User talk:Jenolen
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, Jenolen, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -SCEhardT 05:13, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Images, fair use and otherwise
Right, I know that's not how fair use works. We're trying to get away from fair use. We want free use. One of the main points of Wikipedia is that it is freely-reproduceable for any purpose. I thin you're missing the point when you talk about "bad actors". Nobody's doing a bad thing if the reproduce Wikipedia content, even to sell it. That's always been okay for the text, and it should be okay for the images as well.
Does that make sense? I'm a bit sleepy right now so I'm probably not explaining this as well as I could. I just think you have the attitude that people who copy Wikipedia content are misbehaving somehow, when in fact we want to accomodate them as much as possible. —Chowbok ☠ 03:16, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
- Listen, I appreciate that you're trying to look out for possible pitfalls for us when using images. But really, what you've said in about every instance has been wrong. Companies don't have the right to control who takes pictures of them, and certainly public figures don't. If Bob Noneck appears in public, and you take his picture, you own the picture, the copyright to the picture, and the right to publish the picture. You have a basic misunderstanding of publicity rights. Please, just do the research and you'll see that you're wrong. Please read the PDF I sent you and also this, to start.
- As for McCartney singing "Blackbird"... the rule is we can't use a fair use image or sound if a free replacement could reasonably be created. Of course, good-faith people can disagree on what is "reasonable", and that's been the course of many of the disputes I've been involved in here... but I think most of us would agree that it's not reasonable to think that somebody can force McCartney to sing Blackbird on cue, so that would be a legitimate fair use inclusion in that respect.
- Finally, about being afraid of fair use; that's more a general Wikipedia policy than my personal preference (although of course I agree with it). The second-most important thing about Wikipedia is that it be freely-redistributable (the most important thing, of course, is that anybody be able to edit it). The explosion of fair-use images are encumbering it, and in 98% of cases unnecessarily. —Chowbok ☠ 16:07, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:The Fab Faux.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:The Fab Faux.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
- Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
- On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Chowbok ☠ 04:26, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] More replaceable fair use images
—Chowbok ☠ 20:22, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The Fab Faux.jpg
I slapped a disputed sign on that, as well as many others that would be nearly to completely impossible to duplicated. Chowbok doesn't seem to understand how difficult it is to photograph bands that are big enough to be included on Wikipedia. Dark jedi requiem 05:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps not. But FWIW, I obtained a freely-licensed photo of the Beatie Boys for Wikipedia, who are a bigger band than almost every one I tagged. —Chowbok ☠ 20:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, obviously that was a typo. I do know it's the Beastie Boys.
-
-
- If the admin decides that the image should be kept, he/she of course will remove the template. It's no different from any delete template. As for consensus, I think there already has been one. Have you looked at the discussions I link to at User:Chowbok/Robth's RFU Explanation?
-
[edit] Image:Tina Dico promophoto.jpg
I don't have strong feelings one way or the other regarding this image. We should be making every effort to have only free images, but on the other hand this image would probably be fairly difficult to replace. -SCEhardT 04:41, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Policy #2
You're close, but no. I do agree that most of the photos I've tagged are fair use. The question is are they acceptable fair use. Based on a plain reading of WP:FUC, they are not. It says pretty plainly that fair use images should not be used if a free image "could be created". I don't see how people can argue that that doesn't mean what it clearly says, but it keeps happening anyway. As to your question about why allow fair use images at all: in many cases, a free replacement could not be created. An unquestionable example of this is Image:RobertJohson.jpg. Only two photos of him exist and both are copyrighted; obviously no more will be taken and the copyright owner, sitting on a gold mine, is not about to release it under the GFDL. Obviously, that's an extreme example, but there are other uses of fair use that I would have no problem with. In fact, if you compare my Image edit history with the list of promotional photos, you can see just how many I'm skipping because I believe they are probably in-policy fair use. —Chowbok ☠ 16:32, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, and regarding productivity: if you're really concerned about productivity, why not devote your energies toward finding a freely-licensed photo of Tina Dico instead of using so much of your time fighting a battle (that you will not win—trust me on this) with me? Here's a letter you could send to Dico's people. Or, here's some Flickr photos that are currently all rights reserved, but maybe one of those photographers would change the license on one for a chance to be featured in Wikipedia? That worked for me here and here. Let's work on building a free encyclopedia instead of having to spend all our time arguing. —Chowbok ☠ 16:40, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry you still don't understand the difference. I tried my best to explain above, but I guess no dice. Maybe you should ask over at the media copyright questions page; there'll probably be someone there who can explain this better than I. —Chowbok ☠ 20:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Images
You said: "On another talk page, you wrote
- Wikipedia has decided the choice is between a free image or no image at all
"That is simply not true. In fact, Wikipedia:Copyrights clearly says All original Wikipedia text is distributed under the GFDL. Occasionally, Wikipedia articles may include images, sounds, or text quotes used under the U.S. Copyright law "fair use" doctrine. It is preferred that these be obtained under the most free (libre) license (such as the GFDL or public domain) practical. In cases where no such images/sounds are currently available, then fair use images are acceptable (until such time as free images become available). Please don't mis-state the facts."
