On 7/14/07, John Vandenberg <jayvdb(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 7/14/07, WikipediaEditor Durin
<wikidurin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 7/12/07, John Vandenberg
<jayvdb(a)gmail.com> wrote:
If all logo rationales are alike, why is
{{Non-free logo}}
insufficient? What else is needed? The reason I ask is that perhaps
a few params can be added to {{Non-free logo}} to cater to the
additional licencing issues.
And here's another portion of the argument; can fair use rationales
be boiler plated? Some say no, some say yes. We argue endlessly
about this.
Hi Durin,
I have separately arrived at the conclusion that there must be some
non-free images that can be "boiler plated", but I am keen to read up
if you could you direct me to some argument against this, or outline
the salient points here.
...
Looking at logos specifically again, 99% of logos that
are used on
only one article are probably the logo for that topic, and a human
could quickly go though and verify them all and tag them with
{{logo|<existing logo cat param>|fairuseon=blah}} to indicate that the
image is only fair use on that article. Does resolution even come
into play with logos? if we only use the thumbnail on the article, is
it acceptable for the actual image to be hi res?
A boiler plate for logos has recently appeared, but it has less than
50 transclusions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Logo_fur
Is it acceptable; can we start to depend on this template?
--
John