Wikinews:Image use policy/Poll

This is an open poll created by FellowWikiNews and DragonFire1024 to vote on whether users on Wikinews agree with the new image policy.

See also discussion, more discussion and an FAQ.

Please vote on whether you approve of this policy or not below. Feel free to edit this poll to make it better and more informational.

The finding will be presented to the Wikimedia Foundation and Jimbo Wales or anyone else who has authority over the Wikis.

This poll does not have a scheduled time of closing. Please no comments...just a vote. Comments should be put on this poll's discussion page or on this pages comments section.

Users who agree to policy edit

Votes:

Overall I support this policy, but I am unhappy about the need to delete CC-BY-ND-2.5 images under this policy. Deleting images that are used in articles (and in some cases are the main topic of the article) hurts an element of our mission. We are in part a news archive. Deleting stuff from the archive when we do not absolutely have to hurts this. --Cspurrier 21:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree in spirit (But not on the finer points), but I especially think that this should not be retroactive Eloquence has magical debating powers. Down with unfreeness. Bawolff ☺☻ 22:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 12:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)~~[reply]
Voting is evil. --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 12:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Zanimum 17:32, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Pro-Board. Thunderhead ► 02:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Users who oppose policy edit

Votes:

Oppose: DragonFire1024 20:49, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose —Fellow Wiki Newsie 20:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: --TUFKAAP 18:53, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - -- Davodd | Talk 09:00, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly oppose (the retroactive section of this policy). —Spe88 20:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the retroactive aspect of the policy. Unlike most other projects, Wikinews is time-critical and contains an archive of news at a given point in time - Cartman02au (Talk)(AU Portal) 07:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
oppose like Cartman02au says. Also I feel we still need to be able to use Images released to the press (even if they are not "free" images Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 09:58, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
oppose Is there any evidence that use of fair use images has actually been a problem? Have any copyright holders actually objected? Crimson 18:31, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See m:Licensing policy FAQ draft#Why is this a problem? No one is likely to sue over most of them.. –Doldrums(talk) 20:19, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very strongly oppose - Copyright as a system needs to be redone with the coming of the Internet, Web 2.0, and Wikipedia (including Wikinews). Mac Davis 23:35, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this for the reasons highlighted above, particularly the retroactive part. I'm all in favour of developing stricter licencing requirements for the future, however. Lankiveil 12:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Oppose insufficient consultation (will people ever learn the importance of this?) and the retroactive part is balls. Dan100 (Talk) 18:16, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other/Comments edit

I object very strongly to the retroactive application of this policy. From the perspective of someone who follows notices on the wiki and the mailing list I am very unhappy I was not given a chance to comment. As said elsewhere, "It's not free enough! Burn it!". --Brian McNeil / ^talk 15:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak second on points of retroactive application. --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 15:14, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I strongly second this.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*Given the recent discussions on logos, I say that we are headed for certain disaster overall... DragonFire1024 02:21, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a note, Jimmy Wales' term on the Board will be expiring this year, I believe. Therefore, I suggest submitting it to the Board in general, or Mrs. Florance Devouard. Thunderhead ► 23:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]