I agree! Pete, Kaldari and others have fought the good fight about that. I think some Things were developed on Commons and we tried to get more folks involved to no avail. I can't provide links this second.
I tried my best with model releases (I worked in fashion and photography before I was a Wikipedian and curator!) but little has seemed to come from it and as alway - I encourage people to get involved in curating commons of non-educational content. More voices means more content control. I had to shift my focus to focus on bringing more women to Wikipedia, which I hope leads to more curating of content. Don't get me wrong - I think his very Important!! Sarah Sent via iPhone - I apologize in advance for my shortness or errors! :) On May 31, 2012, at 1:44 PM, Sarah <slimvir...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Sarah Stierch <sarah.stie...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> ... I think it's concerning about >> model contracts and so forth, but, I think we have bigger fish to fry at >> this point. ... > > Hi Sarah, I see your point, but I think the model releases are a major > issue for us. As I look at it, women *are" involved extensively in > Wikimedia, but a big percentage of that involvement comes in the form > of being portrayed naked on Commons. This is very troubling to me. If > in addition it's being done without their consent, then it's something > I really wish we could act on, regardless of the legal requirements. > > Sarah > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
