Anyway they can italic or bold this Phrase: in a private place or
situation without permission. ??
On 9/12/2011 10:53 AM, Sydney Poore wrote:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Sarah Stierch
sarah.stie...@gmail.com mailto:sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote:
I have no clue how I missed this
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.comwrote:
I have no clue how I missed this (and perhaps it's been posted before?)
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Images_of_identifiable_people
Perhaps we can lend a hand to assist in this?
-Sarah
Yes, the
IMO, the Commons policy needs to be tweaked to to ensure that the person
giving consent for the image to be taken understands that it will be
uploaded with a free license, and what that means.
Yes, there doesn't really seem to be an appropriate representation about
this. I also think it
+1. There are hundreds of photographs of women sunbathing, walking down
the
street, etc. It makes me severely uncomfortable that we have people
taking
photographs of people in a voyeuristic manner uploading images to
Commons,
Flickr, whatever. Just because someone (of any gender) lays on
They don't appear to be in any questionable or exploitative situations. I would
like to think you did ask their verbal permission or informed them that they
represent their town on Wikipedia. I have learned to avoid people in images
without strict permission after having an anthropologist as a
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Sydney Poore sydney.po...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com
wrote:
I have no clue how I missed this (and perhaps it's been posted before?)
Sydney -- all good ideas, for sure! The resolution was intended as a
(re)focusing device, as you note; and there is still lots of work to
be done. One of the areas is making sure that all wikis have a similar
policy. Would it help to put together a page on meta to coordinate
this?
I'm not
On 9/12/11 3:58 PM, Sarah Stierch wrote:
I'm not sure if we're ready to move it to meta yet, I do wish we had a
more private place to develop this. It's a rather sensitive topic for
folks. Perhaps a google doc or...?
To be honest, I think that working as publicly as possible is
To be honest, I think that working as publicly as possible is only
good, in the long run, for what needs to happen. Transparency is super
important.
I suppose it's paranoia that makes me sensitive about making it so
transparent in an infant stage. But, if we have to place it
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.com wrote:
Sydney -- all good ideas, for sure! The resolution was intended as a
(re)focusing device, as you note; and there is still lots of work to
be done. One of the areas is making sure that all wikis have a similar
10 matches
Mail list logo
