Hehe "Taittinger is a leading champagne producer that operates in historic structures from Medieval and Roman times, but due to licensing issues Wikipedia's article depicts only the parking lot."
On 9/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
http://searchengineland.com/070911-083723.php
- d.
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
On 9/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
http://searchengineland.com/070911-083723.php
- d.
...
I see this possibly leading to slews of watermarked images stamped with website addresses.
:(
Ayelie wrote:
On 9/11/07, *David Gerard* <dgerard@gmail.com mailto:dgerard@gmail.com> wrote:
http://searchengineland.com/070911-083723.php - d....
I see this possibly leading to slews of watermarked images stamped with website addresses.
Then we will kindly explain how things work and gently fix things for them.
- c.
On 11/09/2007, Ayelie ayelie.at.large@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
I see this possibly leading to slews of watermarked images stamped with website addresses. :(
So? They're Crappy and will end up being Replaced. Or the watermark removed.
I'm currently working out a useful way to reliably get entertainment industry promo photos Free, as in what would make them flock to us. A few really crappy examples would be a start.
(e.g. "You don't get to have a good photo under your control. You get a crappy photo that's under a suitable license, or you give us a good photo under a suitable license. The latter is probably a lot more to your liking and that of your artists.")
The hardest part is working out where to put it that it would actually get read by the target audience. Ideas?
- d.
On 9/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
The hardest part is working out where to put it that it would actually get read by the target audience. Ideas?
Wasn't there something like a "Click here if you have a free image" image on en for biographies? Might work here as well.
Bryan
Bryan Tong Minh wrote:
On 9/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
The hardest part is working out where to put it that it would actually get read by the target audience. Ideas?
Wasn't there something like a "Click here if you have a free image" image on en for biographies? Might work here as well.
Bryan
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
I was considering doing one for Lepidoptera... so we can massively expand articles without having to wait for butterfly photos...
On 11/09/2007, Cary Bass cbass@wikimedia.org wrote:
Bryan Tong Minh wrote:
Wasn't there something like a "Click here if you have a free image" image on en for biographies? Might work here as well.
I was considering doing one for Lepidoptera... so we can massively expand articles without having to wait for butterfly photos...
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28proposals%29#Redesign...
The current images are bloody horrible. Do we have anyone handy with SVG who thinks they're a good designer?
Also to come up with a suitable replacement text.
- d.
On 11/09/2007, Cary Bass cbass@wikimedia.org wrote:
I was considering doing one for Lepidoptera... so we can massively expand articles without having to wait for butterfly photos..
Do you have anyone who would be prepared to monitor the image stream for copyvios? If yes setting up a system would not be a problem.
On 11/09/2007, Bryan Tong Minh bryan.tongminh@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
The hardest part is working out where to put it that it would actually get read by the target audience. Ideas?
Wasn't there something like a "Click here if you have a free image" image on en for biographies? Might work here as well.
I mean as in Durova did. She wrote her article for promotional people.
- d.
"David Gerard" dgerard@gmail.com wrote on Tue, 11 Sep 2007 15:36:15 +0100:
On 11/09/2007, Bryan Tong Minh bryan.tongminh@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
The hardest part is working out where to put it that it would actually get read by the target audience. Ideas?
Wasn't there something like a "Click here if you have a free image" image on en for biographies? Might work here as well.
I mean as in Durova did. She wrote her article for promotional people.
What about directly emailing the PR departments of the companies?
Flo
Time will come when there'll be a niche for "freelance consulting experts" who'll propose their services to PR departments to upload media to Wikipedia in a way that complies with Wikipedia regulations...
Rama Rama wrote:
Time will come when there'll be a niche for "freelance consulting experts" who'll propose their services to PR departments to upload media to Wikipedia in a way that complies with Wikipedia regulations...
Probably, in India, as with many white collar outsourceable jobs.
On 9/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/09/2007, Ayelie ayelie.at.large@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
I see this possibly leading to slews of watermarked images stamped with website addresses. :(
So? They're Crappy and will end up being Replaced. Or the watermark removed.
They could be good-quality and have a hard-to-remove watermark. Who is going to go through 200+ images a month and remove watermarks? It isn't easy, and we already have large backlogs. Prevention is key, but unfortunately a lot of people in the commercial industry (including pro photographers who are uploading pictures for commercial reasons) have issues with not being directly credited. Remember the hullabaloo with the sports photographer repeatedly reverting his image to the watermarked version, leading its protection and his departure?
New images are great, but perhaps we should emphasize that watermarks are Not Allowed. Not just discouraged, but Not Allowed. On an encyclopedia, having a watermark leading to a website amounts to promotion and such images shouldn't be on articles purporting to be NPOV.
On 11/09/2007, Ayelie ayelie.at.large@gmail.com wrote:
They could be good-quality and have a hard-to-remove watermark. Who is going to go through 200+ images a month and remove watermarks? It isn't easy, and we already have large backlogs. Prevention is key, but unfortunately a lot of people in the commercial industry (including pro photographers who are uploading pictures for commercial reasons) have issues with not being directly credited. Remember the hullabaloo with the sports photographer repeatedly reverting his image to the watermarked version, leading its protection and his departure?
I don't really see a way around that except banning watermarks and/or the uploaders getting a clue.
New images are great, but perhaps we should emphasize that watermarks are Not Allowed. Not just discouraged, but Not Allowed. On an encyclopedia, having a watermark leading to a website amounts to promotion and such images shouldn't be on articles purporting to be NPOV.
Sounds good to me.
- d.
On 11/09/2007, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
I don't really see a way around that except banning watermarks and/or the uploaders getting a clue.
We have banned them for self uploads. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#User-created_images
4th para.
On 11/09/2007, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/09/2007, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
I don't really see a way around that except banning watermarks and/or the uploaders getting a clue.
We have banned them for self uploads. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#User-created_images 4th para.
And on Commons?
- d.
On 11/09/2007, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/09/2007, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/09/2007, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
I don't really see a way around that except banning watermarks and/or the uploaders getting a clue.
We have banned them for self uploads. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#User-created_images 4th para.
And on Commons?
Visible tags or watermarks inside images are strongly discouraged at Wikimedia Commons. So information like "Mr. Foobar, May 2005, CC-BY-SA" shall not be written directly in the image but in EXIF fields, which is technically even superior.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Manipulating_meta_data#Purpose_for...
On 9/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/09/2007, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/09/2007, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
I don't really see a way around that except banning watermarks and/or the uploaders getting a clue.
We have banned them for self uploads. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#User-created_images 4th para.
And on Commons?
No official policy, but general consensus is that we don't like them. Maybe we should add that to Special:Upload (or is it already?).
- d.
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Bryan
On 11/09/2007, Bryan Tong Minh bryan.tongminh@gmail.com wrote:
No official policy, but general consensus is that we don't like them. Maybe we should add that to Special:Upload (or is it already?).
I've noted in the comments on Durova's article that watermarked images are verboten on en:wp and ill-favoured, i.e. likely to be deleted, on Commons - and even if a watermarked image survives on Commons, it's unlikely to be used on en:wp precisely because of the watermark.
- d.
On 9/11/07, Bryan Tong Minh bryan.tongminh@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
And on Commons?
No official policy, but general consensus is that we don't like them. Maybe we should add that to Special:Upload (or is it already?).
It`s mentioned that they`re strongly discouraged (on some upload forms at least, I believe the "self" one), but few people actually read that and it isn't an outright ban.
On 9/11/07, Bryan Tong Minh bryan.tongminh@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/11/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/09/2007, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/09/2007, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
I don't really see a way around that except banning watermarks
and/or
the uploaders getting a clue.
We have banned them for self uploads. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#User-created_images
4th para.
And on Commons?
No official policy, but general consensus is that we don't like them. Maybe we should add that to Special:Upload (or is it already?).
Drafted a sort-of policy here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Watermarks
Please take a look and edit, fix, discuss, etc. if you have suggestions or if I made any mistakes. Thinking on it now, we could perhaps condense the info by moving suggestions and tips to another page and linking them from the "official policy" page, which only contains the basic rules?
Input much appreciated :)
Nice one, Durova!
Look forward to the follow-up, too :)
cheers, Brianna
On 12/09/2007, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
http://searchengineland.com/070911-083723.php
- d.
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l