Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Il giorno mar 14 mag 2019 alle ore 15:46 Yann Forget ha scritto: > Le mar. 14 mai 2019 à 15:32, Andy Mabbett a > écrit : > > > On Tue, 14 May 2019 at 04:50, Yann Forget wrote: > > > > > Currently, we require a confirmation via OTRS if an image was > previously > > > published elsewhere before

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

To quote what you said > > I think professional photographers should have their account confirmed by > > OTRS. This is not about previous publishing, this is about the person publishing a photo. Problems with previous publishing is not special in any way for professional photographers vs

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

m" did we fail? > > Thanks > > From: Wikimedia-l on behalf of > Lane Rasberry > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2019 4:01 PM > To: Wikimedia Mailing List > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach > > I see the proble

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

we fail? > > Thanks > > From: Wikimedia-l on behalf of > Lane Rasberry > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2019 4:01 PM > To: Wikimedia Mailing List > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach > > I see the problem as lack of acc

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Sorry Lane... which " wiki publishing norm" did we fail? Thanks From: Wikimedia-l on behalf of Lane Rasberry Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2019 4:01 PM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach I see the probl

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

I see the problem as lack of access to basic training information. It appears that the team doing the uploads failed to comply to wiki publishing norms. I do not see this as a problem between editors and moderators, but rather as being between who editors versus our rules. Wikimedia projects

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Le mar. 14 mai 2019 à 15:32, Andy Mabbett a écrit : > On Tue, 14 May 2019 at 04:50, Yann Forget wrote: > > > Currently, we require a confirmation via OTRS if an image was previously > > published elsewhere before being uploaded to Commons. > > Really? can you provide a link to a policy age

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Nah, of course they do. We are using filters at the Portuguese Wikipedia since 2009, and I can say, without blinking, that if it was not for filters, IPs would have ceased to be allowed to edit at all there for good now, so much it is the amount of IP vandalism that they automatically catch and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

You are right, Asaf. It seems that getting the sysop bit is much harder now than it used to be in the past, possibly due to many situations of inexperienced sysops causing havoc in Commons. OTOH, any destructive/untrustworthy account, such as "Daphne Lantier"/INC, can easily get the flag by being

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

like this can > > take a whole year of volunteer work. > > > * After all the victim-blaming seen on this discussion no one was > > able to point to a page where the procedure was clear for everyone. > > > > > > Let's hope we can follow with this pr

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

> On Mon, 13 May 2019 at 05:10, Yann Forget wrote: > > > > This was reverted. It is a dishonest edit with a misleading summary On Mon, 13 May 2019 at 17:46, David Gerard wrote: > Yann, you SERIOUSLY need to back up this claim of "dishonesty" on the > part of a Wikmedian of long experience.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

On Tue, 14 May 2019 at 04:50, Yann Forget wrote: > Currently, we require a confirmation via OTRS if an image was previously > published elsewhere before being uploaded to Commons. Really? can you provide a link to a policy age proving that assertion? Your claim rather makes a mockery of the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Any image recognition system has the potential to be misused. What we imagined was flagging images for the later attention of volunteers to look at. A simple image hash might just be the basis for identifying potential close matches to previously deleted files or derivatives of existing Commons

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

-l on behalf of Yann Forget Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2019 6:43 AM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach The issue is not in that way. If you published an image exclusively on Commons, then no problem. If you first publish an image outside Commons

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

The issue is not in that way. If you published an image exclusively on Commons, then no problem. If you first publish an image outside Commons, how do we know that you are the author? OK, there may be some factors to prove that (consistency of EXIF data, etc.), but in the absence of EXIF data, we

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Again; what is different between me as a photographer taking pictures for a newspaper and me as a photograper taking pictures for Commons? Is it the name written om the lens? The shoes I'm wearing? There are no difference, this is a fallacy. John Erling Blad /jeblad tir. 14. mai 2019, 05.50

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Hi, Currently, we require a confirmation via OTRS if an image was previously published elsewhere before being uploaded to Commons. I think professional photographers should have their account confirmed by OTRS. Regards, Yann Forget Jai Jagat 2020 Grand March Coordinator

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Not all local sysops have a strong knowledge of image licensing and I think allowing local sysops not familiar with image licensing and how Commons community works in general to delete\undelete files would be counterproductive. I agree with Yann that training would work. I think resources

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Fae, I think that what you are describing is essentially the sort of mechanism that would be mandated by Article 17 on the proposed new European copyright directive. Since the Foundation has explicitly opposed that, see their blog post

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

volunteers are few, and they have a great > > > > job-queue. But outreach volunteers are less, and a project like this > can > > > > take a whole year of volunteer work. > > > > * After all the victim-blaming seen on this discussion no one was > > &

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

The expectations is at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators#Community role Regards, Isaac On Sun, May 12, 2019, 10:43 PM Todd Allen I wouldn't even have any idea what I'd need to do to be a sysop on Commons. > I frequently do find copyvio images and nominate them for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

llow > > when uploading to Commons. > > > > From: Wikimedia-l on behalf of > > Peter Southwood > > Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 7:59 PM > > To: 'Wikimedia Mailing List' > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Many are. I've always been in favour of a "do what you think you can do under your responsibility"-model. Any steward can do any action, still they don't do what they are not familiar with. For example I seldom use central notice. Vito Il giorno dom 12 mag 2019 alle ore 22:28 Paulo Santos

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

> > > to point to a page where the procedure was clear for everyone. > > > > > > Let's hope we can follow with this project next year and we will have > > less > > > problems. > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > Galder &g

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

May 13, 2019 5:30 PM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach We have dozens of cross project brainstorming off-wiki. But the general feeling is often that if you encourage the social dynamics of a platform in a way that people who like to "p

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

dance. And we also gave them a direct > e-mail so they could ask for copyrights issues: two of them did it and we > gave them some answers. > > Cheers > > Galder > > From: Wikimedia-l on behalf of > Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

ct: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach We have dozens of cross project brainstorming off-wiki. But the general feeling is often that if you encourage the social dynamics of a platform in a way that people who like to "play cops" are a key actor... when this is established

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

We have dozens of cross project brainstorming off-wiki. But the general feeling is often that if you encourage the social dynamics of a platform in a way that people who like to "play cops" are a key actor... when this is established there is no point in creating sophisticated or efficient

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 3:03 AM Peter Southwood < peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote: > The precautionary principle is labelled as an official policy of Commons. > I think it should be mentioned on the assume good faith page as it explains > why it is sometimes impractical to assume good faith

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

re less, and a project like this > can > > > take a whole year of volunteer work. > > > * After all the victim-blaming seen on this discussion no one was > > able > > > to point to a page where the procedure was clear for everyone. > > > > &

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

an follow with this project next year and we will have > less problems. > > > > Cheers > > > > Galder > > ________ > > From: Wikimedia-l on behalf > of Vi to > > Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 3:35 PM > > To: Wikimedia Mailing Li

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Ditto. But did not have the impression that this was {a, the} pressing need. Perhaps we also need better ways to highlight workload overloads (and continue conversations about them through time, rather than sporadic proposals of specific implementations that can easily fail) to stimulate

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 1:10 PM Paulo Santos Perneta < paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote: > As a Commoner, I can tell we certainly are, James, please apply here: > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators > > Even if your sysop actions are rather occasional or seasonal, or focused

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

If I could share my vision, I am not part of the group of "expert flagged users"(I have some flags here and there, I was asked to get more but I have no rush) and I am not part of the group of "expert outreach users" (I make events but change them so often I do not play any specific role).

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Some years ago I did a quite simplified analysis of the number of active contributors, and normalized the number against the number of people wit internet connections for the respective language groups. The relative number was pretty similar for all languages from similar cultural groups. I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Trying to explain European copyright to Americans can be quite hard… ;) On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 6:07 AM Yann Forget wrote: > > Hi James, > > Of course. More admins would lesser the work charge, and it would be great. > We specially appreciate admins with multi-language capabilities, as it is a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

___ > From: Wikimedia-l on behalf of Vi > to > Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 3:35 PM > To: Wikimedia Mailing List > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach > > I wonder wheter local sysops could be allowed to delete/undelete images

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

I can imagine a bot comparing photos found by Google (ie. comparing hashes) but not a system extracting some kind of unique feature that says an image is a copyright violation. So how do you imagine ORES being used for copyright violations? I can't see how a copyright violation would have any kind

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

I have proposed use of local sensitive hashing algorithms for at least three different purposes in the past. All being turned down. Probably it is due to LSHs being difficult to understand, and not to forget it is a fairly bit of fighting over what is and whats not a "real" LSH. In the past there

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Hi all, I think that Tomasz and Paulo have made two excellent points. Firstly, Wikimedia Commons is a project on its own with a community that deserves full respect and not just a storage of files that acts as a cloud service to Wikipedia. Secondly, there is evident stagnation and even decline in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

As a Commoner, I can tell we certainly are, James, please apply here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators Even if your sysop actions are rather occasional or seasonal, or focused on a certain topic, like mine, all help is very much welcomed there. Best, Paulo James Heilman

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

, 2019 6:10 AM > To: Wikimedia Mailing List > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach > > This was reverted. It is a dishonest edit with a misleading summary. > > Regards, > Yann > Jai Jagat 2020 Grand March Coordinator > https://www.jaijagat2020.org/

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

I have a fairly good understanding of copyright. Deal with a fair bit of copyright issues occurring via paid editing and flicker washing of images and would be happy to do admin work around that if the Commons community was interested. James On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 4:00 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Wikimedia project communities in general seem to be quite stagnant, if not declining, apart from Wikidata, which is and always will be a whole different case. In the case of Commons it was already very much as it is now when I joined in 2009. I always found it a very pleasant place, but overtime I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Hi Todd, If you are active in Commons, and demonstrably understand copyright, ToO, DeMinimis, FOP, you are very welcome as a sysop there, AFAIK: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators There are some minimal requests of participation, which should not be an obstacle for anyone

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Fair comments. It would be a useful allocation of the donors' money Cheers, P -Original Message- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Yann Forget Sent: 12 May 2019 13:29 To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

But the problem here is not about having a good coverage on copyright issues! Is about deleting things claiming that are DW without specifying what is the original work this files are derived from! ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Hi, Same as for reviewing files. I find more rewarding to work on content that creating and mainting help pages. I should mention that Aymatth2 has done an amazing work on completely reworking the copyright help pages, creating subpages by

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Hi, My guest work is that 1. Adminship requires an extensive knowledge of copyright, that's the main factor limiting the number of candidates. 2. Commons requires candidates to be active locally. 3. I find personally much more rewarding to work on content that reviewing and cleaning files

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

st for any substantial change to minimise strife. Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Tomasz Ganicz Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 5:14 PM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outre

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

In which sense weren't those instructions followed correctly? ___ 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:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Please read my post again, Cheers P -Original Message- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019 9:29 AM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

' Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach Well.. there where instructions. All the videos were supervised before uploading, all the songs were perfectly cited at the descriptions and all the own work was marked as own work. This are the instructiones to follow when uploading

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

] On Behalf Of Yann Forget Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019 6:10 AM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach This was reverted. It is a dishonest edit with a misleading summary. Regards, Yann Jai Jagat 2020 Grand March Coordinator https://www.jaijagat2020.org

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

] Dispute between Common and Outreach Hi, To have a clearer image of Commons admins, please see this https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:List_of_administrators_by_recent_activity There are currently 223 admins (comparing with the English Wikipedia 1,176). Among them 165 have done one admin action

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

A good question to ask would be why the admin group is not growing. And maybe (maybe) we can find a common answer to both problems pointed here. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Hi, To have a clearer image of Commons admins, please see this https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:List_of_administrators_by_recent_activity There are currently 223 admins (comparing with the English Wikipedia 1,176). Among them 165 have done one admin action during the last month. But

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Hi James, Of course. More admins would lesser the work charge, and it would be great. We specially appreciate admins with multi-language capabilities, as it is a multilangual project. Of course, comprehensive knowledge of copyright is needed. That is complex, but it can be learnt. Regards, Yann

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

s discussion no one was > able > > to point to a page where the procedure was clear for everyone. > > > > Let's hope we can follow with this project next year and we will have > less > > problems. > > > > Cheers > > > > Galder > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

I wouldn't even have any idea what I'd need to do to be a sysop on Commons. I frequently do find copyvio images and nominate them for deletion on Commons while working on the English Wikipedia spam queue (and yes, I'm familiar with copyright law, and they have all, to my knowledge, indeed been

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Anyone doing Commons stuff has to do have Commons skills. Wikipedia sysops are not asked to have them, and do not have them by default. If Wikipedia sysops that deal with copyright want to be Commons admins, they can apply anytime for that role. Otherwise, render to Caesar the things that are

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Major projects surely deal with a significant amount of uploads in an efficient way. Vito Il giorno dom 12 mag 2019 alle ore 17:31 Paulo Santos Perneta < paulospern...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > I absolutely disagree with this. A Wikipedia sysop do not necessarily has - > and from my experience,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

n uploading to Commons. > > From: Wikimedia-l on behalf of > Peter Southwood > Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 7:59 PM > To: 'Wikimedia Mailing List' > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach > > It seems to be a situation where there were no clear i

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

sts.wikimedia.org] On > Behalf Of Mister Thrapostibongles > Sent: 11 May 2019 08:53 > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach > > Hello all, > > There seems to be a dispute between the Outreach and the Commons components > of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

-l on behalf of Peter Southwood Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 7:59 PM To: 'Wikimedia Mailing List' Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach It seems to be a situation where there were no clear instructions, so people did what they thought was a good idea, but others thought

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

. Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Mister Thrapostibongles Sent: 11 May 2019 08:53 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach Hello all, There seems

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

I absolutely disagree with this. A Wikipedia sysop do not necessarily has - and from my experience, most of the time hasn't - the necessary skills to deal with copyright. Best, Paulo A domingo, 12 de mai de 2019, 14:35, Vi to escreveu: > I wonder wheter local sysops could be allowed to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

niedz., 12 maj 2019 o 16:23 Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga napisał(a): > As I am the author of the post, some remarks: > > * Commons is, indeed, the only [cloud] storage for file in most of the > Wikipedias. Making an accusation of using Commons as a storage place is > unfair and nonsense. > I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

pe we can follow with this project next year and we will have less > problems. > > Cheers > > Galder > > From: Wikimedia-l on behalf of > Vi to > Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 3:35 PM > To: Wikimedia Mailing List > Subject: Re:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

12, 2019 3:35 PM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach I wonder wheter local sysops could be allowed to delete/undelete images on commons in order to reduce workload. Most risky commons' uploads come from cw-upload, allow local sysops to handle

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

I wonder wheter local sysops could be allowed to delete/undelete images on commons in order to reduce workload. Most risky commons' uploads come from cw-upload, allow local sysops to handle them could work. Vito Il giorno dom 12 mag 2019 alle ore 15:31 James Heilman ha scritto: > It is hard to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

It is hard to get the admin bit there aswell. Is Commons interested in having more admins? James On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 5:41 AM Fæ wrote: > A couple of years ago a proposed project was for the WMF to pay for > access to the Google image matching API access so we could run a > copyvio bot on

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

A couple of years ago a proposed project was for the WMF to pay for access to the Google image matching API access so we could run a copyvio bot on the live new uploads list. Such a bot would not be terribly hard to get working, and would be a great experiment to see if this aspect of the more

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Yes, Yaroslav is right. The active community is small compared to the amount of work to be done. I have advocated since long that massive training is needed to fix this. These trainings should be sponsored by the WMF and its affiliates. Regards, Yann Forget Jai Jagat 2020 Grand March

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

IMO commons need either a Clue Bot NG for new uploads or ores support for images that might be copyright violation, or both. Best On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:10 PM Yaroslav Blanter wrote: > Just the active community itself is too small, compared with the amount of > material it has to deal with.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Just the active community itself is too small, compared with the amount of material it has to deal with. Cheers Yaroslav On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:07 PM Benjamin Ikuta wrote: > > > > Is the shortage of admins due to a lack of people willing or capable to do > the job, or increasing difficulty

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Is the shortage of admins due to a lack of people willing or capable to do the job, or increasing difficulty in obtaining the bit? On May 12, 2019, at 3:55 AM, Tomasz Ganicz wrote: > Well, Actually, at the moment it looks they are all undeleted. > > The good habit - which I was keeping

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Well, Actually, at the moment it looks they are all undeleted. The good habit - which I was keeping when organizing several GLAM-related mass uploads - was to create on Commons project page describing what it is intended to be uploaded, preferably in English. Then you can create a project

[Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Hello all, There seems to be a dispute between the Outreach and the Commons components of The Community, judging by the article "Wikimedia Commons: a highly hostile place for multimedia students contributions" at the Education Newsletter