I agree!
Pete, Kaldari and others have fought the good fight about that. I think some Things were developed on Commons and we tried to get more folks involved to no avail. I can't provide links this second.
I tried my best with model releases (I worked in fashion and photography before I was a Wikipedian and curator!) but little has seemed to come from it and as alway - I encourage people to get involved in curating commons of non-educational content. More voices means more content control.
I had to shift my focus to focus on bringing more women to Wikipedia, which I hope leads to more curating of content. Don't get me wrong - I think his very Important!!
Sarah
Sent via iPhone - I apologize in advance for my shortness or errors! :)
On May 31, 2012, at 1:44 PM, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stierch@gmail.com wrote:
... I think it's concerning about model contracts and so forth, but, I think we have bigger fish to fry at this point. ...
Hi Sarah, I see your point, but I think the model releases are a major issue for us. As I look at it, women *are" involved extensively in Wikimedia, but a big percentage of that involvement comes in the form of being portrayed naked on Commons. This is very troubling to me. If in addition it's being done without their consent, then it's something I really wish we could act on, regardless of the legal requirements.
Sarah
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap