Or, the es.wp users are all not aware of the restrictions on what is acceptable. Your earlier post appeared to support the es.wp position. This is a problem that should be handled at the source, not creating better tools to fix what should not be happening in the first place. If, say, 90% of the material being uploaded is against the grain, why should we not try to fix the problem at the source? We are clearly not doing a good enough job explaning what is okay and what is not if this kind of situation has evolved.
On 11/14/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 14/11/06, Brad Patrick bradp.wmf@gmail.com wrote:
Commons exists to be a repository for free culture *and* to serve as an inter-wiki storage medium for *free* media. it is not a place to dump stuff, nor is it a place which exists independently of other wikis. Copyright violations are not a minor or trivial problem. They are a serious problem, for which we are obligated to act when they are properly brought to our attention. This is all nothing new. If there are Wikimedians who are advocating housing copyrighted media in Commons, speak up now, because we need to get clear on why that is not cool immediately.
There isn't anyone advocating that; this discussion started with a Commons admin threatening to block all es:wp users from Commons to stop copyvios from es:wp, because the Commons admins can't keep up, evidently because their admin process is strict enough that pretty much no-one even bothers trying.
- d.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l