On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:50 PM, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Rich Holton
<richholton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I'd say that Time magazine and the eBay
culprit(s) *should* have given
Durova credit for the restoration. But the "should" I'm using has to do
with
common decency--something that is becoming rather
uncommon.
As that page stands, I'm not sure they *could* have done that, let
alone *should*. There is not a single indication anywhere on that page
that this image contains much hard work by a Wikipedian, and that that
hard work should be acknowledged. There is the brief comment "Restored
version of Image:Stroop Report - Warsaw Ghetto Uprising 06.jpg with
artifacts and scratches removed, levels adjusted, and image
sharpened..", and there Durova's name is listed as the uploader...but
you have to read between the lines to decide that Durova performed the
work, and that that work is worth acknowledging.
We're actually talking about different images...but I think your point still
applies.