Template talk:No source

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Usage: {{ subst:nsd }} - this will do the right thing with Template:No source.

 {{No source}} is protected at the moment. Use {{Editprotected}} on this page to propose an edit.  


When adding this template to an image it would be proper wikiquette to notify the uploader by adding Template:Image source or Template:Idw-pui to his or her talk page.


An archive of old, inactive discussion is at /archive1.

Contents

[edit] Distinguishing source and copyright holder

The source of an image (i.e. the image creator) and the copyright holder of an image are not necessarily the same. Am I correct in thinking that all what is needed to establish the validity of a particular license is the identity of the copyright holder, and that the source is irrelevant here? If this is correct, then I think that the wording in this template should reflect this, and not imply that an image whose copyright holder is known but whose source is not should be deleted. Lupin|talk|popups 03:56, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Establishing the copyright holder is the important part, yes, with the source being used to verify that. That said, it's a pretty fine distinction to be asking for, when most people can't tell the difference between an image, the subject of that image, the use of the image, and the source of the image. --Carnildo 08:55, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Idea for a change

To simplify this template, perhaps we could take some ideas from Template:No copyright holder. Stifle (talk) 00:06, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Subst {{a week from today}}

Please replace {{a week from today}} with {{#time: d-m-Y|+7 days}}. There's no reason for the template to exist anymore, with the new time function. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 07:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I changed it to {{#time: Y-m-d|+7 days}}, because [[11-09-2006]] gives a red link: 11-09-2006, while [[2006-09-11]] renders as the user's preferred date format: 2006-09-11. Angr 06:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sourcing private press websites?

I got Image:Nbc apprentice2 donald trump.jpeg from a private press website run by NBC. I had access to it when I was a reporter for Suite101.com, but have since voluntarily resigned access. Since it is private, what is the use of adding an exact source? Can I get away with just saying "private NBC press website"? -- Zanimum 14:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed edit

{{editprotected}}

See User:Poccil/nosource. I have modified the template so it displays a speedy deletion notice seven days after the specified date on the template. See this diff for a demonstration. -- Peter O. (Talk) 07:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

That would place lots of images in CAT:CSD. I think this is not a good idea, the existing categories like Category:Images with unknown source as of 4 September 2006 are enough. CAT:CSD is sufficiently backlogged already without more automatic additions of images. Kusma (討論) 14:43, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
It may appear to be the case at first. Once the current backlog (not of speedy deletions but of unsourced images) is cleared, a more steady flow of additions should occur. Until so, my proposed edit should wait. Another proposal is to change the category for the images. Peter O. (Talk) 15:42, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
This change will break OrphanBot's processing of unsourced images. --Carnildo 19:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Is there a way to accommodate my change and allow your bot to still work correctly? Peter O. (Talk) 20:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding the recent updates

Looks good, however please note #Be careful when editing this template above, the wikifying of the date seems to have thrown OrphanBot for a loop. Unless Carnildo can re-write the bot in a hurry we'll have to either block it or temporarily revert the template before all the older subcats are emptied out and shoved along into the current cat over and over (today's cat is up to 5 pages already...).

To ensure efficnet OrphanBot operations it's a good idea to give Carnildo a heads up before any major changes are made so he can adapt the bot to recognize the new template version... --Sherool (talk) 15:18, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, major edits are usually fine. It's the minor ones that cause problems. --Carnildo 19:30, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
Heh, any plans to make the bot more robust though (would it work to parse the actual category link, or maybe use ?action=raw and check the actual wikicode rather than spesificaly formated HTML output, or even generate a HTML comment just for the benefit of the bot or things like that)? It would be nice to be eable to edit the templates without having to worry about tripping up OrphanBot in the process. --Sherool (talk) 20:04, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
The bot will now fall back to checking the category if it can't get the date from the template. The reason for working from the rendered page rather than the raw wikicode is that the code only includes the date, while the final page also includes the upload history (needed for notifying the uploader) and the image links (needed if the bot is going to remove the image from use). --Carnildo 01:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Sorry for the inconvenience. The reason I was adding more markup was actually to ease parsing by bots. —Quarl (talk) 2006-10-10 20:08Z

[edit] Help for the recipient

This template includes no pointer toward how to include source information, or further information on the problem. {{nld}} links directly to Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags, where lack of copyright is addressed. I've yet to find a good match containing details on how to source an image, perhaps Wikipedia:Cite_your_sources#Images (just created)? Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#Rules_of_thumb? Even the {{image source}} user_talk notice seems to lack in this regard. ∴ here…♠ 08:28, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../n/o/_/Template_talk%7ENo_source_c518.html"