[Commons-l] Fwd: [Foundation-l] Friendliness

[Gnangarra]

Why is and why should "Ownership" be such a big deal, what ever the re-use
license the author is still the image owner and always will be.

 Commons best resource is always going to be our contributors because they
make Commons unique we should be encouraging that resource, but we dont
infact we drive our best contributors away by niggling at them by limiting
them from promoting themselves(no customer user attributions boxes on image
pages) but we let images sourced from FLICKR do just that and we even
promoted FLICKR with custom boxes on the image pages, the same goes for
other GLAM-type institutions that have contributed works they give a small
resolution image in return they get a custom box with link back to where
people are charged for larger images even on PD images.

I think we should be about improving the authors experience and valuing
their efforts more,

Wikinews has three pages for each article, *collaboration and opinions* so
the background setup is there maybe we can have three tabs as
well,*file,talk,feedback
* with feed back being solely about commenting on the image aspects




On 23 February 2011 23:20, Siebrand Mazeland <s.mazeland at xs4all.nl> wrote:

> Not sure if anything as described below has ever been suggested, let alone
> rejected. Wikimedia projects usually do not work in the same way as Pau.l
> has indicated in the example for Flickr. "Ownership" is the main
> difference, I think, but ways of using and embedding the resources are
> also very different.
>
> Still, each media upload on Commons has a media revision history, which
> indicates which user has uploaded the media, and there is a direct link to
> the user talk page of the uploader. From a page in a random Wikimedia
> where the media is being used, it takes 4 clicks to comment to the
> uploader, although this does not immediately provide a connection to the
> media file:
>
> 1. Click media in Wikimedia project page.
> 2. Click link to commons from Image: resource page in local Wikimedia
> project.
> 3. Click link to uploader talk page.
> 4. Click link to create new page section for commenting.
>
> I agree; this is quite a journey, and many will probably fail to complete
> this challenge. What user story would be fitting here? From there, a
> solution could be designed.
>
> Siebrand
>
> Op 23-02-11 16:04 schreef Eusebius <wikipedia at eusebius.fr>:
>
> >Now that's constructive.
> >I would love to see something like that on Commons. But surely this is
> >not the first time this is suggested, and this has been rejected for a
> >reason?
> >
> >Guillaume
> >
> >Le 23/02/2011 15:58, Paul Houle a écrit :
> >>      As someone who develops media collections,  I've been thinking a
> >> lot about the role of community,  and in my mind,  Flickr is the site
> >> that is the most successful at attracting photographers because Flickr
> >> is all about the photographer.  The way comments and favorites work is
> >> particularly sticky because you know you're giving feedback directly to
> >> the person who took the picture.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> Commons-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>



-- 
GN.
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
Gn. Blogg: http://gnangarra.wordpress.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/attachments/20110224/4dbadc1b/attachment.htm