AW: [Foundation-l] Partnership with Mandrakesoft

[Angela]

I don't think I understand your point since there is absolutely no
reason for people to be uploading new images with deprecated licence
tags. "Unknown" is not an option. If you don't know the licence,
simply do not upload it. Such images will be deleted via the new
process at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_images

The new upload form will not apply to existing images. Those are being
dealt with via the tagging drive at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Yann/Untagged_Images

Angela.

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 23:13:57 +0200, Jens Ropers <ropers at ropersonline.com> wrote:
> May I STRONGLY suggest that we include ALL the other depreciated image
> tags as well?
> 
> Rationale:
> Migrating from the current technical possibility not to include ANY
> tag/description while uploading directly to the limited choice of tags
> as per the below mockup link would be too big of a change for many
> users, who will feel--wrong as they might be--that their images "have
> to be included". This will lead to many folks picking "unknown/don't
> know" (unbekannt/weiss nicht) -- and practically having no license tags
> is ACUTELY worse than having depreciated license tags. We should have
> MORE metadata, not less of it. Having "depreciated license"-images in
> there (marked as depreciated) is A LOT better because we can always
> deal with these pics and/or that entire category later and we'll at
> least know where things are at as regards these pics. We WON'T know
> that in case of "unknown/don't know" -- these would just be a wild heap
> of wildly unknown stuff, making it acutely harder to deal with in the
> future.