Mailing List Archive

Hmm. What is the copyright status of the old logo?:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/archive/b/bc/20030314234804%21Wiki.png

and can I confirm it is ok to delete this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Wiki.PNG (note capitalisation)



--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

We shouldn't just pick on the CVU. If we're going to start deleting these,
we should delete all of them, including the AMA logo, among others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:CopyrightByWikimedia
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:CopyrightByWikimedia

On 9/1/06, geni <geniice@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hmm. What is the copyright status of the old logo?:
>
>
> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/archive/b/bc/20030314234804%21Wiki.png
>
> and can I confirm it is ok to delete this:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Wiki.PNG (note capitalisation)
>
>
>
> --
> geni
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 02/09/06, Rory Stolzenberg <rory096@gmail.com> wrote:

> We shouldn't just pick on the CVU. If we're going to start deleting these,
> we should delete all of them, including the AMA logo, among others.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:CopyrightByWikimedia
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:CopyrightByWikimedia


As long as it gets started somewhere, else the logo policy is purely
decorative and should be removed as obsolete.


- d.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Hmm! Incidentally, I left a message on Jimbo's talk page about the CVU using
the Wikimedia Logo.

On 9/1/06, David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Counter-Vandalism_Unit&diff=73115462&oldid=73037422
>
> Despite much attempt at sweet reason, they insist on continuing
> egregious violation of the logo policy, and apparently won't listen to
> anyone but you.
>
> Alternately, if there's a Commons admin who can speedy the pics in
> question as an utter violation of all such rules, it would probably be
> a good idea.
>
> (And that's not even getting into their strange notion that they can
> vote themselves exempt from any sort of civility policy.)
>
>
> - d.
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Obviously me not deleting something that didn't have a policy or
committee dealing with it at the time isn't a reason to keep it
forever, as I've just explained at [[Wikipedia talk:Counter-Vandalism
Unit]].

One problem is that
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_visual_identity_guidelines
is currently about the Wikimedia logo, not about all logos Wikimedia
claims trademarks over.

Since we do now have a trademarks committee and a Brad, I'm sure they
can sort this out without the need for people arguing on mailing lists
about whether to speedy delete these images. There's no rush to delete
them unless the Foundation does object to them, but that also
shouldn't be seen as permission for them to stay or for more to be
created.

Angela.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 02/09/06, Angela <beesley@gmail.com> wrote:

> Obviously me not deleting something that didn't have a policy or
> committee dealing with it at the time isn't a reason to keep it
> forever, as I've just explained at [[Wikipedia talk:Counter-Vandalism
> Unit]].


Thank you :-)


> Since we do now have a trademarks committee and a Brad, I'm sure they
> can sort this out without the need for people arguing on mailing lists
> about whether to speedy delete these images. There's no rush to delete
> them unless the Foundation does object to them, but that also
> shouldn't be seen as permission for them to stay or for more to be
> created.


Yes, that would be a less apocalyptic solution for all involved.


- d.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Hi,

Although there is no official decission yet wether these images will be authorized by the Foundation some Wikimedians felt unhappy with them and they thus were speedy deleted by commons:User:AlisonW with the reason that they are unauthorized.

As this affects many "unauthorized" images sitting below
* Category:CopyrightByWikimedia
* and as the situation is unclear

I have restored the files, did overwrite them with a cross (so that it can't be used in a way the Foundation potentially could harm, as they are still linked a lot on many pages) and transformed the matter into a normal deletion request. That way we can come to a more general solution on that matter in Commons for the future (I don't want to have that debate again and again) and everyone interested can have a look in order to be able making an own decission.

As well that speedy deleted images are still used a lot and people would have probably uploaded them (or very similar images) locally without knowing that there is a debate going on and so the matter would have come up again locally. With the help of the CommonsTicker local people will hopefully be alerted as well that there are certain things that need to be taken care of and can give feedback (Note: I never did participate in the w:en:Wikipedia:Counter_Vandalism_Unit and never did care about it).

So please join:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests#Wikipedia:Counter_Vandalism_Unit_images

Cheers, Arnomane
--


Der GMX SmartSurfer hilft bis zu 70% Ihrer Onlinekosten zu sparen!
Ideal für Modem und ISDN: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/smartsurfer
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 9/3/06, Daniel Arnold <Arnomane@gmx.de> wrote:
> As well that speedy deleted images are still used a lot and people would have probably >uploaded them (or very similar images) locally without knowing that there is a debate >going on and so the matter would have come up again locally. With the help of the >CommonsTicker local people will hopefully be alerted as well that there are certain things >that need to be taken care of and can give feedback (Note: I never did participate in the >w:en:Wikipedia:Counter_Vandalism_Unit and never did care about it).
>
> So please join:
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests#Wikipedia:Counter_Vandalism_Unit_images
>


arch this really isn't a good time what with the other issues around
the CVU at the moment.

--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

> arch this really isn't a good time what with the other issues around
> the CVU at the moment.
>
> --
> geni

I don't want to interfere with recent en.wikipedia issues on CVU. One of the problems with these logos is that they are no en.wikipedia only thing as mistakenly thought by some people. Have a look at the usage of these images over all these different wikpedia languages (that's why I did came to the CheckUsage idea in order to make that visible) in other language CVU projects.

This is a very important aspect that wasn't considered at the speedy deletion. What would it help if you have found a decission on the CVU in en.wikipedia but there are some more in other languages around that quickly would reupload the logo locally or would create a much similar logo just because there was no way/time for them to get alerted? Thus the regular deletion with proper debate will save us a lot of time in any case, regardless of the particular decission on the en.wikipedia CVU.

Arnomane

--


Der GMX SmartSurfer hilft bis zu 70% Ihrer Onlinekosten zu sparen!
Ideal für Modem und ISDN: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/smartsurfer
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 9/3/06, Daniel Arnold <Arnomane@gmx.de> wrote:
> This is a very important aspect that wasn't considered at the speedy deletion. What >would it help if you have found a decission on the CVU in en.wikipedia but there are some >more in other languages around that quickly would reupload the logo locally or would >create a much similar logo just because there was no way/time for them to get alerted? >Thus the regular deletion with proper debate will save us a lot of time in any case, >regardless of the particular >decission on the en.wikipedia CVU.
>
> Arnomane

I'm worried that the current en situation could mess up what happens on commons

--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l