Does a species list meet the threshold of originality? I'm dubious
that it qualifies for copyright protection.
I think it may be appropriate for a Wikipedia project. The only object
that occurs to me is notability, but in my opinion, a location
specific plant list, if published, is notable.
-- Walter Siegmund
On Feb 24, 2011, at 10:21 AM, Michael Snow wrote:
On 2/24/2011 10:07 AM, Stan Shebs wrote:
To take an example from my activity, much of my
plant photography is
motivated by checking off a published list of the thousand-odd taxa
recorded in the Spring Mountains west of Las Vegas. I've been doing
penciled annotation of the physical list, partly because I don't
have to fight over having a WP or commons version of the list. It
be very convenient to have it in commons to track what pics we are
looking for, and be able to point my fellow Vegas plant people at it,
but I just know that there would be a nonstop parade of busybodies
arguing that the list (full of redlinks ZOMG!) is inappropriate for
Actually, the real problem is that presumably the list is not freely
licensed. Even though your annotation of it makes a pretty good case
transformative fair use, that doesn't help you with Commons policy.
Maybe there's too strong of an expectation that Commons is only for
finished products and not intended to be a workspace, notwithstanding
that it is still a wiki.
Commons-l mailing list