On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 10:02 PM, Michael Peel<[email protected]> wrote:
On 12 Jun 2009, at 11:13, Sam Korn wrote:Right. I certainly agree that it would be better to name the author. But when articles are reused, they generally link to the Wikipedia article without giving a list of usernames; I don't see why that would be different for images.Images are generally the work of one, or a few people, whereas Wikipedia articles are the work of many. In the case of the images that I've taken myself and uploaded to Commons (CC-BY-SA license), pretty much the only thing I'm after for myself is attribution. I believe that's a standard stance amongst photographers that aren't also after money as a matter of routine. I'm not sure whether I'd go through all the trouble of uploading images to Commons/Wikipedia were that not the case. TBH, I think giving a list of usernames/authors of Wikipedia articles when they're reused would be best, but due to the number of authors that's more often than not impractical.
And for the (not insignificant number of) cases where there is more than one contributor to an image? E.g. where an image has been touched up by another user? I'm suggesting a simple, catch-all method. If the method we suggest isn't simple, it won't be followed. I agree entirely that giving a list of users would be *best*, but I'm not sure that practically we have that option. Sam -- Sam PGP public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sam_Korn/public_key
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
