Commons:Requests for comment/scope

add sections
← Older revision
Revision as of 00:45, 19 March 2013
Line 57:
Line 57:
 
: I believe that some old personal photos were deleted in [[Commons:Deletion requests/Family history]].
 
: I believe that some old personal photos were deleted in [[Commons:Deletion requests/Family history]].
 
: We do need some photos of [[:Category:People|people]] and [[:Category:Living rooms|living rooms]] and similar things just as we need some photos of [[:Category:Eiffel Tower|Eiffel Towers]] and [[:Category:Mona Lisa|Mona Lisa]] and other things. The problem seems to be the same as suggested above: if there are too many images, then some will be deleted per [[COM:SCOPE]]. Since there are fewer photos of 19th century living rooms than photos of 21st century living rooms, a private photo of a 19th century living room is more likely to survive than a private photo of a 21st century living room. --[[User:Stefan4|Stefan4]] ([[User talk:Stefan4|talk]]) 00:20, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 
: We do need some photos of [[:Category:People|people]] and [[:Category:Living rooms|living rooms]] and similar things just as we need some photos of [[:Category:Eiffel Tower|Eiffel Towers]] and [[:Category:Mona Lisa|Mona Lisa]] and other things. The problem seems to be the same as suggested above: if there are too many images, then some will be deleted per [[COM:SCOPE]]. Since there are fewer photos of 19th century living rooms than photos of 21st century living rooms, a private photo of a 19th century living room is more likely to survive than a private photo of a 21st century living room. --[[User:Stefan4|Stefan4]] ([[User talk:Stefan4|talk]]) 00:20, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 
+

 
+
==Files as tesserae==
 
+
[[File:Random_10000.png|thumb|Same file seen as part of a different pattern]]
 
+
Imagine that each file here is individually a [[:Category:Tessera|tessera]]. An individual tessera may be plain and boring, or it may be beautiful in its own right, but plain or jewel like a tessera is only part of something greater, i.e. a mosaic. Now imagine that every tile being part of the same Roman floor mosaic and that the subject of the mosaic is knowledge, some tessera belong to at least one pattern in the mosaic, and most in multiple ones. Looking at the patterns they resolve themselves into panels in some areas grainy, in others clearer. The more tessera we have and the better we sort them out into the correct patterns that they belong to the clearer and and better the mosaic.
 
+

 
+
Imagine that the file to the left represents our mosaic, and that each random point in it represents a tessera. If the square is completely black then our mosaic is complete, and if it is white nothing. Despite the complaint that we already have too many files I don't think that we are anywhere close to the level of coverage that this file would represent.--[[User:KTo288|KTo288]] ([[User talk:KTo288|talk]]) 00:45, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 
+

 
+
==Free files at Flickr and other user upload sites==
 
+
''Stream of thought over this topic-didn't really get that far-but maybe other users may pick up and run with this.''--[[User:KTo288|KTo288]] ([[User talk:KTo288|talk]]) 00:45, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 
+
:{{Question}}Given that files are loaded at Flickr and at other sites, e.g. Geograph with Commons compatiable licenses, why copy them to Commons, they would be just as educational and available to users outside of the Wikimedia projects where they are. If we find one that is useful for a particular wikimedia project, why can't we just load that one file to Commons, rather than hoovering up all that we can find by bot.--[[User:KTo288|KTo288]] ([[User talk:KTo288|talk]]) 00:45, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 
+
::{{Comment}}Although some Flickr users are no doubt flattered to find their images used in Wikipedia articles, others have been horrified by the way their images have been characterised and of derivative works created from them. This is in no small part due to some users not really understanding the implications of the licenses that they apply to their images. To maintain control of their images, and also perhaps encouraged by Flickr's attempt to monetise content, some Flckr users are revoking the original Commons compatiable licenses and applying less permissive ones to files old and new. It is my subjective experience that Commons compatiable licenses are becoming increasingly rare at Flickr.--[[User:KTo288|KTo288]] ([[User talk:KTo288|talk]]) 00:45, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 
+
:{{Question}}In that case we should grab every free file that we can, while we can then, and keep them all. Tough luck if someone changes their mind licenses cannot be revoked.--[[User:KTo288|KTo288]] ([[User talk:KTo288|talk]]) 00:45, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 
+
::{{Comment}}No. While legally we would be entitled to do so, such a mindset in my opinion is self defeating. I see Commons as being here for the long term, I hope for it, and the work we have put into it, to survive long after we have gone. The consequences of this is that Commons' relationship with the world at large must also be for the long term. Alienating users at Flickr and elsewhere into believing that we are stealing their images, using them for nefarious purposes and bullying them over copyrights, which they never thought would be used against them, will just turn off the taps of future user created PD and creative commons images. We need to educate, flatter and persuade, not huff and puff about what we are entitled to do.--[[User:KTo288|KTo288]] ([[User talk:KTo288|talk]]) 00:45, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Requests_for_comment/scope&diff=92845297&oldid=92844476