On 4/2/07, Platonides Platonides@gmail.com wrote:
Plus, the message wording must clearly state that it *Was* pulled from commons, better with some legal wording as "we're not responsible about it" and preferably, with a link to the user which uploaded it (similar to what was done on en: stating what there are archived versions).
Yes, we have some good users who can craft a lovely clear message when the time comes.
Another problem i see is a vandal uploads 'goatse' to commons marked as GFDL, and immediatly inserts it on one hundred MediaWiki installs. We will delete it almost immediatly but he now has it on a lot of mirrors. Requiring the file to be at least X minutes old would benefit this, but makes InstantCommons useless for those who want their users to upload at Commons (which may or may not be a good idea).
Another reason why autodeletion and deletion cause codes are important... "Maintaining a user submitted image library is *hard*, let the experts at Wikimedia Commons handle it for you" .... The initial access to the content is just a little part of the cost of having media on your website. :)
The delay makes sense.. Based on our deletion rates a ~10day delay would be best..
Perhaps the way to deal with that is to include an over-ride on the receiving site and figure a way to auto-fire it for content submitted by the sites users?