On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 10:02 PM, Michael Peel<email(a)mikepeel.net> wrote:
On 12 Jun 2009, at 11:13, Sam Korn wrote:
Right. I certainly agree that it would be better
to name the author.
But when articles are reused, they generally link to the Wikipedia
article without giving a list of usernames; I don't see why that
would be different for images.
Images are generally the work of one, or a few people, whereas
Wikipedia articles are the work of many.
In the case of the images that I've taken myself and uploaded to
Commons (CC-BY-SA license), pretty much the only thing I'm after for
myself is attribution. I believe that's a standard stance amongst
photographers that aren't also after money as a matter of routine.
I'm not sure whether I'd go through all the trouble of uploading
images to Commons/Wikipedia were that not the case.
TBH, I think giving a list of usernames/authors of Wikipedia articles
when they're reused would be best, but due to the number of authors
that's more often than not impractical.
And for the (not insignificant number of) cases where there is more than one contributor
to an image? E.g. where an image has been touched up by another user?
I'm suggesting a simple, catch-all method. If the method we suggest isn't simple,
it won't be followed.
I agree entirely that giving a list of users would be *best*, but I'm not sure that
practically we have that option.
Sam
--
Sam
PGP public key:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sam_Korn/public_key