[Foundation-l] [Slashdot] Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
It is great to find issues with MediaWiki. The solution is often not obvious
and, there are often solutions available, some of these solutions do not
scale and some of the solutions are not invented here.David Shankbone is one
of the solutions for our lack of high profile people. David does important
work, his pictures are great but he does not scale.. We need more people
like David.

The Wikiportrait project is another solution. It has been developed by the
Dutch chapter, it works but it is in Dutch. It is software and it needs
internationalisation and localisation. It needs either money for the
internationalisation and then we can hand it over to translatewiki.net.

The last solution is to write to the publication agents and ask them for a
picture of their clients for use in Wikipedia. When we throw in an extra
bone by featuring high quality publications shots.. They are relevant,
encyclopaedic and are at least as relevant as all the bugs and panoramas we
habitually feature.

The best approach would be to promote all three solutions. This would allow
us to be true to our missions and address the issue at the same time
Thanks,
       GerardM

2009/7/20 K. Peachey <p858snake at yahoo.com.au>

> Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> "The NY Times has an article investigating why, unlike the articles on
> Wikipedia which in theory are improved, fact checked, footnoted, and
> generally enhanced over time, the photos that go with Wikipedia
> articles are so bad[1] and in many cases there is no photo at all for
> even well known public figures. Few high-quality photographs,
> particularly of celebrities, make it onto on Wikipedia because
> Wikipedia runs only pictures with the most permissive Creative Commons
> license[2], which allows anyone to use an image, for commercial
> purposes or not, as long as the photographer is credited.
> 'Representatives or publicists will contact us' horrified at the
> photographs on the site, says Jay Walsh, a spokesman for the Wikimedia
> Foundation. 'They will say: "I have this image. I want you to use this
> image." But it is not as simple as uploading a picture that is
> e-mailed to us.' Recent photographs on Wikipedia are almost
> exclusively the work of amateurs who don't mind giving away their
> work. 'Amateur may be too kind a word; their photos tend to be the
> work of fans who happen to have a camera,' opines the Times's author.
> Ultimately the issue for professional photographers who might want to
> donate their work is copyright. 'To me the problem is the Wikipedia
> rule of public use,' says Jerry Avenaim, a celebrity photographer. 'If
> they truly wanted to elevate the image on the site, they should allow
> photographers to maintain the copyright.'"
>
> [1]. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/20/arts/20funny.html
> [2]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_use_policy
> [3].
> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/07/20/0044240/Why-the-Photos-On-Wikipedia-Are-So-Bad
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>