This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The new thumb-syntax should be integrated into the MediaWiki-upload text, because it could prevent uploading a small and a large version of an image, because it is not needed anymore. I.e. the syntax [[image:NAMEOFTHEIMAGE.jpg|thumb|Text under the image]] could be recommended. Stern 19:47, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I propose to remove the contents of this page (I have moved all the information to Wikipedia:Uploading images) and replace it with the following. — Timwi 14:50, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Use this page to upload images.
See Wikipedia:Uploading images for information on how this upload form works, how to use images in articles, and what file formats are preferred for what types of images.
I mostly agree with this, but an extra line on how to add images would be really useful for those who have read the instructions before, and just need a quick reminder. Angela . 07:11, Apr 19, 2004 (UTC)
Ahhh, my eyes. This text is too big and too purple. No one is going to bother reading it now. Dori | Talk 14:49, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)
Wow. This is such an improvement over the current, looks-like-fineprint version. I'm going to try to get enough consensus to get this implemented. If you are reading this because a message from me sent you to this page, please look over the Timwi's version above, and if you feel able to support it, please add your sig below (with whatever comments you feel moved to make). Let's get this fixed! JesseW, the juggling janitor 20:26, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Not having "To view or search previously uploaded images, go to the list of uploaded images." is inconvenient, and, unless it no longer overwrites files silently, removing the warning about that seems undesirable. Niteowlneils 01:52, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I am sure someone else has thought about this, but wouldn't be a good idea to include a check for already uploaded images with the same filename? It shouldn't be too hard to write, and very helpful. Also I'd like to see the "summary" field a lot bigger, like a text box instead of the small 1-line text field. Now I have to re-open all the images I upload, edit them, and then save them again to include all the info I want... -- Vikingstad 23:34, Apr 26, 2004 (UTC)
The checkbox text is confusing; I had a hard time with it the first time. It says
I affirm that the copyright holder of this file agrees to license it under the terms of the Wikipedia copyright.
Well, for a public domain file, there is no copyright holder, and it can't be licensed under any copyright. But checking the box with a positive affirmation is required to perform an upload.
Maybe it should say something more like "there is no conflict with Wikipedia copyright" or "I affirm that the file is public domain, or that the copyright holder..."-- Roland Walker 19:20, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I'm also confused by that checkbox. I want to upload an image from an anime series; do I need permission from whoever created the image (if that person can be found), or from the creators of the anime series itself (who likely will find no reason to grant permission)? If I want to upload a photo of a calendar with pictures from that series, can I grant permission to use the photo I took, or do I still need permission from the creators of the series? It's not clear to me whether the "copyright holder of this file" is the person who created the file or the person who created whatever it depicts. I'd prefer if the checkbox read "I affirm that the copyright holder of this file agrees to license it under the terms of the Wikipedia copyright or that it falls within fair use," but I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know if that's okay. Brian Kendig 21:13, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Could someone add to the warning text on Special:Upload that people must use clear, unambiguous filenames? -- Tarquin 09:20, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I noticed that I can upload AVI movies up to about 2Mb. The upload warns that AVI is not a recommended format. Above 2 MB a technical error message is generated.
My questions:
t.i.a., TeunSpaans 07:58, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
Michael Snow implied in Wikipedia:Village pump#Unverified images that there is some effort underway to revise the upload form. I gather this is where it's being discussed. I would ask that any such effort also include (if it doesn't already) revision of all pages that talk about uploads as if they are always images. As an example, Special:Upload says "See Wikipedia:Uploading images for information on how this upload form works". It's not enough just to tweak the article text to include brief mentions of other formats. When I first used that form to upload an image, I had the impression after reading the entire form (yes, I'm one of those who RTFMs) that Wikipedia did not support sound, which turned out not to be true. (If I had known at the time what an "ogg" file was, I could have inferred that sound was supported, but I would argue that even mentioning more widely-known WAV files in passing does not correct the fundamental bias toward image uploading that remains in upload-related pages.) I would be bold and make the changes myself, except that I don't want to interfere with an existing process that I know nothing about. (Also, I'm still recovering from bruises I received during my attempts to broaden the Wikipedia:Sound text. ☺) — Jeff Q 14:26, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
The instructions for uploading images are unclear as to where the image description should be added. I wasn't sure if I should type my multi-line description into the summary box, or if uploading the image would take me to another page where I should then enter the description. Eoghan 20:04, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The bold formatting of the following text doesn't work, probably because of the line break:
By uploading a file to which you hold the copyright, you agree to licence it under the terms of the
<a href="/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GNU_Free_Documentation_License">GNU Free Documentation License</a>.
Please try and keep this small. No one reads MS EULA length notices, and it defeats the purpose of having text there: Informing the uploaders. Dori | Talk 04:11, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Uploading images and Wikipedia:Sound for more information, and Special:Imagelist for a list of already uploaded files.
By uploading a file to which you hold the copyright, you agree to licence it under the terms of the
GNU Free Documentation License.
"By uploading a file to which you hold the copyright, you agree to licence it under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License." This is not exactly correct. Say I upload something and release it under a compatible Creative Commons license, or some other free license. I have not licensed it under the GFDL, I've licensed it under the other license. Can someone reword this? I can't think of a better way of saying this right now. Dysprosia 03:51, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Neutrality added this to the page: You may duel-license your file under a Creative Commons license, but this must be in addition to—NOT in place of—the GDFL.
I removed it, first of all I question the use of duel instead of dual here, it's either a spelling error or some rare synoum for dual, either way it's much rarer.
Second, it's both biased and unfactual, first, not all creative commons licences are allowed here, only a few copyleft ones and the more permissive ones, furthermore people may infact submit content under copyleft licences not compatable with the GFDL, however as I understand it if they hold the copyright to said file they autmatically dual-licence their content.
Third, this could be percived as spam, robbot recently got blocked for mass-messageing people requesting that they dual licence their content, although I won't compare this to such spam this makes it look like we officially endorse dual-licenceing, which we may or may not want to do, furthremore, if we do, I object to this bias towards one particular licenceing scheme, personally I'd much prefer people put their works in the public domain. -- Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 16:07, 2005 Jan 20 (UTC)
How about:
This is so that we can check the claimed copyright, look for higher-resolution versions, look for other similar images and so forth. Many users already do this, but when somebody doesn't I sure miss it. -- Andrew 11:56, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
The bullet point specifying the licence doesn't seem to be working anymore. It displays as "Specify the licence of the file by adding the appropriate tag(s), e.g. {{[[template:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]]}}, {{[[template:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]]}}, etc.". I assume that this is because the {{tl}} doesn't work for this. Could someone please fix this back? Thanks. JYolkowski // talk 21:03, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This was recently added; why, and what does it actually mean? I have no idea what the instruction is actually telling me to do. -- Andrew 21:55, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
This is a new and startling restriction on the images that can be uploaded to wikipedia! Where was it discussed? I suppose it replaces the totally bogus little checkbox which forces most wikipedia users to lie when uploading images (if I upload a NASA image, there is no copyright holder, so forcing me to click and agree that they agree to license it however is pretty dubious).
I suppose this means if I want to put my cc-sa image on Wikipedia I need to get a friend to do it. What about images with joint copyright (e.g. a cc-sa image somebody else created and I modified)?
Since it is not at all clear that it is even possible to release one's work into the public domain ( Wikipedia:Granting your work into the public domain) this would be rather awkward. What is the goal of this restriction on uploads? Is the intent to forbid dual-licensing of images? I prefer to use {{ CopyrightedFreeUse}} (or in fact {{ NoRightsReserved}}) for my images, but am willing to also license them under the GFDL; do I have to start getting someone else to upload my images? -- Andrew 03:35, May 18, 2005 (UTC)
If this restriction is actually a good idea, I think Lupin's phrasing is better.
From public domain: A copyright holder can explicitly disclaim any proprietary interest in the work, effectively granting it to the public domain, by providing a licence to this effect. A suitable licence will grant permission for all of the acts which are restricted by copyright law. Such a license is sometimes called a free use or public-domain equivalent licence. -- AllyUnion (talk) 21:03, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
If it's true that there are legal problems with granting stuff into the PD ( Wikipedia:Granting work into the public domain), then perhaps the text on this page should be altered to say "if you own the copyright, you must either license it under the GFDL, or grant it into the PD or otherwise release all rights to the work." This would allow copyright holders/uploaders to use tags like {{ CopyrightedFreeUse}}. kmccoy (talk) 23:07, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
I suggest that these instructions mention Wikipedia:Picture tutorial or Wikipedia:Images briefly but prominently. See Wikipedia:Help_desk#Disappeared_image_of_Green_Anole where a novice user thought that, "you could go to the page that you wanted the image to reside, and just click upload, and Bingo it would be there." Bovlb 19:28, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
please change image to Image:Commons-logo.svg -- Paddyez 16:18, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
The current notice is very unreadable, and often ignored. Here's my draft of a radically cut version.
I now prefer Rick Block's version below, so I've removed my old draft. Feel free to review the old one here. JesseW, the juggling janitor 01:01, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
I'll tweak it for a bit, then put it up for comments... JesseW, the juggling janitor 17:40, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
Notice: Your file will be deleted in a few days if you do not follow the following guidelines:
Users who upload content with false license declarations may be blocked. Do not state that an image is public domain or licensed under the GFDL unless you have a valid argument for why you believe it to be so.
You can also upload files under a free license (no fair use!) to the Wikimedia Commons, a shared repository of content which can be used on all Wikimedia projects in all languages. Uploading your files to Commons is highly recommended.For more information, see Wikipedia:Uploading images.
I like this new version. I went ahead and put it in place. Perhaps we could shorten / simplify / strengthen the Commons message. Something like the following. dbenbenn | talk 17:14, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
After uploading the file, insert the file or image in relevant articles using the syntax [[Image:File.jpg|thumb|Caption]], and other media with [[Media:File.ogg]]. See Wikipedia:Images or Wikipedia:Extended image syntax for further instructions.
As it is not on the provided link. Thanks. «» Who ?¿? meta 04:19, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
I hate to seem as though I'm crufting up the notice, but I've reinserted the statement that images uploaded by the copyright holder must be licensed under GFDL or released into PD, as I can't find any evidence that this has changed, and it's important to mention before media is uploaded.
Mindspillage
(spill yours?) 18:13, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
I have amended the language so that users repeatedly uploading images with no license declaration are also warned that they can be blocked. This seems to me common sense - such blocks are already being doled out to problem users that repeatedly violate this, on the basis that it is a disruption. If anyone has a problem with this, just revert and we can discuss further. Regards, Fawcett5 16:15, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Could someone who understands the image upload page please take a look at this discussion [2] and see if they can help out? Appreciated. Trollderella 21:27, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
I'd like to propose a few changes to this page. See my proposed version directly below my post. I think that the advantages of this version are that it:
Let me know what you think. Thanks, JYolkowski // talk 21:02, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Note: Your file will be deleted in one week unless you: Provide detailed information, including URLs for images obtained on the Internet, on:
Users who upload content with false license declarations, or who repeatedly upload images with no license declaration, may be blocked.
For more information, see our image use policy, how to upload, and the image copyright tags available.
No-one's replied, so I'm going to make the change. JYolkowski // talk 22:14, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
How would you feel if I added a direct link to the page that allows uploading to the Commons? -- Denelson 83 04:30, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
This really needs to be updated, how is that done? Specifically {{ web-screenshot}} is very dangerous, most people seem to be using it for anything they find online, I don't really think it's intended use is even common enough to warrant inclusion. Category:Screenshots of web pages is very full of incorrectly tagged images. - cohesion t 07:01, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
I've been bold and added a notice I proposed on WikiEN-l to the page. While I was at it, I also made a few other changes to the page in separate edits. — Ilmari Karonen ( talk) 00:21, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
If you feel a Commons-style red box is less offensive, I'm fine with that. There is now a big red box on the page with wording similar to your suggestion above. I've left the blue box as is for the time being. — Ilmari Karonen ( talk) 08:07, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
On the one hand, I think the recent additions are well-meant and add some clarity, but this page is getting too long again. It required drastic downsizing before and it's getting that way again -- people simply won't read a long list of bullet-points of instructions. If the idea is to scare them away from uploading instead of wasting our time with images we can't use for whatever reason, it might work, but as it is now, I can't even see the actual form for uploading on my screen, as it's pushed down far below the instructions. Is there some way we can trim this back to the barest essentials, please? — Catherine\ talk 20:15, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Your file will be deleted in one week unless you provide both:
Please note: Most images on the internet are copyrighted under terms intended to prevent them from being freely used on other sites, making it inappropriate and/or illegal to upload them to Wikipedia. Users who upload content with false license declarations, or who repeatedly upload images with no license declaration, may be blocked.
For more information, see our image use policy and our guide to uploading. See the list of image copyright tags for an explanation of compatible licenses.
That's much better, Rick -- thank you. Made a few changes. What do folks think? I don't object to leaving the red box up for bit if the size of the purple box is decreased so the form is visible. — Catherine\ talk 22:10, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
The part about uploading to Wikimedia Commons links to commons:Special:Login, but that link is broken and should be changed to commons:Special:Userlogin. (It's protected, so I can't fix it myself...) -- Tifego 19:48, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
I propose we change:
to something like this (hopefully somebody can say the same thing, while being more concise):
I find a lot of people are giving a link to the home page of a web site where they got the image, and the image is not on that page. Or they give a link directly to the image, but you can't see the page it was found on, so you can't find any actually information about the copyright. -- Rob 19:18, 19 March 2006 (UTC)