There are no pictures in Wikipedia any more

[Charles Matthews]

"George Herbert" wrote

> I am considering proposing a deletion process change - Increase AFD
> run time so that they run for six business days, ensuring that at
> least one weekend is in the AFDs run time so that people who have work
> during the week and a bit more bandwidth on weekends are sure to have
> a chance to see it.

You'd still have a problem with people who think WP:SNOWBALL can be used to justify almost any sort of early closure.

Charles

-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam


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

[George Herbert]

On 10/1/07, [hidden email]
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> "George Herbert" wrote
>
> > I am considering proposing a deletion process change - Increase AFD
> > run time so that they run for six business days, ensuring that at
> > least one weekend is in the AFDs run time so that people who have work
> > during the week and a bit more bandwidth on weekends are sure to have
> > a chance to see it.
>
> You'd still have a problem with people who think WP:SNOWBALL can be used to justify almost any sort of early closure.

Sure.  But if the policy says "Thou shalt not SNOWBALL early close
normal AFDs" then we can set people on fire if they close them early
anyways.

If something is truly likely to snowball, one should PROD it, not AFD
it.  Snowballs are an indication that someone is taking an
uncontroversial delete (or very clearly should be deleted delete)
through the controversial or questionable deletion process role AFD is
now.

The process change should also increase PROD time runs to 7 calendar
days to ensure at least one weekend is included as well, for the same
reason.


--
-george william herbert
[hidden email]

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

[Charles Matthews]

geni wrote
 
> 5)Systemic bias. [[WP:V]] [[WP:RS]] [[WP:BLP]] yeah all kinda written
> assuming a western setup in terms of documentation.

I agree. And the victors write the history books.

So what do we do?

Charles

-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam


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

[Wily D]

On 10/1/07, [hidden email]
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> "George Herbert" wrote
>
> > I am considering proposing a deletion process change - Increase AFD
> > run time so that they run for six business days, ensuring that at
> > least one weekend is in the AFDs run time so that people who have work
> > during the week and a bit more bandwidth on weekends are sure to have
> > a chance to see it.
>
> You'd still have a problem with people who think WP:SNOWBALL can be used to justify almost any sort of early closure.
>
> Charles
>

Realistically, what percentage of AfDs really have the outcome in
doubt?  Maybe 10%?  IfDs are much lower - go over those noms, almost
none actually require discussion.  Like anything, SNOW is sometimes
applied inappropriately - that can always be fixed afterwards.

WilyD

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

[Charles Matthews]

"Wily D" wrote

> Realistically, what percentage of AfDs really have the outcome in
> doubt?  Maybe 10%?

I'd say much higher: maybe 30%. Things get deleted, not because the topic is unsuitable, but because sources are lacking. When I have got involved in AfD recently, it has only been because people swear that black is white on "notability" in these instances.

>IfDs are much lower - go over those noms, almost
> none actually require discussion.  Like anything, SNOW is sometimes
> applied inappropriately - that can always be fixed afterwards.

No, it can't. There was a recent case where the mathematics community got very het up. It took a very thick skin (Michael Hardy's) to protest with an out-of-process revival, and a new AfD. If Carcharoth hadn't intervened then, it would probably have been lost once more. ([[Infinite monkey theorem in popular culture]], if you're wondering.)

Charles

-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam


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

[Ray Saintonge]

George Herbert wrote:
> I am considering proposing a deletion process change - Increase AFD
> run time so that they run for six business days, ensuring that at
> least one weekend is in the AFDs run time so that people who have work
> during the week and a bit more bandwidth on weekends are sure to have
> a chance to see it.
Good.  I was about to suggest a full week until I reread your comment to
see that you said "business days".  We may still need to educate the
deletionists so that they understand that the concepts "day" and
"business day" are not identical.

Ec

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

[Angus McLellan]

geni <[hidden email]> writes

> On 01/10/2007, Earle Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On 30/09/2007, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > 2)Literacy levels. India has a literacy rate of a bit under 70%
> >
> > Out of a population of 1.14 billion [1], that leaves us a mere 798
> > million people. Of whom (if we take a na?ve view and assume literacy
> > as a prerequisite) some 65 million speak English as a second
> > language... [2]
> >
> > > small pool to do the writing
> >
> > ...and over forty million of those people have access to the internet. [3]
> >
> > I don't think we're going to be short of willing writers any time soon.
> >
> Not our writers. Writers to write the local history books. Writers to
> write the detailed history of every train used on the Indian lines
> ever. Writers to write books on local football and cricket teams.

There are 22 million books in the National Library of India. Over 25%
are written in Indian languages. The library receives copies of 902
newspapers and 17000-odd periodicals, and has over a million volumes
of bound periodicals. [ Source http://www.nlindia.org ]

And do the states have state libraries with manuscript and periodical
holdings? Well, Andhra Pradesh does, even if the library doesn't yet
have a website, so quite probably they all do.

Anyway, you were saying?

Angus

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

[George Herbert]

On 10/1/07, Ray Saintonge <[hidden email]> wrote:

> George Herbert wrote:
> > I am considering proposing a deletion process change - Increase AFD
> > run time so that they run for six business days, ensuring that at
> > least one weekend is in the AFDs run time so that people who have work
> > during the week and a bit more bandwidth on weekends are sure to have
> > a chance to see it.
> Good.  I was about to suggest a full week until I reread your comment to
> see that you said "business days".  We may still need to educate the
> deletionists so that they understand that the concepts "day" and
> "business day" are not identical.

Actually, on reflection, "business day" might be confusing enough to
people that it could cause problems.  It probably shouldn't be, but I
have seen a lot of non-english speakers and non-business people who
didn't get the idiom.  Perhaps just making it run for 7 days or 8 days
from time/date of listing is better...


--
-george william herbert
[hidden email]

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

[Angus McLellan]

On 10/1/07, Angus McLellan <[hidden email]> wrote:

> geni <[hidden email]> writes
> > On 01/10/2007, Earle Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > On 30/09/2007, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > 2)Literacy levels. India has a literacy rate of a bit under 70%
> > >
> > > Out of a population of 1.14 billion [1], that leaves us a mere 798
> > > million people. Of whom (if we take a na?ve view and assume literacy
> > > as a prerequisite) some 65 million speak English as a second
> > > language... [2]
> > >
> > > > small pool to do the writing
> > >
> > > ...and over forty million of those people have access to the internet. [3]
> > >
> > > I don't think we're going to be short of willing writers any time soon.
> > >
> > Not our writers. Writers to write the local history books. Writers to
> > write the detailed history of every train used on the Indian lines
> > ever. Writers to write books on local football and cricket teams.
>
> There are 22 million books in the National Library of India. Over 25%
> are written in Indian languages. The library receives copies of 902
> newspapers and 17000-odd periodicals, and has over a million volumes
> of bound periodicals. [ Source http://www.nlindia.org ]
>
> And do the states have state libraries with manuscript and periodical
> holdings? Well, Andhra Pradesh does, even if the library doesn't yet
> have a website, so quite probably they all do.
>
> Anyway, you were saying?

A minute after posting this, McLellan realises that the "millions"
comma is lakhs, not millions. Oops.

Still, given the number of articles an enterprising Wikipedian can
write from one book, the NLI should be good for umpteen million
articles, and the periodicals should be good for millions more. And
when those are done, there will be tens of thousands more books and
journals published to write another huge heap of articles.

Angus

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

[geni]

On 01/10/2007, Angus McLellan <[hidden email]> wrote:
> There are 22 million books in the National Library of India.
2,270,954. 2.2 million

http://www.nlindia.org/useful_info.html

It helps when you release they put the commas in funny places

> Over 25%
> are written in Indian languages. The library receives copies of 902
> newspapers and 17000-odd periodicals, and has over a million volumes
> of bound periodicals. [ Source http://www.nlindia.org ]
>


118K not over 1 million

> And do the states have state libraries with manuscript and periodical
> holdings? Well, Andhra Pradesh does, even if the library doesn't yet
> have a website, so quite probably they all do.
>
> Anyway, you were saying?
>
> Angus

2.2 million is less than a 10th of the British library holdings. While
technically the British library covers a much larger land area (all
the imperial records and the like) there is still a concentration on
subjects within the UK (total Indian records cover only 300K documents
http://www.bl.uk/collections/orientaloffice.html )

--
geni

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

[James Farrar]

On 01/10/2007, Wily D <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Realistically, what percentage of AfDs really have the outcome in
> doubt?  Maybe 10%?  IfDs are much lower - go over those noms, almost
> none actually require discussion.  Like anything, SNOW is sometimes
> applied inappropriately - that can always be fixed afterwards.

Of course, the moment it has to go to DRV, the burden of consensus changes.

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

[David Goodman]

Snow closes do get overturned at DRV from time to time. The main thing
that is needed to improve DRV--and very badly needed--is wider
participation. A rule --or preferably a bot-- that ensures that
everyone in the previous debate MUST be notified would help--it has
been requested many times.

Just as the request for 7 days at AfD has been suggested many times.
Time to do it. See you on the discussion page there.


On 10/1/07, James Farrar <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 01/10/2007, Wily D <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Realistically, what percentage of AfDs really have the outcome in
> > doubt?  Maybe 10%?  IfDs are much lower - go over those noms, almost
> > none actually require discussion.  Like anything, SNOW is sometimes
> > applied inappropriately - that can always be fixed afterwards.
>
> Of course, the moment it has to go to DRV, the burden of consensus changes.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.

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

[Ray Saintonge]

geni wrote:
> 2.2 million is less than a 10th of the British library holdings. While
> technically the British library covers a much larger land area (all
> the imperial records and the like) there is still a concentration on
> subjects within the UK (total Indian records cover only 300K documents
> http://www.bl.uk/collections/orientaloffice.html )
Sounds like a good argument for repatriating records to India. :-)

That might help to redress the balance for what was taken away while
India was under British occupation.

Ec

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

[Ray Saintonge]

geni wrote:
> On 01/10/2007, Ray Saintonge <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> What makes you think that those books don't already exist?
>>    
> 1)Lack of publishing infrastructure. In say the UK something will have
> been published on pretty much any human settlement because it is easy
> to do.
>  
The lack of such infrastructure suggests that we should be more flexible.
> 2)Literacy levels. India has a literacy rate of a bit under 70% small
> pool to do the writing
>  
That's actually quite high.
> 3)Different cultures. One of the few things considered respectable in
> British retirement is to research your local history
>  
And in Indian culture?
> 4)Raw numbers. British libiary has at 25 million books one book per
> 2.4 people in Britain (and a bit over 2 items per person). Now a lot
> of that will be international but also suggests a decent coverage of
> UK topics. National library of India has about 2 million books. 1 book
> per 560 people.
>  
Either national library still has a limitation on how many people can go
there to use it at any one time.  This favours the residents of either
capital.
> 5)Systemic bias. [[WP:V]] [[WP:RS]] [[WP:BLP]] yeah all kinda written
> assuming a western setup in terms of documentation.
>  
How many Indians participated in writing those?

 From the site of an Indian bookstore that I have used:
https://www.alltimebooks.com/shop/index.php?searchstring=Cricket&email=Email&subscribe=yes 
- 116 books about cricket!  There must be at least one that fills your
criteria.  Football only gave me 27 books, but then India does not have
much of a football reputation.  I got 78 hits for "railway", but there
are other related search words that could give further hits.

Ec

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

[geni]

On 02/10/2007, Ray Saintonge <[hidden email]> wrote:

> geni wrote:
> > On 01/10/2007, Ray Saintonge <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >> What makes you think that those books don't already exist?
> >>
> > 1)Lack of publishing infrastructure. In say the UK something will have
> > been published on pretty much any human settlement because it is easy
> > to do.
> >
> The lack of such infrastructure suggests that we should be more flexible.

You want to weaken [[WP:V]]?

> > 2)Literacy levels. India has a literacy rate of a bit under 70% small
> > pool to do the writing
> >
> That's actually quite high.

Not compared to say Europe or old soviet countries



> > 4)Raw numbers. British libiary has at 25 million books one book per
> > 2.4 people in Britain (and a bit over 2 items per person). Now a lot
> > of that will be international but also suggests a decent coverage of
> > UK topics. National library of India has about 2 million books. 1 book
> > per 560 people.
> >
> Either national library still has a limitation on how many people can go
> there to use it at any one time.  This favours the residents of either
> capital.

UK is smaller so London tends to be more reachable (and the various
train companies seem deterimed to send you through it regardless of
real intent.

> > 5)Systemic bias. [[WP:V]] [[WP:RS]] [[WP:BLP]] yeah all kinda written
> > assuming a western setup in terms of documentation.
> >
> How many Indians participated in writing those?

I'm not aware of any.


>  From the site of an Indian bookstore that I have used:
> https://www.alltimebooks.com/shop/index.php?searchstring=Cricket&email=Email&subscribe=yes
> - 116 books about cricket!  There must be at least one that fills your
> criteria.

For a country the size of India with cricket as popular as it is?

>Football only gave me 27 books, but then India does not have
> much of a football reputation.  I got 78 hits for "railway", but there
> are other related search words that could give further hits.


But even local UK libraries seem to have that many railway books (and
then about 3 token ones on canals although that is mostly due to
canals falling into the local history trap).

--
geni

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

[Earle Martin]

On 01/10/2007, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> 2,270,954. 2.2 million

Is that *all*? Somebody get WikiProject India on the line, tell them
we're shutting down. There's clearly no point in us going any further.
[rolls eyes]

--
Earle Martin
            http://downlode.org/
http://purl.org/net/earlemartin/

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

[Omegatron-3]

On 9/24/07, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Yes.  We should repeal the prohibition against "with permission only"
> > and "non-commercial use only" images.
>
> Both of those have legal issues within wikimedia never mind re users.

No they don't.

> Hard to say. Raw deletion numbers would be a few 100K but we have no
> idea how many extra free images have turned up since.

> It tends to produce novel content.

So do you or do you not have actual evidence?  I want to see the
number of non-free images being replaced with free ones vs the number
of non-free images being deleted and never replaced.

This restriction doesn't produce any more novel content than would
have been produced without it.

(Proof by assertion is great, isn't it?)

If you want to promote the creation of free content or the finding of
free images, go right ahead.  I'll gladly help.  Just stop deleting
the non-free content in the meantime.

> Tends to produce bigger images. Compare
>
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Edna_Parker.JPG
>
> With the average stolen AP image.

One down, a few 100K to go?

> Given that conventional encyclopedia tended not to be too pic heavy
> I'm not so worried.

There's a great attitude.  The 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica didn't
have an article on Linux, so why should we?

> > it's not benefiting our
> > users, and it's not benefiting our downstream users.
>
> That various produces of static CD versions would beg to differ,

Please provide concrete evidence of an actual problem.  Not just "it
might theoretically cause problems for some downstream users".  Lots
of things might cause problems for downstream users.  Good thing we
don't cripple the project for their benefit.

> That is already the case as far is allowed within US law.

Our current rules are much more strict than US law, since fair use is
not a license; it's a shaky, undefined legal defense.  Relying
entirely on fair use without even asking permission is very dangerous
from a legal standpoint.

It would be infinitely safer and more rational to ask copyright
holders for permission to use their images, like every other normal
publication.  If we're lucky (or persuasive), they might even agree to
freely license them.

> Most of our policies are setup to sidestep as much as possible that
> very question.

Why?

On 9/24/07, Nick <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Just thinking about it, how long does it take to track down a photo of a
> celebrity on Flickr and ask the photographer for him to relicence one or two
> images under CC-BY or CC-BY-SA licences on Flickr ?

If said photographer is willing to release that image for
redistribution, modification, and resale by anyone...

Small "if".

On 9/24/07, James Farrar <[hidden email]> wrote:
> What we appear to have is an argument between two camps as to whether
> we are producing a FREE encyclopaedia, or a free ENCYCLOPAEDIA.

Is someone advocating for a non-free encyclopedia?

Using non-free images in our articles does not make the encyclopedia
any less free.   Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia, not a free image
repository.

On 9/24/07, James Farrar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  Erm, "non-free content". *blush*

Which includes images, sound clips, videos, and text excerpts and
quotations.  Images are just the most common type.

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

[geni]

On 13/10/2007, Omegatron <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 9/24/07, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > Yes.  We should repeal the prohibition against "with permission only"
> > > and "non-commercial use only" images.
> >
> > Both of those have legal issues within wikimedia never mind re users.
>
> No they don't.

Define precisely non-commercial does with permission allow for
resizing or moving to projects other than the one it was uploaded
onto.

> > Hard to say. Raw deletion numbers would be a few 100K but we have no
> > idea how many extra free images have turned up since.
>
> > It tends to produce novel content.
>
> So do you or do you not have actual evidence?  I want to see the
> number of non-free images being replaced with free ones vs the number
> of non-free images being deleted and never replaced.
>

You are free to compile them.

> This restriction doesn't produce any more novel content than would
> have been produced without it.
>
> (Proof by assertion is great, isn't it?)


My assertions are based on my experience from spending large amounts
of time dealing with en's images.

Still random example see [[Henry Allingham]]

Note free image does not appear until after non free has been vaporised

> If you want to promote the creation of free content or the finding of
> free images, go right ahead.  I'll gladly help.  Just stop deleting
> the non-free content in the meantime.
>

Find enough free content and it will cease to be an issue.

> > Tends to produce bigger images. Compare
> >
> > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Edna_Parker.JPG
> >
> > With the average stolen AP image.
>
> One down, a few 100K to go?

Eh I'm young I can wait.

>
> > Given that conventional encyclopedia tended not to be too pic heavy
> > I'm not so worried.
>
> There's a great attitude.  The 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica didn't
> have an article on Linux, so why should we?
>

I was considering the context of more modern works.

> > > it's not benefiting our
> > > users, and it's not benefiting our downstream users.
> >
> > That various produces of static CD versions would beg to differ,
>
> Please provide concrete evidence of an actual problem.  Not just "it
> might theoretically cause problems for some downstream users".  Lots
> of things might cause problems for downstream users.  Good thing we
> don't cripple the project for their benefit.
>

SOS children

> > That is already the case as far is allowed within US law.
>
> Our current rules are much more strict than US law, since fair use is
> not a license; it's a shaky, undefined legal defense.  Relying
> entirely on fair use without even asking permission is very dangerous
> from a legal standpoint.

Asking permission has no impact on fair use.


> It would be infinitely safer and more rational to ask copyright
> holders for permission to use their images, like every other normal
> publication.  If we're lucky (or persuasive), they might even agree to
> freely license them.

Not if they can get away with less free options.


> > Most of our policies are setup to sidestep as much as possible that
> > very question.
>
> Why?
>

Because if I were to say that per Rogers v. Koons your fair use case
is probably invalid:
a) rather a lot of people won't know what I'm talking about
b)Someone will claim I'm illegally giving legal advice

There are far more effective ways of keeping fair use under control.

> On 9/24/07, Nick <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Just thinking about it, how long does it take to track down a photo of a
> > celebrity on Flickr and ask the photographer for him to relicence one or two
> > images under CC-BY or CC-BY-SA licences on Flickr ?
>
> If said photographer is willing to release that image for
> redistribution, modification, and resale by anyone...
>
> Small "if".

For a fair number yes.


> On 9/24/07, James Farrar <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > What we appear to have is an argument between two camps as to whether
> > we are producing a FREE encyclopaedia, or a free ENCYCLOPAEDIA.
>
> Is someone advocating for a non-free encyclopedia?
>
> Using non-free images in our articles does not make the encyclopedia
> any less free.   Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia, not a free image
> repository.

Are you now trying to claim that images are not part of the encyclopedia?

--
geni

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