[WikiEN-l] Technical solution to bad fair use (was:Uploading images should be a privilige...)

[Fastfission]

On 8/1/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
> How much value does a photo being "free" really add to any given
> encyclopaedic article? Is this policy about promoting "free" images
> not at odds with other policies which are all about producing a high
> quality encyclopaedia? What happens when the goal to produce a "high
> quality" encyclopaedia is at odds with the goal to produce a "free"
> encyclopaedia?

The value is project-wide, not necessarily on an article-by-article
basis. And I think Jimbo would say that a high quality encyclopedia is
never at odds with producing a free one. Wikipedia could still be high
quality even if it lacked fair use images. Most encyclopedias do *not*
have an image for every article and do not feel the need to, much less
images of lesser known celebrities and video games.

Also, I think the more free and good looking images Wikipedia has, the
more impressive and useful it is. Wikipedia is currently the only site
I know of on the 'net where you can get high-quality vector images
illustrating a wide-variety of things (parts of cars, household items,
hydrogen bombs).

Ugly free images can also inspire better free images. I have many
times replaced well-intentioned but amateurish free images with
re-done, more professional looking free versions. If everything is a
slick un-free image, though, the obviousness of what should be
replaced goes down a bit.

FF