[Foundation-l] Commons as an art gallery?

List overview All Threads
Download

newer

older

[Foundation-l] The Signpost –...

[Foundation-l] User talk page...

Andreas Kolbe

16 May 2011 16 May '11

11:40 a.m.

There is a long thread on the Commons and Gendergap lists about today's featured image on Commons: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/2011-May/ http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/2011-May/ It's an original piece of art by a Wikimedian, "in the style of" erotic manga: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:On_the_edge_-_free_world_version.jpg The picture was removed from the main page by a WMF staff member, acting as an ordinary editor, and then restored a few hours later by a Commons admin. Aspects of the image that have been discussed include the fact that * it has no noteworthy artistic value * it is used to showcase a Wikimedian's artwork on the project main page * it lacks educational value, being the work of a non-notable Wikimedian * it makes the Foundation look puerile * it might turn off serious educators * it might turn off older people * it might turn off schools * it might turn off women * it might turn off institutions owning valuable content from donating to the Foundation * it is the victim of cultural fascism directed against manga/anime * it is the victim of prudery * it is the victim of censorship * not showing the image on the mian page would undermine the Foundation's mission etc. etc. This is really a Foundation topic though. Are projects' main pages there to showcase Wikimedians' fine art? If yes, then why do we not have songs by unsigned garage bands "in the style of ..." as featured media of the day? Should the Foundation establish guidelines on what type of content to feature on project main pages? Crossposted to Foundation-l, Commons-l and Gendergap. Andreas

Show replies by date

Ilario Valdelli

16 May 16 May

12:22 p.m.

On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

...

I could continue to say what said in the past. Commons is a "common repository for the various projects". Now the real problem is that Commons is in conflict with other projects because "original works" of pure fantasy (I don't include "original works" to document the reality) are not accepted, except in Commons. In general if I would use these images in Wikipedia, for example, I would be in conflict because I cannot use "original works" in this project (and this image is a "strict" original work). In my opinion Commons is moving the project in an incorrect direction and I would appreciate a lot if Commons will divide the project to receive "original works" of pure fantasy in one repository and the documentary work in another in order to help the other project to understand what is original and what is not original. Commons should have the same rule of Wikisource/Wikibooks. Ilario

Andreas Kolbe

12:29 p.m.

Neil posted the following on Commons-l* and asked for it to be cross-posted here: -- * See http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/2011-May/006038.html * Also see http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/2011-May/006036.html for a longer post by Neil on the image ---o0o--- On 5/16/11 5:40 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:

...

This is really a Foundation topic though. Are projects' main pages there to showcase Wikimedians' fine art?

Béria Lima

12:54 p.m.

I would like to question something: Why you people are not discussing that in commons? Because here people can give opinions, in Gendergap mailing list too, but the people who can actually change the policy are the commons editors. So, is not better spend all that talk in the wiki? _____ *Béria Lima* <http://wikimedia.pt/>(351) 925 171 484 *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*** 2011/5/16 Andreas Kolbe <jayen466(a)yahoo.com>

...

This is really a Foundation topic though. Are projects' main pages there

showcase Wikimedians' fine art?

No. This is a non-issue. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Project_scope#Must_be_realistical… "Examples of files that are not realistically useful for an educational purpose: [...] * Self-created artwork without obvious educational use." QED. Someone else cross-post this to Foundation-L... I have assiduously avoided subscribing there and don't plan to now. -- Neil Kandalgaonkar ( ) <neilk at wikimedia.org> _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Andreas Kolbe

1:19 p.m.

--- On Mon, 16/5/11, Béria Lima <berialima(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

I've been discussing it on your Commons talk page for the past four hours, but you're not replying. Would you like to suggest somewhere else? Andreas

Béria Lima

1:21 p.m.

well, you are not the only talking in my talk page, so i imaged my opinion would be useless :P But in this case, i will go there answer you people. _____ *Béria Lima* <http://wikimedia.pt/>(351) 925 171 484 *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*** 2011/5/16 Andreas Kolbe <jayen466(a)yahoo.com>

...

--- On Mon, 16/5/11, Béria Lima <berialima(a)gmail.com> wrote:

I've been discussing it on your Commons talk page for the past four hours, but you're not replying. Would you like to suggest somewhere else? Andreas _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Risker

2:21 p.m.

On 16 May 2011 12:54, Béria Lima <berialima(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

Well, I suppose I would be happy to talk about it on the wiki....if I could find the place where it's being discussed. Not at the village pump, the talk page for picture of the day, the talk page of the image, the administrator noticeboard, the Main Page talk page... Risker/Anne

Steven Walling

2:49 p.m.

On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Risker <risker.wp(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

Ha! Exactly. I am on Commons just about every other day, and I couldn't figure out the best place to bring it up. Steven

Ilario Valdelli

2:27 p.m.

On 16.05.2011 18:54, Béria Lima wrote:

...

I have thought to don't reply to this cross-post but I have only indicated one opinion concerning the impact of Commons choices in the other projects. I would not influence the decision of the Commons community (probably in future I will subscribe to this list), but I would give to all communities a point of discussion to understand that an important project like Commons can influence other projects. In my opinion this image, put in all wikipedia home pages, can create two big problems: a) a problem of acceptance of "original works" b) a problem of acceptance of "promotional works" (original works are not accepted also to prevent promotional works) I understand the position of Commons, and there is no problem to have this content (but well categorized in order to prevent mistakes), but the decision of Commons has broken two important pilasters of Wikipedia, for example. In any case we could start from this experience to improve the guidelines of Commons and of all other projects, not necessary looking in this experience like a point of dispute. Ilario

Andreas Kolbe

2:03 p.m.

Incidentally, that little piece of original art is also the picture of the day on several Wikipedias' main pages; among them the Russian and Bulgarian Wikipedias. The image itself has been nominated for deletion in Commons by User:AndreasPraefcke, as out of scope. A. --- On Mon, 16/5/11, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

...

From: Andreas Kolbe <jayen466(a)yahoo.com> Subject: [Foundation-l] Commons as an art gallery? To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>rg>, "Wikimedia Commons Discussion List" <commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>rg>, "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" <gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Date: Monday, 16 May, 2011, 16:40 There is a long thread on the Commons and Gendergap lists about today's featured image on Commons: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/2011-May/ http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/2011-May/ It's an original piece of art by a Wikimedian, "in the style of" erotic manga: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:On_the_edge_-_free_world_version.jpg The picture was removed from the main page by a WMF staff member, acting as an ordinary editor, and then restored a few hours later by a Commons admin. Aspects of the image that have been discussed include the fact that * it has no noteworthy artistic value * it is used to showcase a Wikimedian's artwork on the project main page * it lacks educational value, being the work of a non-notable Wikimedian * it makes the Foundation look puerile * it might turn off serious educators * it might turn off older people * it might turn off schools * it might turn off women * it might turn off institutions owning valuable content from donating to the Foundation * it is the victim of cultural fascism directed against manga/anime * it is the victim of prudery * it is the victim of censorship * not showing the image on the mian page would undermine the Foundation's mission etc. etc. This is really a Foundation topic though. Are projects' main pages there to showcase Wikimedians' fine art? If yes, then why do we not have songs by unsigned garage bands "in the style of ..." as featured media of the day? Should the Foundation establish guidelines on what type of content to feature on project main pages? Crossposted to Foundation-l, Commons-l and Gendergap. Andreas _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Andreas Kolbe

2:27 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] [Commons-l] Commons as an art gallery?

--- On Mon, 16/5/11, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

...

From: Andreas Kolbe <jayen466(a)yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [Commons-l] [Foundation-l] Commons as an art gallery? To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>rg>, "Wikimedia Commons Discussion List" <commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>rg>, "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" <gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Date: Monday, 16 May, 2011, 19:03 Incidentally, that little piece of original art is also the picture of the day on several Wikipedias' main pages; among them the Russian and Bulgarian Wikipedias.

It's also on the Bengali Wikipedia's main page (serving Bangladesh and parts of India). http://bn.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%A6%AA%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%B0%E0%A6%A7%E0%A6%BE%… Andreas

Andreas Kolbe

2:43 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Commons as an art gallery?

Pete Forsyth made what I think is an interesting point on the Gendergap list. Reproduced below, with his permission.

...

--- On Mon, 16/5/11, Pete Forsyth <peteforsyth(a)gmail.com> wrote: > From: Pete Forsyth <peteforsyth(a)gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons > To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" <gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org> > Date: Monday, 16 May, 2011, 16:49

...

> In my opinion there's a large and > pervasive problem behind today's controversy: in striking > contrast to our core value of openness, it is very difficult > to even *perceive* how important decisions like this are > made. Both the technical and the editorial processes are > pretty opaque to the average main page visitor. > > I suspect there are ways the Commons pages relating to > Picture of the Day could be improved to make it clearer to > the reader how decisions are made, and how to meaningfully > participate in those processes. > > For instance, main page content could have a link named > something like "how did this get here?" that would permit > the reader to view the discussion that led to its inclusion > on the main page. (This is just an off-the-cuff idea, to > illustrate the general kind of usability changes I would > like to explore.) > > To put it another way, the issue behind today's controversy > that interests me most is access. Increasing the ability of > a large and diverse group to participate in important > decisions (like what gets featured on the main Commons page) > is something that would both honor the basic values of our > project, and (I believe) support better content decisions in > the future. > > Anybody interested in tackling this issue? > -Pete >

David Richfield

3:10 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] [Commons-l] Commons as an art gallery?

How on earth can this become the POTD on any Wikipedia? It's tolerably well executed art, but utterly non-notable. -- David Richfield e^(πi)+1=0

Robert Rohde

4:10 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] [Commons-l] Commons as an art gallery?

2011/5/16 David Richfield <davidrichfield(a)gmail.com>om>:

...

How on earth can this become the POTD on any Wikipedia? It's tolerably well executed art, but utterly non-notable.

Thomas Morton

4:30 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] [Commons-l] Commons as an art gallery?

Ah... this is one of those perennial issues that is unlikely to be solved this time around. I think casting this a gender issue is incorrect; certainly amongst my group of friends those who would not appreciate the image are fairly evenly split between male/female. I think most rational adults can tell the difference between porn (or gratuitous sexuality) and nudity. The other problem is not recognizing this as art, in the same way as artistic nudes. Given the ease of making images nowadays there is an awful lot of them out there - and this one certainly runs a fine line. It's an area that is always going to be subjective. Commons is, surely, about media. Is this good media? I am no expert of this genre, but it seems reasonably decent. At the end of the day, NOTCENSORED does come into play - it is a legitimate genre, where the image is judged to be of a high quality. It just happens that it offends the sensibilities of, by comparison to other issues, a largish portion of the editing community. There is an irony in there somewhere. Tom On 16 May 2011 21:10, Robert Rohde <rarohde(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

2011/5/16 David Richfield <davidrichfield(a)gmail.com>om>:

How on earth can this become the POTD on any Wikipedia? It's tolerably well executed art, but utterly non-notable.

The Commons Picture of the Day process allows photos / illustrations of a very high technical quality to be promoted even if they have no claim to notability at all. In general, "notability" has very little to do with Commons at any level. -Robert Rohde _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Dan Rosenthal

6:22 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] [Commons-l] Commons as an art gallery?

I feel like this image from the same author: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Futanari.png might be crossing the lines. Given Niabot's user page loudly railing against Commons being "censored", I'd say the issue is less "art" and more "lets see who we can shock and/or piss off." -Dan On May 16, 2011, at 4:30 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:

...

2011/5/16 David Richfield <davidrichfield(a)gmail.com>om>:

How on earth can this become the POTD on any Wikipedia? It's tolerably well executed art, but utterly non-notable.

_______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Thomas Morton

6:29 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] [Commons-l] Commons as an art gallery?

Yes. I would agree that image is the other side of the line and into pornography. Tom Morton On 16 May 2011, at 23:22, Dan Rosenthal <swatjester(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

2011/5/16 David Richfield <davidrichfield(a)gmail.com>om>:

How on earth can this become the POTD on any Wikipedia? It's tolerably well executed art, but utterly non-notable.

_______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Delphine Ménard

7:25 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] [Commons-l] Commons as an art gallery?

On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 12:29 AM, Thomas Morton <morton.thomas(a)googlemail.com> wrote:

...

Yes. I would agree that image is the other side of the line and into pornography. Tom Morton On 16 May 2011, at 23:22, Dan Rosenthal <swatjester(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I feel like this image from the same author: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Futanari.png might be crossing the lines. Given Niabot's user page loudly railing against Commons being "censored", I'd say the issue is less "art" and more "lets see who we can shock and/or piss off." >

Allow me to disagree. While it would be hard for me to actually see this Futunari image get to the front page (I'm prudish that way), I actually "learned" something from it (had no clue what Futunari was all about, now I know). Which is far from being the case with that "On the edge - free world version" image, which brought me absolutely nothing except a rather puzzled wtf? Delphine -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org

David Richfield

4:43 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] [Commons-l] Commons as an art gallery?

Ah, sorry, I missed the point that it was on the Wikipedias solely as a Commons POTD, and that it hadn't been selected by the wikipedias themselves. On 16 May 2011 10:10 PM, "Robert Rohde" <rarohde(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

2011/5/16 David Richfield <davidrichfield(a)gmail.com>om>:

How on earth can this become the POTD on any Wikipedia? It's tolerably well executed art, but utterly non-notable.

4722

days inactive

4722

days old

wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

18 comments

10 participants

tags (0)

participants (10)

Andreas Kolbe
Béria Lima
Dan Rosenthal
David Richfield
Delphine Ménard
Ilario Valdelli
Risker
Robert Rohde
Steven Walling
Thomas Morton