PS: my last rely to GerardM, not to Gnangarra.
On 22 June 2014 09:52, Rama Neko <[email protected]> wrote: > You are reverting the burden of responsibility. If files are improperly > uploaded on Commons, the issue is not Commons removing them, it is the > uploading that causes the problem. Which in itself would not be a big deal > -- you can politely ask a Commons admin to help you upload the file on your > local Wikimedia project, and be done with it. > > The problem becomes serious only because some people around here insist on > shifting blame, starting political controversies out of these punctual > issues, and have this ludicrous notion that they somehow can bring people > in line by shouting and issuing vague and empty threats. Given the degree > on autonomy that project have, and given the voluntary nature of our > activities, this autoritarian approach will always yield more resistance > and therefore cannot work. Therefore, be it only out of practical sense, I > urge the concerned people to change their approach. > -- Rama > > > > On 22 June 2014 09:45, Gnangarra <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The image isnt directly lost to the other projects Commons has a policy >> of allowing temporary restoration for transfer to another project under >> fair use provisions, >> >> >> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Undeletion_requests#Temporary_undeletion >> >> as Gerard kind of identifies the issue is in the communication when >> deletions occurs to project whos contributors may not be active on Commons >> and are therefore unable to contribute to the deletion discussion process. >> >> So the question then is how can we improve this communitcation between >> projects, my thoughts are; >> >> - notification on article talk pages of articles where the media is >> in use, with a link to the discussion so they can participate >> - when a discussion is closed then a notification to the talk page >> giving the result and advising of options of delreview or transfer >> locally. >> >> >> Personally I wouldnt like to see the communication of Commons activities >> put in the hands of a third project(WikiData) thats only going to make more >> points of arguments >> >> >> >> >> On 22 June 2014 14:59, Gerard Meijssen <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hoi, >>> Much of the "ordering around" is the consequence of LOSING the images >>> when Commons decides to no longer make media files available. Even when a >>> project allows for things like "fair use", the images are lost to them when >>> Commons decides to remove access. >>> >>> When the information is Wikidatified, the image in a project will still >>> refer to that Wiki project and it WILL state that Commons has removed it >>> from the media files that are generally available. It is then for the >>> people to grant a local right to use that image. >>> >>> In this way Commons does what it thinks best and the local projects >>> gained the ability to do whatever fits their policies. >>> Thanks, >>> GerardM >>> >>> >>> On 22 June 2014 08:38, Rama Neko <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> It makes as much sense to say that Commons is a repository for other >>>> Wikimedia projects, than to say that Wikipedia is here to provide >>>> encyclopedic context to the media of Wikimedia Commons. >>>> >>>> Where the real asymetry lies is in the feeling of superiority of >>>> certain users of others projects who see Commons as a "service project", >>>> and from there construct the notion that jackbooting in and ordering people >>>> around is remotely legitimate (and, to be practical, has a chance to work). >>>> There is a small number of users, always the same, who regularly >>>> attempt to push an agenda of lax copyright standards for Commons; when this >>>> fails they try to impose their proposed policies by drumming up support >>>> from people with vested interests from other projects, and notorious >>>> authoritarians. Has anybody ever seen an influx of Commonists flocking to >>>> wp.he to "treat it as a problem"? >>>> >>>> That is where the real problem is. The issue is not hosting these >>>> media, they can be hosted locally on the projects that use them as >>>> "Free-but-not-on-Commons", or as "Fair use". The issue is beating Commons >>>> into submission, as an aim in itself. Well, pardon us if we object. >>>> >>>> -- Rama >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 21 June 2014 19:19, Yann Forget <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Rama, >>>>> >>>>> Sorry, but you have it all wrong. >>>>> >>>>> 1. Wikimedia is a repository for other Wikimedia projects. It is its >>>>> primary mission. >>>>> >>>>> 2. But this does not make Commons contributors second-class. On the >>>>> opposite, importing and managing files for other projects make them >>>>> first-class IMHO. ;oD >>>>> >>>>> Yann >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2014-06-21 10:04 GMT+05:30 Rama Neko <[email protected]>: >>>>> > Commons is not there to serve other projects. Commons is a project >>>>> of its >>>>> > own standing, and the other projects are there to serve it just as >>>>> much as >>>>> > it is there to serve other projects. >>>>> > >>>>> > It is really dispiriting to see how certain people see Commonists as >>>>> some >>>>> > sort of second-class contributors. That is wrong in every sense of >>>>> the word >>>>> > -- it is an error and an injustice. >>>>> > -- Rama >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > On 20 June 2014 23:45, David Gerard <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >> >>>>> >> On 20 June 2014 22:28, Gerard Meijssen <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >> >>>>> >> > Blocking because people do not agree with you is very much >>>>> antagonising. >>>>> >> > The >>>>> >> > intention is that Commons serves other projects so why is someone >>>>> >> > blocked >>>>> >> > when they make sure people take notice of what is happening at >>>>> Commons? >>>>> >> > I fins it is rather offensive all these !@#$%%. It gives the >>>>> impression >>>>> >> > that >>>>> >> > there is no conversation possible and that it has degenerated >>>>> into a >>>>> >> > power >>>>> >> > play. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> I've noted before: If Commons doesn't want to be regarded as a >>>>> problem >>>>> >> by other projects, it really needs to start behaving less like one. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> - d. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> _______________________________________________ >>>>> >> Commons-l mailing list >>>>> >> [email protected] >>>>> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>>> > Commons-l mailing list >>>>> > [email protected] >>>>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Commons-l mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Commons-l mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Commons-l mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> GN. >> Vice President Wikimedia Australia >> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra >> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Commons-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
