[Wiki Loves Monuments] Once more about Toolserver
jane023 at gmail.com
Tue Jul 17 17:59:23 UTC 2012
Andrij, you might want to edit those lists to only include numbers for the
ones eligible for photographs, and leave out the numbers for the ones that
should not be in the competition.
About the Kiev monuments: Yes, we need to tackle these issues because
you're absolutely right, we don't want to create a larger problem than the
one we already have.
About North Dakota: It's amazing to me that for a state over 500 kilometers
wide and with fewer than 700,000 inhabitants they would argue about whether
or not they should allow stubs to be made for NRHP monuments. You would
think they would be happy to create a monument article for everything that
fits the NRHP description. Now they seem to be arguing about whether
geocoordinates are useful. There is something rather comical about the
responses. It reminds me of the movie Fargo.
2012/7/17 Yaroslav M. Blanter <putevod at mccme.ru>
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:41:34 +0200, Jane Darnell wrote:
>> If its not one thing, then its the other thing....
>> How strange that there are so many photos of that bridge on Commons! I
>> am glad to see I at least picked a good category to use for testing
> There is still a lot of unfree pictures on Commons, since several years
> ago nobody knew about freedom of panorama, and even now, when I
> occasionally nominate some pictures for deletion i get someone asking on my
> talk page why do I do it. Ukraine is in this respect particularly bad, and
> I am seriously concerned about their WLM participation - for instance, in
> the left bank Kiev monuments list all monuments but two fall unto the FoP
> provisions, i.e. they are all copyrighted. And if we need to erase
> thousands of files afterwards, this is not going to have us good publicity.
>> (off-topic to Yaroslav: they dont get the idea of geocoordinates in
>> North Dakota)
> Oh, when I opened the topic in the NRHP WikiProject, I had no idea that
> there are so many issues, interests, and strong opinions involved, it
> looked like much more innocent. Thanks for the intervention, I think it was
> very useful.
> Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
> WikiLovesMonuments at lists.**wikimedia.org<WikiLovesMonuments at lists.wikimedia.org>
> http://www.wikilovesmonuments.**org <http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the WikiLovesMonuments