someone else has claimed is trademarked, is it? Does that make the
image "unfree"?
--
Alphax | /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred | \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613 | X Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up | / \
I am cc'ing this to commons-l, since this discussion belongs there anyway.
Laura Scudder wrote:
> For instance, for the Netscape icon
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Nuvola_apps_netscape.png we
> apparently can only use it in limited cases and are supposed to
> include the text:
>
> "Netscape, Netscape Certificater Server, Netscape FastTrack Server,
> Netscape Navigator, Netscape ONE, SuiteSpot, and the Netscape N and
> Ship's Wheel logos are registered trademarks of Netscape
> Communications Corporation in the United States and other countries.
> [List other Netscape product names used in your document] are also
> trademarks of Netscape Communications Corporation, which may be
> registered in other countries." (from
> http://wp.netscape.com/legal_notices/trademarks.html)
>
> So it would seem to me that we shouldn't have the trademarked images
> that we can only use in limited cases anyways.
>
>
> Laurascudder
Yes, delete it. Stuff like this should be speedy deleted from commons,
I think. Commons should tend very strongly towards purity, not
comprehensiveness. There can be strong editorial reasons for including
such things in the encyclopedia itself, and "fair use" makes an
appearance there, but in commons, we should tend towards purity. Strongly.
--Jimbo
For quite a long time, I've been meaning to write a summary of the key
reasons not to use "non-commercial uses only" licenses. It is now online at:
http://intelligentdesigns.net/Licenses/NC
I posted it to Kuro5hin as well, where it is now being discussed:
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2005/9/11/16331/0655
The version on the wiki is slightly more comprehensive and will
hopefully evolve over time.
This is not specific to Wikimedia, but I hope that those Wikimedians
lobbying individuals, governments, and educational or scientific
institutions to put their content under truly free licenses or into the
public domain will find this collection of arguments useful.
Best,
Erik
I am cadidadate to be syspos
Pour tout vous dire ma principale raison pour soliciter votre
confiance est mon confort personel. Je pense être un assez gros
contributeur ici [1], et qui dit gros contributeur dit erreurs
et donc statut d'adminstrateur car pourquoi laissez faire à
d'autre ce que l'on peut faire soi-même ? Le nombre des
contributions ne font pas, aujourd'hui un administrateur. Aussi,
vu que beaucoup des administrateurs de langue française sont
occupés par des tâches "supérieures", je m'engage à être ici,
sur commons, comme je le suis wikipédia, un adminsitrateur au
service des autres contributeurs. Pour moi wikimedia commons
doit être exemplaire dans le sens où les fichiers que nous
proposons doivent être absolument "libre" (et si possible en
haute définition pour les images). Je n'ai pas d'appareil photo
et toutes les images que j'ai uploadé ici sont compatibles avec
commons avec une utilisation la plus large possible. Je ne suis
pas parano avec les droits d'auteurs. Je ne suis pas juriste,
mais je connais un peu le droit de la propriété intellectuelle,
le respecte et veux le faire respecter. Mais je souhaite aussi
en profiter pleinement et vous en faire profiter lorsque
celui-ci m'y autorise.
en: : For all to tell you my principal reason for soliciter your
confience is my personel comfort . I think i have made lots of
contributions here [2], and when you contribute a lot you make
lots of mistakes and why let do with other what one can do
yourself? The number of the contributions do not make, today an
sysop. Also, considering many the administrators of French
language are occupied by "higher" tasks, I engage with being
here, on commons, as I am to in wikipédia, a sysop with the
service of the other contributors. For me wikimedia commons must
be exemplary in the direction where the files which we propose
must be absolutely "free" (and if possible into high définition
for the images). I do not have a camera and all the images which
I uploadé here are compatible with commons policy with the
broadest possible use. I am not parano with the royalties. I am
not a lawyer, but I know a little the right of the intellectual
property, respects it and want to make it respect. But I also
wish to benefit from it fully and to make some to you profit
when this one authorizes me there. (P.S. : i make this
translation myself, if you want do do it best, please do it !)
to vote :
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Administrators/Requ…
