No subject

similar and have accredited photographers. An alternative to having two
separate processes might be to move the Wikinews accreditation process =
over
to meta and work from there across multiple projects. We've had a number =
of
people from non-English Wikinews projects apply for accreditation with =
mixed
results. However, that being said it might be best if Commons hammered =
out
their own rules to start with - particularly requirements that those
applying had good equipment and demonstrated a dedication to the project =
and
a good eye for photography. From a Wikinews perspective it would be
fantastic were there a pool of Commons photographers who could be =
contacted
to attend events with an accredited reporter and cover said event.

If you've any further questions on WN accreditation, feel free to ask on =
or
off-list. There are problems in the majority of countries that work =
under
the Napoleonic code and official, government sanctioned credentials are
unavailable unless you make the majority of your income from your
journalistic pursuits. However in a recent case in Belgium brought =
against
an Indymedia reporter the judge threw it out and specified that the case
should treat the person in question as a journalist and go before a
different court and apply a different law. This is great news for all
citizen journalists in the country as the law in question has not been
applied - successfully or otherwise - for many years.


Brian McNeil
-----Original Message-----
From: foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of David =
Gerard
Sent: 28 March 2008 15:41
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Cc: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Photographer IDs

On 28/03/2008, Adam Brookes <adambro at aebrookes.co.uk> wrote:

> I very much doubt that the Foundation would be happy with having the =
WMF
>  logo used in any way which may suggest that Commons photographers are =
in
>  anyway represent the Foundation. The Foundation have been cautious =
about
the
>  Wikinews accreditation process for this very same reason. They want =
to
>  minimise the risk of exposing the WMF to legal repercussions.


Yeah. The problem is not making up a badge, it's all the legal issues
and project politics surrounding "accreditation".

Is there a nice page somewhere summarising how Wikinews editions deal
with accrediting reporters, which might serve as a comparison?


- d.

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