Jump to content

User talk:Rowland Goodman

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rowland Goodman (talk | contribs) at 21:45, 2 September 2010 (→More on licensing). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

The Wikipedia Tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Mr. R00t Talk 21:13, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image credits

Hi -

Just so you know, the Wikipedia Manual of Style has a guideline for crediting the author of an image, at WP:CREDITS:

Unless relevant to the subject, do not credit the image author or copyright holder in the article. It is assumed that this is not necessary to fulfill attribution requirements of the GFDL or Creative Commons licenses as long as the appropriate credit is on the image description page. If the artist or photographer is independently notable, though, then a wikilink to the artist's biography may be appropriate.

I hope that this is not a big problem. Your tennis photographs are amazing and are a great contribution to Wikipedia. :-) Tim Pierce (talk) 20:58, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is a big problem - it is a breach of the copyright conditionRowland Goodman (talk) 20:59, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is a little unusual. The photo page provides no specific instructions as to how the photograph should be credited; how would an editor know what the copyright conditions are? Since a photograph on Wikimedia Commons is already part of Wikimedia, it's not being reused or republished when it's added to a Wikipedia article, so it is not generally considered a copyright infringement to do so. Can you say more about what you're concerned about with having the photo credit appear not only on the photo page but also on any page where it appears as a thumbnail? Tim Pierce (talk) 21:21, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, when you released it with that license on the image description page you state that anyone may copy, distribute, or share that image. That includes use on any page on the encyclopedia. Quick question though, if you didn't want it used on Wikipedia than why did you upload it to Commons? Cheers, Mr. R00t Talk 21:31, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The licence states:

You are free:
  • to share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work
  • to remix – to adapt the work

Under the following conditions:

  • attribution – You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
  • share alike – If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.

Permission (Reusing this file) Copyright Rowland Charles Goodman; may be used provided copyright attribution is given.

There is nothing unusual about photo credits. Rowland Goodman (talk) 05:27, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, there's nothing unusual about photo credits, so the photograph page has your photo credit on it! :-) But if you look around Wikipedia a bit you'll see that individual contribution credits, including photograph credits, just don't appear on the article pages. Wikipedia is understood to be a collaborative work, the result of contributions by thousands of individuals. It's an encyclopedia, not a magazine.
If you're concerned about ensuring that anyone else who would use your photo knows that it's under copyright, it seems to me that anyone who would reuse the photo would not use the thumbnail version on the Wikipedia article, but would click through to the larger version on Commons, where they will see the copyright notice with the precise restrictions. So I still don't see why it's important for the copyright notice to appear on the article page. Can you help me understand? Tim Pierce (talk) 13:01, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What you are trying to do is to redefine the licence conditions offered on Wikimedia Commons. This is not OK. If you feel that the licence conditions offered on Wikimedia Commons should not be offered, then then take action there.
In the mean time, please respect the licence conditions.Rowland Goodman (talk) 17:47, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Having the attribution on the image description page and not in the caption is perfectly acceptable. If you don't wish to respect the MOS, and do not want your image used without attribution in the thumbnail caption, feel free to remove it from the article. —fetch·comms 00:15, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The licence conditions are met by providing attribution on the linked image. We take great care to follow the copyright conditions, and the way Wikipedia attributes photographs has been approved by all kinds of folks who know about such things. If you insist that Wikipedia is in breach of CC because we do not state the attribution on the article page, then you are mistaken...but if you disagree, and wish to pursue it, then of course feel free; see WP:CONTACT.  Chzz  ►  00:19, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also of consideration is this archived discussion where the legal code, rather than the human-readable code, states: "The credit required by this Section 4(b) may be implemented in any reasonable manner".--Commander Keane (talk) 00:45, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More on licensing

It's been brought to my attention that, while the "human-readable" version of the Creative Commons license says that credit must be given "in the manner specified by the author," these words do not appear at all in the actual text of the license, which says only that "The credit required by this Section 4 (b) may be implemented in any reasonable manner." (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode)

The Creative Commons FAQ explains in more detail:


I am not a lawyer, but my reading of this is that you and I were both mistaken on this point, and the Creative Commons license just doesn't allow you to specify completely arbitrary citation requirements. Tim Pierce (talk) 20:58, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But what in fact is happening is that Wikipedia is displaying images on pages without any kind of attribution on the pages where the image is being displayed on. This is a clear breach of licence conditions.

The wording you quote above could be used to justify writing a different form of words for the attribution than the one I specified. It cannot justify not having any kind of attribution on the pages where the image is displayed.Rowland Goodman (talk) 21:45, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rowland_Goodman&oldid=382556003"