User talk:NewB

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] New stuff

Okay, after reading through some of the many pages on image uploading, copyrights, and licensing, I have a few questions that I hope somebody can assist me with.

I'll try to answer, though don't take my replies as written in stone.

I am a hobbyist photographer, and I have many images that could be useful here on Wikipedia. However, I have some concerns:

  1. I do not want to release my images for commercial use. The license terms required by Wikipedia seem to indicate that I must release my images for any use, commercial or non-commercial. Or am I misunderstanding the license terms?
  2. It also seems that I must be willing to allow images I've created to be altered by anyone in any way. True?
    • Mostly, yes. You can licence your images under Creative Commons, which allow certain restrictions. You can also keep it copyright, and add it to the article as Fair Use - though you can only do this in the main space.
  3. I'd appreciate it if somebody could point me towards a tutorial on how to add an image to an article, from the first step to the last.

Thanks --

Basically your understanding was correct, Wikipedia requires a free licence that allows modification and commercial reproduction. The only non-free images we include are fair use, but this is for album covers etc, it is unlikely your own images will be fair use. See Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags#Free_licenses for a list of free licences. Also consider uploading your images (if you are going to make them free) to Commons - so other language Wikipedias can use them (all free images should be uploaded to Commons, and will be moved there eventually).--Commander Keane 18:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I have some followup questions.

  • Why does Wikipedia require licenses that allow modification and/or commercial use of images? Honestly, without some logical rationale this is a self-defeating policy. There are likely many fine images that will never be included on Wikipedia simply because the copyright holders don't like the idea that their images could be used to earn somebody else money, or be modified in negative ways.
  • An ideal license would be one that grants Wikipedia (and/or other non-commercial entities) the right to publish images without modification (see note below) and with the condition that any use must be non-commercial. Does such a license exist?

Note: I guess "modifications" would have to be defined so as to exclude reasonable modifications, such as display at various resolutions.

NewB 18:43, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia requires licences that that allow modification and/or commerical use for two reasons. One is the GFDL, which Wikipedia is licenced under. It requires that material released under it is free to be modified. This material is also free to be used for commerical purposes. Commerical purposes are also why we require licences that allow commercial use. We plan on releasing a paper version of Wikipedia, like the German Wikipedia has done. If we allowed non-commerical images, we would not be able to use them.
As for your second question, you could probably use Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5, but for the reasons stateed above, this won't be allowed.--Shanel ยง 18:53, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Old stuff (already answered -- Thanks!)

Thank you to Bertolotti for the answers to questions 1 and 2 below. Does anybody have the answer to #3? NewB 18:24, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure where to ask these questions, so I guess I'll post them here with the "helpme" tag and see if I get a response.

1. I edited several articles prior to setting up a user account, and the edits are showing up accredited to my IP address(es). Is there any way to remove the IP address attributions and replace them with my login name?

2. One or more articles on the site contain the following warning: "Because of recent vandalism, or to stop banned editors from editing, editing of this article or project page by new or unregistered users is currently disabled. Please discuss changes, or request unprotection." I have no desire currently to edit any of these articles, but I am curious: what criteria are used to determine who a "new" user is? i.e., At what point will I no longer be considered a "new" user, and therefore able to edit such articles?

3. One last question. Can login names be changed? If so, will all attributions be updated, or does the old attribution stick to an edit?

Thanks...

  1. Sorry, no. Actually there is no way to move edit from IP to users. This is a matter of software and not a matter of good will.
  2. This page contains some indication on semiprotection. Among other thing it is stated that new user is defined as user that are registered since less than 4 days.

I hopo I was helpful :-) --Bertolotti 17:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

as for 3, they can be changed if you have less than 5000 edits. See Wikipedia:Changing username. All attributions will then be updated. Sasquatch t|c 18:28, 22 May 2006 (UTC)