I suspect there was an administrative error here, and anthere has complained to Quadell directly about this.
Hopefully this will gets sorted out to everyone's satisfaction.
Arno ----- Original Message ----- From: Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion of my images Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 06:03:44 +0100
For the second time this month, one of my images was deleted on the english wikipedia.
I was not warned at all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Anthere/PictInsectes&diff...
I'll be frank, I AM PISSED OFF.
It is written clearly on my talk page, and my user page that all my images are gfdl. All my insects pictures listed on my user subpage are labelled, but this one.
Just as I already said on the pump less than 2 weeks ago, I think it is really pure disrespect to delete an image without asking the author, and then only AFTER deletion, to go on this user subpage to remove the link to the deleted image. If there is time to go on my user subpage to remove a link, then there is time to drop by my user talk page and talk to me. Of there is time to read the mention on my user and user talk page and to read my warning about the status of my images and to update the image status.
I am sorry, but I really find this of the latest rudeness.
From now quite far away, as I have no more time to edit the english wikipedia, I have the horrible feeling the english wikipedia has become a very very cold place, where there is no respect for editors except those well known possibly. If feels like if one is not among the major editors, he does not count, and his feelings are not important at all. It looks like a machine. An automate. Not a great human construction.
We are all here because we believe in what we do, but what we do is only good because we do it together and because we trust each other.
Well, at least, some people trust other people. And if it is not possible to trust someone who spent already 3 years on wikipedia, I wonder how newbies are treated.
In case you feel like telling me "yeah, but this is just one case you know, not everybody does that", I will then ask why Quadell is trusted to delete images. I do not trust him to do so. Not because he does not do this according to rules, but because he does not do this while taking human feelings into account. And wiki only works thanks to human power.
Anthere
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
There was no administrative error. This was done on purpose as the image was missing a gfdl tag. When I uploaded these images, tags were not mandatory yet. And my insect images had tags *but not* this one.
I complained to Quadell directly and asked him to restore the image. But iMeowbot nicely restored it from a mirror.
The point is, this is *not the first time it happens*.
When I uploaded this picture, I specifically agreed on a little text saying something like "By uploading a file to which you hold the copyright, you agree to licence it under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License.".
So, I agree, but it does not matter I agree at all.
I was also asked some time ago to indicate under which licence I give my images. But the license I mention does not matter.
So, why do we have to agree on this little text when we upload and why are we asked under which license we give our images since it does not matter ?
And why do I give images to Wikipedia for them to be deleted ?
Actually, I recently gave many of Algeria, but the more time goes by, the less I give.
The reasons are
* some english wikipedians delete images uploaded in good faith without warning * images deleted are not easily recoverable * wikimedia projects do not respect the license by not always displaying clearly that images uploaded on wikicommons are under gfdl nor by mentionning authorship on the local projects * wikicommons does not provide a link to where the images are used, so do not allow editors to check whether the way images are used are following legal requirements or not * uploading images unfortunately takes time, even more on wikicommons where issues of duplicate in names begin to appear * wikicommons is in english only, hence limiting access to those non english speaking * wikinews does not allow uploading images, hence preventing the easy use of images to non english speakers (since they can not easily manage wikicommons)
The more time goes by, the less motivating it is to provide images imho. I admire those who continue doing so. It needs real faith.
Anthere
Arno M a écrit:
I suspect there was an administrative error here, and anthere has complained to Quadell directly about this.
Hopefully this will gets sorted out to everyone's satisfaction.
Arno ----- Original Message ----- From: Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion of my images Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 06:03:44 +0100
For the second time this month, one of my images was deleted on the english wikipedia.
I was not warned at all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Anthere/PictInsectes&diff...
I'll be frank, I AM PISSED OFF.
It is written clearly on my talk page, and my user page that all my images are gfdl. All my insects pictures listed on my user subpage are labelled, but this one.
Just as I already said on the pump less than 2 weeks ago, I think it is really pure disrespect to delete an image without asking the author, and then only AFTER deletion, to go on this user subpage to remove the link to the deleted image. If there is time to go on my user subpage to remove a link, then there is time to drop by my user talk page and talk to me. Of there is time to read the mention on my user and user talk page and to read my warning about the status of my images and to update the image status.
I am sorry, but I really find this of the latest rudeness.
From now quite far away, as I have no more time to edit the english wikipedia, I have the horrible feeling the english wikipedia has become a very very cold place, where there is no respect for editors except those well known possibly. If feels like if one is not among the major editors, he does not count, and his feelings are not important at all. It looks like a machine. An automate. Not a great human construction.
We are all here because we believe in what we do, but what we do is only good because we do it together and because we trust each other.
Well, at least, some people trust other people. And if it is not possible to trust someone who spent already 3 years on wikipedia, I wonder how newbies are treated.
In case you feel like telling me "yeah, but this is just one case you know, not everybody does that", I will then ask why Quadell is trusted to delete images. I do not trust him to do so. Not because he does not do this according to rules, but because he does not do this while taking human feelings into account. And wiki only works thanks to human power.
Anthere
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 07:47:47 +0100, Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
When I uploaded this picture, I specifically agreed on a little text saying something like "By uploading a file to which you hold the copyright, you agree to licence it under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License.".
I agree that this should be either binding or stricken.
We should set up a quarantine where all images which have not been validated or license-verified can be put. Then there will be no un-repealable deletion, save for vandalism images and known copyvios. Please.
- wikinews does not allow uploading images, hence preventing the easy
use of images to non english speakers (since they can not easily manage wikicommons)
Why is this?
Anthere wrote:
So, why do we have to agree on this little text when we upload and why are we asked under which license we give our images since it does not matter ?
Well, a lot of people agreed to that text without reading it, and uploaded images they don't own, so Wikipedia has a bunch of nonfree images on it---which is the reason for the whole image-tagging project in the first place. But it's supposed to be standard to ask the uploader about an image before deleting it, so that part wasn't done correctly.
-Mark
(CC to commons-l)
Ant-
- wikimedia projects do not respect the license by not always
displaying clearly that images uploaded on wikicommons are under gfdl nor by mentionning authorship on the local projects
In MediaWiki 1.5, a backlink to the Commons is automatically inserted. In 1.4, this was not the case, and it had to be manually put into the MediaWiki: message - some wikis therefore still lack the backlink. This will be fixed once 1.5 goes live, but can also be fixed by any sysop on the project in question. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sharedupload is a good example to use for this.
You are correct that image license information should be displayed directly on the image description page. This is likely to happen soon.
- wikicommons does not provide a link to where the images are used, so
do not allow editors to check whether the way images are used are following legal requirements or not
Unfortunately, that is correct. Alongside automatic transclusion of image information pages, an EXTLINKS table on the Wikicommons might be used to store usage information. A quick hack using absolute URLs might be sufficient for now.
- uploading images unfortunately takes time, even more on wikicommons
where issues of duplicate in names begin to appear
It is generally a good idea to make a name unique, for example, by adding your username at the end. No matter how large a wiki is, a filename like [[Image:Flower.jpg]] is simply not unique enough. Still, there are ways to improve the handling of the situation, for example, by providing an "Alternative filename" input box when a filename already exists.
- wikicommons is in english only, hence limiting access to those non
english speaking
That is not a fair comment. The Main Page alone has been translated into over 30 languages. For gallery page titles, a carefully thought out policy is used (e.g., use native names for specialty foods, use latin binomial for animals and plants). The interface language of the wiki can be selected in the user preferences. Templates have been created to show what languages a user speaks and are actively used. Filenames are accepted in all languages. The main problem is with categories, which are, unfortunately, not easily internationalizable due to redirects from one cat to another not working -- a technological problem.
- wikinews does not allow uploading images, hence preventing the easy
use of images to non english speakers (since they can not easily manage wikicommons)
I do not see how limiting Wikinews to the Commons excludes non-English speakers, see above, though certainly it is a little more difficult. As you know, this is strictly for legal reasons until the fair use situation has been sorted out:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2005-February/002217.html
This procedure has been directly approved by Jimmy.
The more time goes by, the less motivating it is to provide images imho.
Personally, I find it more motivating to upload images now, because thanks to the Wikimedia Commons, I know that anyone on any project can easily use them. I agree with you that certain functionality would be useful and fun. I've only ever pledged to implement the baseline functionality for the Commons, which I have done. I'll try to find time to add some of the above discussed features, but frankly, coding and testing a new feature is not a lot of fun, and as I've said before, until the WMF goes into the habit of handing out development contracts, projects like Wikinews and Wikicommons will stagnate technologically. All of the above, plus more, could be fixed with a few strategic investments in developer resources. Single login alone would greatly increase cross-project usability, as language preferences could be persistent, and you could easily upload files directly from a local wiki to the Commons.
As an elected Board member, you have the power to speed up the pace of innovation. I have offered many times to help with that. A handful of active developers will *NOT* be able to keep up with the needs of thousands of users.
All best,
Erik