Maybe people don't know but video donation happens in Wikimedia already and it doesn't need to be from Youtubers.

Here is my favorite example: German public broadcaster (ARD) donates short informational videos to Wikipedia and they are used in articles in German Wikipedia. They get a lot of views. Here is a list of videos from one of their programs named Tagesschau:

https://mvc.toolforge.org/index.php?category=Videos+by+Tagesschau+(ARD)&timespan=&rangestart=2023-08-01&rangeend=2023-09-01&limit=100

For example, this video about Golf Stream and impact of climate change on it which is used in the article of Golf Stream in German Wikipedia:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kurzerkl%C3%A4rt,_Golfstrom_-_Tagesschau.webm

Or when cold or hot temperatures can be dangerous to humans: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gut_zu_wissen,_Wann_wird_K%C3%A4lte_gef%C3%A4hrlich_-_Tagesschau.webm

Or an explanation on Carthage, even with English subtitles: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Karthago,_Ph%C3%B6nizische_Gro%C3%9Fstadt_(CC_BY-SA_4.0).webm

It'd really be nice to see more partnerships like this. Whether with youtubers, public broadcasters, museums, universities, or anything like that!

Am Fr., 26. Jan. 2024 um 19:29 Uhr schrieb Andrew Bogott <abogott@wikimedia.org>:

On 1/26/24 12:05 PM, geni wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 at 22:24, Ivan Martínez <galaver@gmail.com> wrote:
>> By not having a Youtube 2.0 we are avoiding a Wikipedia 2.0 with pure encyclopaedic videos. I see a false dilemma there.
>
> Creating good encyclopaedic videos is from a video production point of
> view a far harder problem that dealing with the technical hurdles in
> uploading video to commons. Going to take a lot of effort in
> scripting, shooting, lighting and editing. And having your editor of
> choice render the final project in a wikipedia friendly format should
> not present a problem (and if it does handbrake exists).
>
> I really doubt we will ever get much in the way of encyclopaedic
> videos on our platforms since they take so much time and cost so much
> to make that they are only viable at scale from people who can do it
> at as a full time job. Youtubers find ways to do that through adsense,
> sponsor spots and Patreon. Not really something you can do on
> wikipedia.
I don't know much of anything about youtube licensing... is it possible
for youtubers to dual or re-license their content? Could we invite
creators to donate their content to the commons after a year or two when
their revenue stream has trailed off?
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/HBN55JV62BGTTBZHVVNBLPFHHHF2Y4XO/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org

--

Amir (he/him)

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/PPSSF4WI4VOU7ULX3HNSWTTULEM2WZHN/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org