Some people have suggested putting userspace pages under "Wikipedia only" licenses by default as a solution to forks and mirrors taking user pages and the like. *If* that happened, then "limited license" images would be OK on user pages. But that's a mighty big *if*.

Didn't we already discuss this when Pioneer-12 wanted to retain copyright to his user and talk page postings? Didn't we already decide that anything more restrictive than GFDL on Wikipedia would be license hell and not worth the trouble to administer? Didn't we already decide that the submit button was equivalent to a digital signature agreeing to the terms and conditions of submission? I thought we already did. I hold the view that the allowable licenses should be consistent across the entire Wikipedia site, and that people should know and follow the rules in all Wikipedia locations. This includes user pages, and certainly includes images submitted as well.

--- Fastfission <fastfission(a)gmail.com> wrote: the User namespace that the whole scenario doesn't seem so people realize that on a site which reused! Unless we some other way -- they're not really meant we should allow It is still perfectly reasonable for a person to naturally want to show an image of themselves or other Wikipedias at say a WikiMeet without having to release those images under a license that would allow for extensive reuse. Out of respect to users, who contribute without pay and just for the fun of it, we have always been a bit lax on what users do with their user pages. Again, the *reason* the image use copyright policy forbids NC and special use images is that having those images in articles makes reuse needlessly difficult (even though such use is perfectly fine under GNU FDL). So given that, and the fact that user pages are not part of the encyclopedia, I think we should allow some image licenses for images on user pages and even the Wikipedia namespace that we would not allow in the article namespace. The only issue as I see it, is that we don’t give reusers the option to not download user pages and other Wikipedia-specific pages. But that is a current technical problem; not a valid reason to forever forbid NC and special use images in the user or Wikipedia namespaces. Forbidding such images for no practical reason smacks of fascism to me. So once the technical issue I mentioned is fixed, I see no valid reason for us to not be more permissive on image licensing in the user namespace (within the limits of WP:NOT a personal web page provider) -- mav __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Forbidding such images for no practical reason smacks of fascism to me. So once the technical issue I mentioned is fixed, I see no valid reason for us to not be more permissive on image licensing in the user namespace (within the limits of WP:NOT a personal web page provider) -- mav

Why would reusers even want or need to also have user pages? Also, from my experience, users in general do not like to have their user pages on other websites. So keeping user pages in the same database dump that reusers use has no practical benefit to anybody except maybe the person who creates the database dumps (exporting everything and only having one dump is easier).

NC or special use? Please clarify further, as I want to be certain to answer the question you're asking rather than one I think you're asking.

Actually, http://download.wikimedia.org *does* now carry filtered dumps which don't carry User: and Wikipedia: pages.

But this doesn't solve the problem in hand, because we don't currently filter the *image* dumps in any way. This is actually a big problem for all sorts of licensing issues, because all the hard work of permission tagging is likely to be lost in transmission.

But one very relevant implication is that images will be redistributed even if they're not used *anywhere*, let alone if they're only used on user pages. Remember: images are not attached to pages, they are just referenced from them.

See Erik Möller (Eloquence)'s recent post to Commons-l: http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/2005-September/000077.html "Creative Commons -NC Considered Harmful" The page where he outlines why is: http://intelligentdesigns.net/Licenses/NC

It's completely reasonable, but it's not necessarily a smart idea nor one our licensing scheme accomodates for. As it is, even User pages are included in our GFDL licensing

They can be reused accordingly and often are.

On 9/15/05, Daniel Mayer <maveric149(a)yahoo.com> wrote: I don't have proof, but I suspect they're intentionally reused in articles. Because people see them on Wikipedia, they think that the images must be OK for use in Wikipedia articles. I strongly suspect this because I almost did so myself. Had I not decided to double-check the license, I would have. Many others won't double-check the license before referencing images in the article space.

On 9/16/05, Zachary Harden <zscout370(a)hotmail.com> wrote: the softwear doesn't think so

geni wrote: Pyjamas? :)

I wholly support any approach that would keep User pages either out of the GFDL or out of our database ports, to be honest, though I'm not completely aware of what that would entail in terms of licensing requirements or technical ones.

On 15/09/05, grm_wnr <grmwnr(a)gmail.com> wrote: users.wikimedia.org? A very interesting corollary to single-login, though it might prove a bit of a steep learning curve having to interwiki everything... -- - Andrew Gray andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

I added a line in [[Wikipedia:Fair use]] which says: "Fair use" images should only be used in the article namespace. They should not be used on templates or on user pages. They should be only linked to from talk pages when they are the topic of discussion. Because "fair use" images are only not copyright infringement on Wikipedia when used for strictly encyclopedic reasons, their use in other contexts on Wikipedia is most likely copyright infringement. Does this sound reasonable? I also plan to create a little template which one can drop onto a user page (replacing an existing "fair use" image), which will say something along the lines of the above, with instructions as to how to link to the image if desired. The goal is to be polite but explain that the use of copyrighted images on a user page is probably copyright infringement and not allowed on Wikipedia. Thoughts? Objections? FF On 9/13/05, Fastfission <fastfission(a)gmail.com> wrote: _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l