On 2/27/08, Wily D <wilydoppelganger(a)gmail.com> wrote:
a)Err, obviously professional is preferable to
amatuer.
Err, obviously we would use the best work that is available a free
license. If it looks "amateur", then so be it.
But, quite frankly, to explain the subject to someone
with no
experience with it whatsoever, yes, photographs are helpful.
I agree, and will add that in general, most articles make the mistake
of assuming too much background knowledge on the reader's part.
b)Err, depends on a variety of factors - in all
honesty, I'm not sure
a specific number is really called for. Commons has no reason to
delete media unless it's repetitive or useless.
Or "not free", but yes there is no basis for an upper limit on unique
free images, regardless of what they depict.
A Wikipedia article obvious has some called for
quantity, but I'm not
sure how many - I doubt more than a couple (note that in Canadian
English, this could mean 3 or 4)
Damn kinky Canadians. o.O
—C.W.