If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
70 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

David Gerard-2
Point them at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo_%28dog%29


- d.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

Carcharoth
On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 1:21 PM, David Gerard<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Point them at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo_%28dog%29

:-)

I don't think anyone could !vote delete for such a cute little dog!

Carcharoth

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

geni
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
2009/7/25 David Gerard <[hidden email]>:
> Point them at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo_%28dog%29
>
>
> - d.

US Presidential pets are well established as being notable. Downing
Street cats are probably notable although only the most recent two
have articles and the original Chief Mouser to the Cabinet Office does
not.



--
geni

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

foxyloxy.wikimedia
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2

On Saturday, 25 July 2009 8:21 pm, David Gerard wrote:
> Point them at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo_%28dog%29

The current introduction raised my eyebrows.
"Bo Obama (born October 9, 2008) is the Obama family dog.  Barack Obama
is the head of the household and President of the United States. and is
a neutered male Portuguese Water Dog, or Portie."

If we cut off the first sentence, we learn some interesting facts about
Mr. Obama ;)

--
fl
admin @ enwiki
<http://enwp.org/user:fl>

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

Steve Summit
fl wrote:

> On Saturday, 25 July 2009 8:21 pm, David Gerard wrote:
> > Point them at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo_%28dog%29
>
> The current introduction raised my eyebrows.
> "Bo Obama (born October 9, 2008) is the Obama family dog.  Barack Obama
> is the head of the household and President of the United States. and is
> a neutered male Portuguese Water Dog, or Portie."
>
> If we cut off the first sentence, we learn some interesting facts about
> Mr. Obama ;)

Fixed.  (No pun intended.)

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

The Cunctator
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
Seriously?? Are you arguing this kind of article shouldn't be in Wikipedia?
Sheesh.

On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 8:21 AM, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Point them at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo_%28dog%29
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

David Gerard-2
2009/7/25 The Cunctator <[hidden email]>:
> On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 8:21 AM, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> Point them at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo_%28dog%29

> Seriously?? Are you arguing this kind of article shouldn't be in Wikipedia?
> Sheesh.


No, it just pushed my personal "wtf" button, not something I'd
actually advocate removing. The dog's famous enough.

My point is that despite media publicity about "deletionists" and
people on the fringes of Wikipedia getting annoyed at not being
considered article-worthy ... we still include a wider range of stuff
than (I think) any general encyclopedia ever before us, and no-one can
seriously question that. And we do so to actual standards.


- d.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

Ken Arromdee
On Sat, 25 Jul 2009, David Gerard wrote:
> My point is that despite media publicity about "deletionists" and
> people on the fringes of Wikipedia getting annoyed at not being
> considered article-worthy ... we still include a wider range of stuff
> than (I think) any general encyclopedia ever before us, and no-one can
> seriously question that. And we do so to actual standards.

It's possible to be wider in some areas and narrower in others; even to be
narrower overall with a few specific exceptions.

I'm inclined to say that the article on Obama's dog is an exception, not the
rule.  It's not part of a large category (webcomics, episode articles, etc.)
that deletionists like to delete en masse.  Also, since it's related to Obama,
it's going to be preserved by Obama fans, and we've got lots of those who are
already watching the Obama-related articles.


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

WJhonson
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
"Barack Obama is the head of household {{fact}}"
Michelle has that look in her eye.  Behind closed doors, do we really  know?
 
 
 
In a message dated 7/25/2009 7:16:22 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
[hidden email] writes:

Barack  Obama
is the head of the household and President of the United States. and  is
a neutered male Portuguese Water Dog, or  Portie."


**************An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy
Steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221323048x1201367271/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=62&bcd=Jul
yExcfooterNO62)
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

Dan Dascalescu-3
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
> No, it just pushed my personal "wtf" button

Here's something that pushed my WTF button:

Why was a photograph of a public monument of Martin Niemoeller's poem
"First they came", removed from Wikipedia?

Here is a small version of the photograph:
http://www.oicu2.com/afc/Martin_Niemoeller.jpg

And here is the article's revision history:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=First_they_came...&action=history

I contacted the deletionist at
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kameraad_Pjotr#Martin_Niemoeller

Really, honestly, do some Wikipedia admins have nothing better to do
than delete photographs of public monuments on grounds of the poems
they represent not being in the public domain, while the very article
page reproduces the poem in its entirety?

Aside from that, let's have a bit of common sense: does anyone
sincerely think that if Martin Niemoeller were alive, he'd object to
the image of that monument being on Wikipedia? Does anyone think that
any of Niemoeller's heirs would object? WTF?!

--
Dan

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

James Farrar
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
2009/7/25 David Gerard <[hidden email]>:

> My point is that despite media publicity about "deletionists" and
> people on the fringes of Wikipedia getting annoyed at not being
> considered article-worthy ... we still include a wider range of stuff
> than (I think) any general encyclopedia ever before us, and no-one can
> seriously question that. And we do so to actual standards.

It's notable that you don't say that no-one can seriously question *that*!

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

Elias Friedman
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
It has to do with license compatibility - Commons has a strict policy that all material be available under a free license that includes commercial use. Would he, his heirs, or his estate object if the photo of the poem was modified to be used in a fast-food ad or for a hate group?

And while en.wiki does allow fair use, having the entirety of the poem is likely a stretch of our policies - so it should be removed from the article too.

-Elias Friedman (elipongo)

------Original Message------
From: Dan Dascalescu
Sender: [hidden email]
To: English Wikipedia
ReplyTo: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist
Sent: Jul 26, 2009 03:52

> No, it just pushed my personal "wtf" button

Here's something that pushed my WTF button:

Why was a photograph of a public monument of Martin Niemoeller's poem
"First they came", removed from Wikipedia?

Here is a small version of the photograph:
http://www.oicu2.com/afc/Martin_Niemoeller.jpg

And here is the article's revision history:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=First_they_came...&action=history

I contacted the deletionist at
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kameraad_Pjotr#Martin_Niemoeller

Really, honestly, do some Wikipedia admins have nothing better to do
than delete photographs of public monuments on grounds of the poems
they represent not being in the public domain, while the very article
page reproduces the poem in its entirety?

Aside from that, let's have a bit of common sense: does anyone
sincerely think that if Martin Niemoeller were alive, he'd object to
the image of that monument being on Wikipedia? Does anyone think that
any of Niemoeller's heirs would object? WTF?!

--
Dan

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

Charles Matthews
In reply to this post by The Cunctator
The Cunctator wrote:

> Seriously?? Are you arguing this kind of article shouldn't be in Wikipedia?
> Sheesh.
>
> On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 8:21 AM, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>  
>> Point them at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo_%28dog%29
>>
>>
>>    
The argument worth having is that reliable sources are a necessary
condition for the inclusion of a topic, rather than a sufficient
condition. (This is quite obvious, I believe, but one can go blue in the
face saying it with no effect.) No way is the presidential pooch going
to get deleted, in practical terms. But that only proves once more
"voting is evil", really.

Charles



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

Dan Dascalescu-3
In reply to this post by Elias Friedman
On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 06:23, <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Would he, his heirs, or his estate object if the photo of the poem was modified to be used in a fast-food ad or for a hate group?

What does this have to do with the poem being engraved verbatim in a
public monument?

> And while en.wiki does allow fair use, having the entirety of the poem is likely
> a stretch of our policies - so it should be removed from the article too.

If anyone needed more proof that Wikipedia is too deletionist, here it is.

The damn poem was intended to be distributed as far and wide as possible.

This is similar to the whole "fair use" brouhaha at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Madeleine_close2.jpg#Licence (the
photo of Madeleine McCann, a child who's been missing for 2 years) -
as if Madeleine's family wouldn't wholeheartedly agree to that picture
being plastered on every website in the world.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

Luna-4
On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Dan Dascalescu <
[hidden email] <ddascalescu%[hidden email]>> wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 06:23, <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Would he, his heirs, or his estate object if the photo of the poem was
> modified to be used in a fast-food ad or for a hate group?
>
> What does this have to do with the poem being engraved verbatim in a
> public monument?
>

If someone intends to maintain control over how content is used -- which I
think is what Elipongo was getting at -- that content is not freely
licensed. If content is not under a free license, I believe we generally
consider it "non-free".

Where the clear intent of a photo is to reproduce a given text verbatim, I
should think that the original copyright on that text (if any) still
applies. Photographing pages of a book doesn't suddenly render the book's
copyright moot, for example.

-Luna
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

Sarah Ewart-2
In reply to this post by Dan Dascalescu-3
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Dan Dascalescu <
[hidden email] <ddascalescu%[hidden email]>> wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 06:23, <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
> This is similar to the whole "fair use" brouhaha at
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Madeleine_close2.jpg#Licence (the
> photo of Madeleine McCann, a child who's been missing for 2 years) -
> as if Madeleine's family wouldn't wholeheartedly agree to that picture
> being plastered on every website in the world.


I'm sure thats correct and it also makes it easy to resolve - get
permission.  I think they're fairly accessible through their website, so an
editor could simply email them, explain what's needed and ask them to
release an image under a compatible license or to provide one that's already
been released under a free license. These types of disputes are usually
easier and quicker to actually resolve than it is to complain and argue
about it.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

Carcharoth
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Sarah Ewart<[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Dan Dascalescu <
> [hidden email] <ddascalescu%[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 06:23, <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> This is similar to the whole "fair use" brouhaha at
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Madeleine_close2.jpg#Licence (the
>> photo of Madeleine McCann, a child who's been missing for 2 years) -
>> as if Madeleine's family wouldn't wholeheartedly agree to that picture
>> being plastered on every website in the world.

I can think of several websites they wouldn't want it plastered on.

> I'm sure thats correct and it also makes it easy to resolve - get
> permission.  I think they're fairly accessible through their website, so an
> editor could simply email them, explain what's needed and ask them to
> release an image under a compatible license or to provide one that's already
> been released under a free license. These types of disputes are usually
> easier and quicker to actually resolve than it is to complain and argue
> about it.

And when someone uses the image in an inappropriate fashion (I know
they can do that anyway, without it being on Commons), what then? At a
minimum, this image should have the various warnings heavily plastered
on it (personality rights or whatever the equivalent is for a missing
child), and it should be used with decorum in Wikipedia itself. There
are some articles some editors would put it on without realising what
offence it might cause.

Carcharoth

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

Steve Summit
In reply to this post by Luna-4
Luna wrote:
> If someone intends to maintain control over how content is used -- which I
> think is what Elipongo was getting at -- that content is not freely
> licensed.

Well, if the control someone intends to control over their
content is ironclad, I don't think they'd agree to have it
engraved verbatim on a public monument.

> Where the clear intent of a photo is to reproduce a given text verbatim,
> I should think that the original copyright on that text (if any) still
> applies.

I suppose the way the photo is cropped clouds the argument somewhat.
But I think (I hope) we can agree that a freely-licensed photo of
the monument as a monument -- that happened to visibly include
the text -- would not be objectionable.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

Dan Dascalescu-3
While deletionist folks are at removing the poem from Wikipedia, why
don't you delete it from Wikiquote as well? Here's the page, for your
convenience:

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Martin_Niem%C3%B6ller

Have fun improving Wikipedia.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: If anyone ever says Wikipedia is too deletionist

Ken Arromdee
In reply to this post by Sarah Ewart-2
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009, Sarah Ewart wrote:
> > This is similar to the whole "fair use" brouhaha at
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Madeleine_close2.jpg#Licence (the
> > photo of Madeleine McCann, a child who's been missing for 2 years) -
> > as if Madeleine's family wouldn't wholeheartedly agree to that picture
> > being plastered on every website in the world.
> I'm sure thats correct and it also makes it easy to resolve - get
> permission.

The kind of permission we require would allow the image to used as a part of,
say, toy advertisements or political ads.  The family of a disappeared child
may not wish to give that sort of permission.


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
1234