Sam Korn wrote:
On 11/28/05, Anthere Anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
I think you should not play on words if you were fair.
A year ago, fair use was authorized, with no mention if it was authorized in the encyclopedic content or in the user page. Amongst the two untaggued pages listed above, one was a picture of my daughter and labelled as such. It was clearly not meant for encyclopedic space.
Besides, see the message just below as well : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Anthere/box#Image_tagging
It says
P.P.S. I hope all is well with you, and that you are enjoying your labors with Angela and Jimbo. :)
Looking here, I'd like to add that the following images need tags: ▪ Image:Acacia.JPG ▪ Image:Dessication.JPG ▪ Image:SablePlante.JPG ▪ Image:Hoggar.JPG ▪ Image:Hoggar2.JPG ▪ Image:Hoggar5.JPG ▪ Image:Oasis.JPG ▪ Image:Sahara3.JPG ▪ Image:Sahara5.JPG Any more tags would be a great help. Thanks! --[[User:Ricky81682|Ricky81682 (talk)]] 08:11, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)
Does that look like an automated message ? The P.P.S. ?
Look, I find the general behavior which consist in saying to an editor "you are allowed to do that", then a year later, to rudely delete work without warning, upon the reason it is no more allowed now to do that, a bit difficult to admit.
But I find the behavior which consist one year later to deny that what was done a year before, was authorized at that time, much more difficult to admit. Fair use was authorized a year ago. Period.
I think what you are arguing is something different to quite a lot of others. They are saying why the policy was necessary. Your complaint is actually that you weren't warned. I don't think anyone would disagree that you should have been notified before the deletions took place.
-- Sam
Thanks, you are absolutely correct Sam. Yes, what bugs me is the change of policy and no-warning.
I have no problem with adopting a much stronger policy against fair use myself. I think it will empoverish the project, but protect it greatly, as there has been a lot of abuse on this tag use.
Ant