Hoi,
Thank you for demonstrating the extend OTRS is not fit for purpose. I
understand that OTRS is governed by rules and regulations but a reference
is made to "legal". There is no law that insists on the existing rules and
regulations as put forward, rules and regulations that are blatantly unfit
for purpose.
Particularly the line: "- it must not say the use is to, for, or on
Wikipedia" is problematic because either this is a list as stated what OTRS
adheres to or, it is not. It is a negative and as such it reads that it is
NOT about any Wikipedia and its vagaries.
Yet again it is brought to the attention that the negative attitude is to
be acceptable because of a perceived workload. Apparently it is easier to
say no than to say yes and that is in itself mystifying.
OTRS has not moved on with the time and as such it does not even know
selfies... An issue not confined to OTRS is that understanding of copyright
and licensing is dim anyway. When a copyright holder provides us with
material, it is licensed by the copyright holder to be available under a
WMF permitted license. When the copyright holder provides it under a
secondary license elsewhere or when our material is used elsewhere with a
more restrictive license, it does not follow that we are in breach of
copyright. I have fought such "delete on sight" battles and the only result
is no response on the image that was to be speedily deleted. The rule
should be; when material is provided to us, the license is checked at the
time and any and all issues NOT involving the copyright holder are to be
seen as irrelevant.
OTRS is a Wikimedia Foundation sanctioned function. It insists to function
as is and therefore *a new mandate is required* because as is, it does the
worst possible service. There is no Wikipedia, there are 300+, there are
other projects that require a functioning Commons and as it is, it is not
fit for purpose.
You may remember when English Wikipedia had egg on its face because of the
deletion of what became a Nobel prize winner. There are MANY science awards
and we want a picture for all awardees in addition, in the Scholia tool we
want pictures of any and all people that authored a paper.
Thanks,
GerardM
On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 at 02:06, Gnangarra <[email protected]> wrote:
> For legal reasons OTRS requires very specific wording, it declines
> permissions that fail to meet that very strict wording.
>
> The person must;
>
> - establish their authority to license the image
> - the license must be a free license PD or CC-by
> - it must not say the use is to, for, or on Wikipedia
> - it needs a URL to associate the permission with
>
> If the media meets these requirements than it will be accept, if it doesnt
> it gets rejected. Scope is something that gets decided on on Commons.
>
> Wikidata has had an impact on scope, quite literally everything is now
> within scope. We havent even yet got to the issue about Wikidata items
> including trademarked logos and copyrighted works for which Commons cant
> have images under fairuse
>
> Commons has fallen behind when it comes to the capability of taking photos
> of ones self (selfies) the default position when Commons started was that
> taking a high quality photograph of yourself wasnt possible there must have
> been someone else pushing the button. What happens is Commons asks for the
> subject to obtain permission from the photographer and submit that to OTRS,
> the systems falls over because the photographer cant prove that the photo
> they took of themselves was taken by themselves because the underlying
> assumption is that that isnt possible. The vast majority of agents on the
> commons permission queue are people from commons who have learnt the
> policies and have the tools to do the work.
>
> OTRS permission behaves as expected because there is a very narrow
> definition of whats acceptable, anything that doesnt fit gets rejected. The
> very real need to be pro-active in ensuring the permissions queue doesnt
> get overwhelmed and backlogged contributes to the fact that the grey is
> treated as black -- close it, delete it, move on.
>
> In an ideal scenario a closer relationship with google via flickr to make
> it possible for Wikidata to link in there as well would be a potential
> solution to those areas where copyright is an issue as it would still
> enable the ability of having an image accessible via a link.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 at 05:00, Michael Maggs <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > This has nothing to do with Commons only supporting Wikipedia. Commons
> > supports ALL of the Wikimedia projects, and always has.
> >
> > As is quite clearly set out in the Commons SCOPE policy, “a file that is
> > used in good faith on a Wikimedia project is always considered
> > educational”, and hence is in scope. Of course, that includes Wikidata.
> >
> > Under the same policy, Commons does not editorialise on behalf of any of
> > the projects, and an image that is acceptable to Wikidata is by design
> > acceptable to Commons.
> >
> > If the Wikidata community considers that an item on an individual is not
> > acceptable (for example because it has been added solely for
> > self-promotion), Wikidata can - under its own rules - delete it, and
> hence
> > the link to the image on Commons.
> >
> > Commons would then delete the image as not in use (and not otherwise
> > educational).
> >
> > None of this relies in any way on the specific definition of ‘notable’ as
> > used on the Wikipedias; that’s simply not relevant.
> >
> > The problem here seems to be an additional hurdle that has apparently
> been
> > added to the guidance given to OTRS volunteers. OTRS has so far as I
> know
> > no mandate to decline images that fall within Commons Scope, and if they
> > are indeed doing that, the guidance should be changed.
> >
> > Michael
> >
> > > On 25 Feb 2020, at 16:11, Gerard Meijssen <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hoi,
> > > Apparantly at Commons they have standardised themselves to only support
> > > Wikipedia.
> > >
> > > At Wikidata we have people who are notable according to our standards.
> We
> > > are actively asking them for images to illustrate our information. The
> > best
> > > suggestion we get is: do not ask for images because they are deleted at
> > > Commons.
> > >
> > > When this is what awaits us when we standardise on one label Wikipedia,
> > it
> > > is obvious that this is the worst scenario for the "other" projects.
> The
> > > projects who operate to different standards who have notability
> criteria
> > > different from English Wikipedia.
> > > Thanks,
> > > GerardM
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [email protected]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [email protected]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> GN.
>
> *Power of Diverse Collaboration*
> *Sharing knowledge brings people together*
> Wikimania Bangkok 2020
> August 5 to 9
> hosted by ESEAP
>
> Wikimania: https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page
> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [email protected]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
