On 10/16/07, Brianna Laugher brianna.laugher@gmail.com wrote:
On 16/10/2007, Magnus Manske magnusmanske@googlemail.com wrote:
CommonsHelper does have the functionality to do direct uploads via the aforementioned bot account, however, that has been deactivated since forever, due to concerns.
I would like to propose the reactivation of that feature. Concernes about unsuitable uploads through the bot account are superflous, IMHO, since images are screened thrice this way:
- On the wikipedia where the image was originally uploaded
- By the CommonsHelper (e.g. it will reject "fair use" images from en)
- On commons, by the usual suspects :-)
Which is two levels of screening more than direct uploads to commons, which were, last time I checked, enabled ;-)
That's some dubious counting :P
My point is that transfering images from wikipedias through CommonsHelper is likely to result in little copyright violations, compared to our working "grab a user name and upload whatever you want" method :-)
Could CH use a bot similar to the Flickr upload bot? I am really impressed by its method (although it is a little counterintuitive the first time). That way there is a solid record of who the transferrer is... which is the sticking point to allowing "anonymous" transfers, for me.
My whole point is "one-click transfer". IMHO it's less (the same at best) work to save locally and upload than go through the counter-intuitive edit-and-click-here loop.
Also, uploading under my account (instead of a bot) might convey some false sense of ownership. I got some "your-image-is-being-deleted" messages over the years for things I only transfered from a wikipedia. I don't know any more about the images than is given in the description; noone bothers to contact the original author on wikipedia. Uploading through the bot would * show the "tagging" admin that it's no use to write on the talk page ('cause its a bot), but look up the original uploader (one click) * ease nuking of bad images ("bot upload, original uploader long gone => bye-bye")
Magnus