Concerning using Commons as a photo hosting, I have written a blog post
earlier this year:
https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/t/wikimedia-commons-as-private-photo-hosting/2866
However, I can not see how it can become anything close to social media,
nor do I think it should be. It already has a
This discussion, although started with a question "why don't people
contribute to Wikimedia Commons, now after actually the discussion above,
covers more topics. A few notes, observations and comments:
1) I remember a major discussion took place somewhere on Wikimedia Commons
when one of the
This was discussed a number of times[sic.] onwiki and there was no consensus at
all to allow NC on commons.
Citing from Commons:Village pump/Copyright: "One of Wikimedia Commons' basic
principles is: "Only free content is allowed." Please do not ask why unfree
material is not allowed at
If memory serves me correctly, as Steinsplitter said, there has been
pushback on Commons regarding allowing NC-licensed images on Commons,
but I can't recall if there was a consensus regarding having a site
that is an alternative to Commons and allow images with NC licenses.
I'm not sure how much
There are several causes why people do not upload their photos to Commons.
-
Wikimedia Commons is less known like the other Wikimedia sisters. We had to
increase the awareness of these projects including the Foundation
itself. But all people speak only about Wikipedia, and nobody starts an
ad
On Sun, 17 May 2020 at 07:20, Roland Unger
wrote:
>
> There are several causes why people do not upload their photos to Commons.
>
> -
> Wikimedia Commons is less known like the other Wikimedia sisters. We had to
> increase the awareness of these projects including the Foundation
> itself. But
I think you've hit the nail on the head Pine with
> However, I'm not sure that
> the community has enough human resources to monitor and sustain
> another project. We already have problems with maintaining what we
> have.
We really need to address the lack of cross project support and community
"there are way less people maintaining it than it is needed" is naif summary
of what is going on. IMHO. There are people maintaining it in a way that is
counterproductive. You can always create an efficient workflow, if you want it.
We don't need people that delete an image of a statue in the
On Sun, 17 May 2020 at 05:12, Gnangarra wrote:
> Personally I think WLE, WLM need bigger budgets all round with sponsors
> from retail outlets offering photography prizes and WMF & Affiliates
> offering the primary prize that lets people buy gear like cameras and lenses
>
The size of those
On Sun, 17 May 2020 at 08:33, Fæ wrote:
> A "share" link on image pages would go a long way to fixing this. If
> folks on instagram, flickr etc. got used to seeing nice images with
> links back to Commons, we might expect 1% to 4% of those readers to
> follow the link back to the source, so if a
On Sun, 17 May 2020 at 10:32, Tito Dutta wrote:
> 1) I remember a major discussion took place somewhere on Wikimedia Commons
> when one of the strategy2030 draft recommendations suggested uploading
> non-free images on Wikimedia Commons. That discussion was also on the scope
> of Wikimedia
Hoi,
Just consider this, there are still many pictures in the English Wikipedia
that could be in Commons because of its license and regularly there are
pictures in Commons that are deleted because there license is not
compatible with Commons. At Commons a revolution is taking place because
the
On Sun, 17 May 2020 at 04:05, Benjamin Ikuta wrote:
> Has there been, or should there be, any research into this, or why people
> don't contribute more broadly?
Perhaps although similar research with regards to wikipedia has never
produced particularly useful results.
--
geni
I have no doubt that on the long-term solutions will be found. Even if
structural data were IMHO presented and used poorly, the catalyzing effect of
them and Wikidata will be there. I am also in full support for the creation of
a parallel Commons for NC files as well, which will also speed up
14 matches
Mail list logo
