"Sean Barrett" sean@epoptic.org schrieb:
If we have to completely gut our encyclopedia by removing a large percentage of its images....
I hardly think removing even "a large percentage" of our images constitutes "gutting" our encyclopedia. And even if it did, no one is suggesting removing "a large percentage," just a handful of "fair use" borderline cases.
Well, let me make that suggestion then. I would like to remove all pictures for which: 1. no author or source is known, and 2. there is no good reason to believe they are public domain
From my own sample, which unfortunately did not get posted on the list
yet (I sent it from another email address, and it is waiting moderator approval because it is from a non-subscribed address), I think that this might include as many as 20% of our current images.
Andre Engels
Well, let me make that suggestion then. I would like to remove all pictures for which:
- no author or source is known, and
- there is no good reason to believe they are public domain
From my own sample, which unfortunately did not get posted on the list yet (I sent it from another email address, and it is waiting moderator approval because it is from a non-subscribed address), I think that this might include as many as 20% of our current images.
If so, then I'm wrong and will immediately change my position. If 20% of our images are from questionable sources, we are in a bad position and need to correct it quickly. Given the large number of images that have no provenance information, perhaps we should rearrange the image-upload process to require uploaders to click through a "where did you get this image" page before they enter the file name. Of course that won't force anyone to enter anything, but it will make it more obvious that they should.
Sean Barrett wrote:
Well, let me make that suggestion then. I would like to remove all pictures for which:
- no author or source is known, and
- there is no good reason to believe they are public domain
From my own sample, which unfortunately did not get posted on the list yet (I sent it from another email address, and it is waiting moderator approval because it is from a non-subscribed address), I think that this might include as many as 20% of our current images.
If so, then I'm wrong and will immediately change my position. If 20% of our images are from questionable sources, we are in a bad position and need to correct it quickly. Given the large number of images that have no provenance information, perhaps we should rearrange the image-upload process to require uploaders to click through a "where did you get this image" page before they enter the file name. Of course that won't force anyone to enter anything, but it will make it more obvious that they should.
I would say it was greater than 20% from the tagging work we've been doing.
Copyrighted 43 Fair use 186 GFDL 1714 Noncommerical 26 Public Domain 369 Unverified 273
Total images tagged so far: 2611 (approx total images 40,000) Percentage unverified (images with no info): 10.4%
However: the figures have a bias as we have been tagging our own images. I have uploaded 193 images, Morwen has uploaded 1224 (a thousand of which are her GFDL maps). When I was tagging yesterday's image upload log over 50% had no info.
I hope this helps.
Caroline / Secretlondon
On Sat, Feb 21, 2004 at 09:20:12PM +0000, Caroline Ford wrote:
I would say it was greater than 20% from the tagging work we've been doing.
Copyrighted 43 Fair use 186 GFDL 1714 Noncommerical 26 Public Domain 369 Unverified 273
What does "copyighted" mean ? Everything on this list except PD is copyrighted.
On Sat, 21 Feb 2004, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
On Sat, Feb 21, 2004 at 09:20:12PM +0000, Caroline Ford wrote:
I would say it was greater than 20% from the tagging work we've been doing.
Copyrighted 43 Fair use 186 GFDL 1714 Noncommerical 26 Public Domain 369 Unverified 273
What does "copyighted" mean ?
Allowing any usage, but retaining copyright.
Imran
Imran Ghory wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2004, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
On Sat, Feb 21, 2004 at 09:20:12PM +0000, Caroline Ford wrote:
I would say it was greater than 20% from the tagging work we've been doing.
Copyrighted 43 Fair use 186 GFDL 1714 Noncommerical 26 Public Domain 369 Unverified 273
What does "copyighted" mean ?
Allowing any usage, but retaining copyright.
Imran
copyrighted tag is for ones that we have specific permission to use. CopyrightedFreeUse is for ones that aren't specifically GFDL but they don't mind who uses them and for what purpose.
They may need renaming
Caroline
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org