Commons talk:Photographs of identifiable people/Update 2013/Lead

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
  • Click on the 'Project page' tab, above to see the current policy/guideline wording that is under discussion on this page.
  • To make a specific proposal, please start a new subsection and use the code below to put it in its own box. You can sign underneath the resultant box, but for technical reasons you can't use "~~~~" within it. Please number your proposal for ease of reference.
{{divbox|amber|Proposal number and title|Introduction
*text
*more text}}
Commons-logo.svg Scope Review 2013 links:

Discuss stage 2 of this review

Translation

Background

Links to current rules

Discussion: Introductory Scope wording

Discussion: Files

Discussion: Pages, galleries and categories

Discussion: Areas of particular concern

Discussion: Identifiable people

Other proposals

Proposal 1[edit]

--MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:48, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Please discuss the above proposal here
  • Yes this is a good idea. I'm not sure there is much technical difference but respect for our subjects should have as much weight as respect for photographer's licences. Colin (talk) 11:49, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Sure, why not. -- Beland (talk) 18:16, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Yes, absolutely. --Conti| 15:47, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
  • No, that's too much of a blank cheque for me. Developing a policy is certainly a good goal, but I think there are enough grey areas here that we might better served by a guideline (or by some mixture of policies and guidelines) than by a policy. --Avenue (talk) 15:46, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Consent issues are too much of a gray area that constantly needs interpretation and application of common sense, I don't think that this needs to be a policy. I also disagree with Colin that consent issues are as important as copyright issues; copyright issues are important because of the very reason Commons exists (to provide free media), while consent issues aren't (though they are an important moral issue - I am not disagreeing with that). darkweasel94 13:32, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

This topic appears to be of lesser interest/priority to the community than some of the others in this review, and I propose that we should close it down now. That will allow us in part 2 of the review to focus our full attention on the most important and/or contentious issues. This issue may well come up again later, though. Please comment at Commons talk:Project scope/Update 2013/Stage 2. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:11, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Proposal 2[edit]

  • Please discuss the above proposal here