|
You know, the number of Wikipedia articles with pictures in them
is really plummeting. I just went from [[Talia Shire]] to [[Joey Tribbiani]] to [[Matt LeBlanc]] and noticed that there were no pictures in any of them. I know the reason(s), of course, but viewing Wikipedia as a user (as I was this morning), this really significantly decreases its quality and usefulness. I'm afraid I know the answer, but would there be any way of reversing the various death-to-all-but-the- most-rampantly-free-images trends? _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
Maybe not banning free image providers
for the sake of The Bureaucracy (TM) would help. On 24/09/2007, Steve Summit <[hidden email]> wrote: > You know, the number of Wikipedia articles with pictures in them > is really plummeting. I just went from [[Talia Shire]] to [[Joey > Tribbiani]] to [[Matt LeBlanc]] and noticed that there were no > pictures in any of them. > > I know the reason(s), of course, but viewing Wikipedia as a user > (as I was this morning), this really significantly decreases its > quality and usefulness. I'm afraid I know the answer, but would > there be any way of reversing the various death-to-all-but-the- > most-rampantly-free-images trends? > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > [hidden email] > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
In reply to this post by Steve Summit
On 24/09/2007, Steve Summit <[hidden email]> wrote:
> You know, the number of Wikipedia articles with pictures in them > is really plummeting. I just went from [[Talia Shire]] to [[Joey > Tribbiani]] to [[Matt LeBlanc]] and noticed that there were no > pictures in any of them. Don't forget to add: [[Image:Replace this image1.svg|right]] [[Image:Replace this image female.svg|right]] [[Image:Replace this image male.svg|right]] Make the gap look more like a fillable thing. - d. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
In reply to this post by Steve Summit
On 24/09/2007, Steve Summit <[hidden email]> wrote:
> You know, the number of Wikipedia articles with pictures in them > is really plummeting. No it isn't. Total number of media files on en is currently 758,221. It bounces around a fair bit but on average it seems to have been pretty much flatlineing > I just went from [[Talia Shire]] to [[Joey > Tribbiani]] to [[Matt LeBlanc]] and noticed that there were no > pictures in any of them. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Matt_leblanc_1995_emmy_awards.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Matthew_Perry_by_David_Shankbone.jpg > I know the reason(s), of course, but viewing Wikipedia as a user > (as I was this morning), this really significantly decreases its > quality and usefulness. I'm afraid I know the answer, but would > there be any way of reversing the various death-to-all-but-the- > most-rampantly-free-images trends? Yes. Is there a way that would widely be considered ethical? No. -- geni _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
On 9/24/07, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 24/09/2007, Steve Summit <[hidden email]> wrote: > > You know, the number of Wikipedia articles with pictures in them > > is really plummeting. > > No it isn't. Total number of media files on en is currently 758,221. > It bounces around a fair bit but on average it seems to have been > pretty much flatlineing ...and commons has two million images and a monthly a net-increase of around 150,000. It would probably be more productive for Steve to narrow the scope of his complaint, since it seems unlikely that there is project-wide image supply problem. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
In reply to this post by geni
On 24/09/2007, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 24/09/2007, Steve Summit <[hidden email]> wrote: > > I know the reason(s), of course, but viewing Wikipedia as a user > > (as I was this morning), this really significantly decreases its > > quality and usefulness. I'm afraid I know the answer, but would > > there be any way of reversing the various death-to-all-but-the- > > most-rampantly-free-images trends? > Yes. Is there a way that would widely be considered ethical? No. People are at work on contacting entertainment publicists. "Relinquish control over just one good promo pic and you get a good pic on a top-10 website." - d. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
In reply to this post by Armed Blowfish
On 9/24/07, Armed Blowfish <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Maybe not banning free image providers > for the sake of The Bureaucracy (TM) > would help. Which free image providers are banned for the sake of a bureaucracy? When do you consider an image to be free? If it can't be legally used by someone making a DVD copy of Wikipedia to distribute in Kenya, is it free? If it can't be put into a YouTube video? If it can't be used in a blog post? I know there's a difference between law and enforcement, and of course fair use can be fairly broadly applied. But focusing on acquiring resources without any potential problems like these seems very reasonable. -- Toward Peace, Love & Progress: Erik DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
In reply to this post by Steve Summit
On 9/24/07, Steve Summit <[hidden email]> wrote:
> You know, the number of Wikipedia articles with pictures in them > is really plummeting. I just went from [[Talia Shire]] to [[Joey > Tribbiani]] to [[Matt LeBlanc]] and noticed that there were no > pictures in any of them. I know what you're saying, but really, is it that hard to find a picture of Matt LeBlanc? We're not hurting any readers by not having a photograph. -- Stephen Bain [hidden email] _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
On 24/09/2007, Stephen Bain <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 9/24/07, Steve Summit <[hidden email]> wrote: > > You know, the number of Wikipedia articles with pictures in them > > is really plummeting. I just went from [[Talia Shire]] to [[Joey > > Tribbiani]] to [[Matt LeBlanc]] and noticed that there were no > > pictures in any of them. > > I know what you're saying, but really, is it that hard to find a > picture of Matt LeBlanc? We're not hurting any readers by not having a > photograph. > We've got a photo of Matt LeBlanc http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Matt_leblanc_1995_emmy_awards.jpg -- geni _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
On 9/24/07, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I know what you're saying, but really, is it that hard to find a > > picture of Matt LeBlanc? We're not hurting any readers by not having a > > photograph. > > > > We've got a photo of Matt LeBlanc > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Matt_leblanc_1995_emmy_awards.jpg But Wikipedia doesn't display it... Images bit-rotting out of articles for various reasons (including replacement with non-free images) is a real problem. Every month or two I sweep all my uploads to see which are still in use, every time I've done it I manage to find several that have fallen out due to vandalism or replacement with non-free images (or both: people often 'fix' unillustrated articles with non-free images). Editorial judgement is one thing, but submitting photos seems like such a waste when they end up lost so easily. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
David Gerard wrote:
> On 24/09/2007, Steve Summit <[hidden email]> wrote: >> I just went from [[Talia Shire]] to [[Joey Tribbiani]] to >> [[Matt LeBlanc]] and noticed that there were no pictures in any of them. > > Don't forget to add: > [[Image:Replace this image1.svg|right]] > [[Image:Replace this image female.svg|right]] > [[Image:Replace this image male.svg|right]] > Make the gap look more like a fillable thing. Aha. It was not so much "forgot", but rather, "didn't know to". Thanks for the tip. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
In reply to this post by geni
geni wrote:
> On 24/09/2007, Steve Summit <[hidden email]> wrote: >> You know, the number of Wikipedia articles with pictures in them >> is really plummeting. > > No it isn't. Total number of media files on en is currently 758,221. Thank you for a pedantic, literal answer which misses the point. I knew someone would. >> I just went from [[Talia Shire]] to [[Joey Tribbiani]] to >> [[Matt LeBlanc]] and noticed that there were no pictures in any of them. > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Matt_leblanc_1995_emmy_awards.jpg > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Matthew_Perry_by_David_Shankbone.jpg Splendid! Thank you. I will see about using those. >> I'm afraid I know the answer, but would there be any way of reversing >> the various death-to-all-but-the-most-rampantly-free-images trends? > > Yes. Is there a way that would widely be considered ethical? No. Define "widely". Considered ethical by a vocal few who have the stamina to impose their views everywhere? Certainly not. By a majority of Wikipedia editors? I don't know. By publicists who would love to have high-quality (if copyrighted) images disseminated widely? Certainly yes. By a majority of our readers? Certainly yes. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
In reply to this post by Stephen Bain
Stephen Bain wrote:
>On 9/24/07, Steve Summit <[hidden email]> wrote: >> I just went from [[Talia Shire]] to [[Joey Tribbiani]] to >> [[Matt LeBlanc]] and noticed that there were no pictures in any of them. > > I know what you're saying, but really, is it that hard to find a > picture of Matt LeBlanc? We're not hurting any readers by not having a > photograph. I know what you're saying, but I must respectfully disagree. I'll give you the backstory, because I think it's illustrative. Bear in mind here that for the moment I'm speaking not as a Wikipedia editor, but as an ordinary user. I needed the date of the first Rocky movie (which turns out to have been 1976). Not too long ago I would always have gone to imdb for this sort of question, but today, I automatically go to Wikipedia. It's faster, there are no ads to view, and, well, it's Wikipedia. On the [[Rocky]] page, I was reminded of Talia Shire, and wondered what she was up to, so I clicked through. Huh. No picture. Too bad; she's pretty. In the Trivia section at [[Talia Shire]], there's an interesting tidbit about some Friends dialogue. Not being much of a television watcher, I couldn't remember which character Joey was, so I clicked through. Huh. No picture. But surely there'll be one if I click one step further, to [[Matt LeBlanc]]? Huh! Nope. Dang. (I'll save for another day a rant about how ugly and unnecessary that {{trivia}} template in the Trivia section at [[Talia Shire]] is.) Yes, if I really cared, I could obviously find a picture of Matt LeBlanc. But I didn't, so I didn't try. In any case, it's all beside the point: Wikipedia failed me as a reader. That's too bad. After I sent that first message, I looked a little further. Out of the six actors and actresses who starred in one of the world's most popular sitcoms, we've currently got pictures of: two. I found that remarkable. (And of those two, Lisa Kudrow's face is so badly lit she's almost unrecognizable, and Jennifer Aniston is pretty blurry and out of focus.) I understand all the passionate arguments behind free images, really I do. But personally, I think we've cut off our nose to spite our face. And that's too bad. (But I also didn't realize there were so many images sitting there on Commons just waiting to be integrated into Wikipedia. Thanks to those in this thread who've reminded me. Putting my editor's hat back on, I'll get to work.) _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
In reply to this post by Steve Summit
On 24/09/2007, Steve Summit <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Considered ethical by a vocal few who have the stamina to impose > their views everywhere? Certainly not. By a majority of > Wikipedia editors? I don't know. By publicists who would love > to have high-quality (if copyrighted) images disseminated widely? > Certainly yes. By a majority of our readers? Certainly yes. So target the publicists. Show them an awful free-content shot, point out to them that releasing a good promo under this handy list of acceptable licenses means a better pic on a top-10 website and the number one reference site. See how long it takes them to work out that this is a good idea. - d. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
In reply to this post by Stephen Bain
Stephen Bain wrote:
> On 9/24/07, Steve Summit <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> You know, the number of Wikipedia articles with pictures in them >> is really plummeting. I just went from [[Talia Shire]] to [[Joey >> Tribbiani]] to [[Matt LeBlanc]] and noticed that there were no >> pictures in any of them. >> > > I know what you're saying, but really, is it that hard to find a > picture of Matt LeBlanc? We're not hurting any readers by not having a > photograph. > That's an intriguing argument. It's not hard to find almost any bit of information on Wikipedia, so by that reasoning we wouldn't be hurting anybody by shutting down entirely. All Wikipedia does is make existing information better available. What somebody looks like is a pretty important piece of information to a lot of people. If you search for Matt LeBlanc on Google, of the top ten results, all of them display a picture, all but one prominently. One mentions pictures in the title. And Google even puts his picture on the search page. And good thing they do, as I had no idea who "Matt LeBlanc" was until I saw those pictures. So I'd say that from a user perspective, leaving the picture out is a pretty big deal. William -- William Pietri <[hidden email]> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:William_Pietri _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
In reply to this post by Gregory Maxwell
Greg,
Dunno if this is a solution looking for a problem, but surely we could run a sweep once a (day/week/month) to see which free images have fallen out of use, see if they've been replaced by another free image or not, and perhaps revert or add the image back in if at all possible (I know it would need a fair bit of code). Nick On 24/09/2007, Gregory Maxwell <[hidden email]> wrote: > > On 9/24/07, geni <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > I know what you're saying, but really, is it that hard to find a > > > picture of Matt LeBlanc? We're not hurting any readers by not having a > > > photograph. > > > > > > > We've got a photo of Matt LeBlanc > > > > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Matt_leblanc_1995_emmy_awards.jpg > > But Wikipedia doesn't display it... Images bit-rotting out of articles > for various reasons (including replacement with non-free images) is a > real problem. > > Every month or two I sweep all my uploads to see which are still in > use, every time I've done it I manage to find several that have fallen > out due to vandalism or replacement with non-free images (or both: > people often 'fix' unillustrated articles with non-free images). > > Editorial judgement is one thing, but submitting photos seems like > such a waste when they end up lost so easily. > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > [hidden email] > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > -- Nick http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nick _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
In reply to this post by Steve Summit
On 24/09/2007, Steve Summit <[hidden email]> wrote:
> geni wrote: > > On 24/09/2007, Steve Summit <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> You know, the number of Wikipedia articles with pictures in them > >> is really plummeting. > > > > No it isn't. Total number of media files on en is currently 758,221. > > Thank you for a pedantic, literal answer which misses the point. > I knew someone would. It suggests your point isn't well stated. > >> I just went from [[Talia Shire]] to [[Joey Tribbiani]] to > >> [[Matt LeBlanc]] and noticed that there were no pictures in any of them. > > > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Matt_leblanc_1995_emmy_awards.jpg > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Matthew_Perry_by_David_Shankbone.jpg > > Splendid! Thank you. I will see about using those. On the other hand we don't have pic of David Schwimmer I'm not convinced our pic of Lisa Kudrow is free (in fact I'm pretty sure it isn't) and I had to dig our free pic of Courteney Cox out of the page history. > >> I'm afraid I know the answer, but would there be any way of reversing > >> the various death-to-all-but-the-most-rampantly-free-images trends? > > > > Yes. Is there a way that would widely be considered ethical? No. > > Define "widely". However many cultures consider murder to be unethical. -- geni _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
In reply to this post by Erik Moeller-4
> On 9/24/07, Armed Blowfish <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Maybe not banning free image providers >> for the sake of The Bureaucracy (TM) >> would help. On 24/09/2007, Erik Moeller <[hidden email]> wrote: > Which free image providers are banned for > the sake of a bureaucracy? I'm not dragging individuals into this. But surely you have noticed that if someone breaks some bureaucratic rule (most of which have nothing to do with legal issues) and someone else draws attention to it, it doesn't matter how much that person has contributed to the encyclopaedia (images, text, good articles, featured articles, whatever), and the person gets banned? _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
We've not banned anybody for contributing images to Wikipedia, be they
freely licence or copyrighted and used under our fair use provisions, and I don't think we've blocked any users for uploading fair use material roughly in accordance with policy (copyright, source, rationale etc). People who are getting blocked are people who are claiming copyright on work that is not theirs, and we're not talking about the misguided souls who think because they've made a screenshot, they own the copyright, we're talking about people who continually claim ownership of stuff they're finding on the internet in a deliberate attempt to circumvent fair use and deletion policies. Nick On 24/09/2007, Armed Blowfish <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > On 9/24/07, Armed Blowfish <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> Maybe not banning free image providers > >> for the sake of The Bureaucracy (TM) > >> would help. > On 24/09/2007, Erik Moeller <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Which free image providers are banned for > > the sake of a bureaucracy? > > I'm not dragging individuals into this. But > surely you have noticed that if someone > breaks some bureaucratic rule (most of which > have nothing to do with legal issues) and > someone else draws attention to it, it doesn't > matter how much that person has contributed > to the encyclopaedia (images, text, good > articles, featured articles, whatever), and the > person gets banned? > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > [hidden email] > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > -- Nick http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nick _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
|
In reply to this post by Armed Blowfish
On 9/24/07, Armed Blowfish <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > On 9/24/07, Armed Blowfish <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> Maybe not banning free image providers > >> for the sake of The Bureaucracy (TM) > >> would help. > On 24/09/2007, Erik Moeller <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Which free image providers are banned for > > the sake of a bureaucracy? > > I'm not dragging individuals into this. But > surely you have noticed that if someone > breaks some bureaucratic rule (most of which > have nothing to do with legal issues) and > someone else draws attention to it, it doesn't > matter how much that person has contributed > to the encyclopaedia (images, text, good > articles, featured articles, whatever), and the > person gets banned? I haven't noticed. Most bans are often justified; we are not a democracy, we do not have due process (which is pretty much a legal concept specific to the US, as most other countries have different approaches - and besides, we are not a country). If the community consensus wants you gone, it does not matter whether you have done something wrong or broken any rules, you're tossed out. We can debate whether this is desirable, but it's worked pretty well. If one admin does not like what's going on, then that admin unblocks (community bans only work if no admin is willing to lift the ban). Wheel warring and/or discussion may ensue, and after all the ridiculous crap that goes around comes around, we either ban or unban and get back to work on the encyclopaedia. It's imperfect, it's definitely not what I like to see. But the point is, it works, and I've yet to see any ideas that would be more effective without causing so much controversy and chaos as to make the costs outweigh the benefits. But this is off-topic. (Those replying to specific parts of this email can cut out the irrelevant bits, I suppose.) Back on topic, I agree from a user's standpoint that the lack of pictures is pretty bad. But as David says, we should show we're aware of this and that we're working on getting freely reusable and redistributable pictures onto our articles. Kudos to those who came up with and worked on this ingenious solution (I believe geni was one of them?). On another note, newbies replacing these with unfree uploads is a *major* problem. If there are free images on Commons, we should probably create a Commons page for the article's subject and use a commons template on the article to show that there is free content out there. Newbies will toss out the free image, but they rarely remove a Commons template at the same time. Johnleemk _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [hidden email] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |
| Powered by Nabble | Edit this page |
