User talk:Kim Bruning

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Hello! I'll check this page very rarely, please leave new messages at en:User talk:Kim Bruning

Image:Jimbo interview.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading images on Commons.

Please add your images to appropriative pages and/or categories where other users could easily find them. For example to Category:Jimbo Wales.

EugeneZelenko 14:20, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Policy proposal:No deletion of improved versions of images[edit]

Hi Kim. You may be interested in this: Commons:Village pump/Policy proposal:No deletion of improved versions of images. pfctdayelise (translate?) 00:39, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Certainly put the Cat02.jpg among the Band-tailed Pigeons.jpg ... (ahem excuse me, a moment of weakness...) pfctdayelise (translate?) 15:48, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Your irc msg[edit]

Yes, Wikinews allows the use of certain types of images not allowed on Commons. These are a small selection of Fair Use images types - images released for publicity, logos and trademarks, and certain forms of screen shots - and they are not uploaded to Commons. Our policy regarding fair use came about last winter during the first round of discussions with Commons when the Wikinews project had no upload capability on any of the language editions and was completely dependent on Commons.

When it became very clear Wikinews could not gain support from Commons for any of these image types which were cleared by the WMF legal team and copyright lawyers as completely legal uses, Wikinews petitioned the Board to allow these limited uploads to the site. The policy was expanded to include IRIN and Crown Copyright images, which again have legal use on Wikinews.

During the months-long discussion leading to uploads being enabled on Wikinews, we also developed an Image policy which would allow Wikinews to avoid using Commons if we gained approval from the board to do so. We did not get approval from the board to do so at that time, but the data I'm amassing at the moment would likely support such an argument now.

Hope that answered your questions. - Amgine 15:52, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

you're here now :-)[edit]

I think you may assume wrong.... and you know what they say about assume, right? How come no-one talks to you on commons? Privatemusings (talk) 12:22, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Because they talk to me elsewhere? ;-) --Kim Bruning (talk) 16:42, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Editor @[edit]

Hello. I would like to inform you that I have granted you editor flag at the Arabic Wikipedia, all your edits there will be automatically marked as patrolled. Best regards.--Avocato (talk) 07:12, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Quality loss[edit]

Hello Kim, I don;'t want to spam the RfC with nitpicking, but regarding we would not really have a quality loss, but we would give up a quality gain. If we don't offer MP4 support in the first place the conversion to a free format has to be done somewhere else (and that already causes a quality loss). By having the original MP4 assets we'd have control over the conversion process and could optimize it better than any single user. We could also offer improved conversion long after the initial upload if new open formats or improved encoders emerge. --Dschwen (talk) 22:10, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

I was thinking in some particular worst-case scenario, a third party fork may end up needing to regenerate mp4 from scratch from the free copies, or doing without the mp4 original entirely. Your points stand if we look at wikimedia by itself. --Kim Bruning (talk) 22:58, 16 January 2014 (UTC)