Wikinews:Water cooler/assistance/archives/2009/December

Keeping copyright to my images, fair use of original work.

Hi Guys, i'm more than happy for the text of my articles to be used in any way according to the CC licence, but as a semi-pro and with my images going to other places and not just Wikinews, I need to maintain copyright fully over my images, particularly in terms of commercial usage and attribution. I get the impression that I can do so by uploading locally to Wikinews as fair use media. To clarify, is this okay with OR photos to upload via fair use? Also, what option should I selec under 'Licensing', I know it says "Specify the license/what it is of the file by selecting it from the drop-down list below. Only the fair use situations listed in the licensing drop down are permitted on Wikinews" But maintaing copyright and granting limted use to Wikinews is a must for me. Thanks, --Juleshs31 (talk) 20:56, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are free to retain control of attribution of your images. (In fact almost all photographs used are attributed to their original author) However in order to include it in a story, you must allow other people to reuse and potentially modify the image (even commercially). At one point we did allow wikinews only images, but we no longer do. Bear in mind that you still retain copyright control, all that is required is that you let other people use it. You can still sell said image to someone else, etc. note that you don't have to upload the full resolution. Some people upload web-resolution version of their images, and sell the high-res versions. Also note that there is a variety of licenses that you can choose from, some more restrictive than others. In particular, i believe that GFDL images require that anyone who reproduces an image has to attach a 7 page legal document to it (which makes some uses for such images prohibitive). See commons:COM:L#Well-known_licenses for a big list of choices.
Just to clarify, fair use refers to specific parts of copyright law, which simply don't apply to your images (IANAL). See w:Fair use.
Last of all, I hope you'd be willing to contribute images, but if you don't feel comfortable doing this, we still welcome any other contributations you might make. Cheers. hopefully that answered your question. Bawolff 01:11, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I’m more than happy to contribute my images, but I'm not sure if I want to license them for commercial use under CC. I have no problem with their use for non-profit projects such as the WMF, but if I give it away for free commercial use under creative commons then I can't exactly sell commercial licenses to clients. Can I not submit it under a CC non-commercial license, like “Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share Alike 2.0”. I’m more than happy to share under that license. I know it isn't accepted by the commons, but can't I upload locally to Wikinews under said license? --Juleshs31 (talk) 11:24, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, we aim to create "properly" free content. As I said on your article's page, a good way forward would be to release a few completely and link to the rest on a noncommercial license somewhere. We want everyone to be theoretically able to use our content - including newspapers. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 12:45, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As Blood Red Sandman says, Wikinews and commons both share the same view point on this (in fact all of wikimedia does). We aim to allow content to be distributed by anyone, for any purpose. As such non commercial licenses are not allowed. ( [1] is the general philosophy used to decide what can be allowed). With that being said, if you release some of your images under free licenses, and keep others restricted, perhaps the free ones will help promote the images you're selling. Bawolff 22:43, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help with article requested

Hello. If anyone has the time I'd appreciate help in expanding a new article on Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri's death. This is an important event, and if it's big now it will be huge tomorrow when the burial happens. Cueball (talk) 16:52, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article in question has now been published. Tempodivalse [talk] 18:16, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is scientific article but considerably outdated Another alike event covered by some press could save it from deletion But I could not find one Can you help?

I hope it is not too late. Do you have some free 30 minutes? I'm just afraid that this novice user Wikiwide, the author of the article, being probably a scientist (you just look at the first version of this article), has a very little understanding of what Wikinews is. And probably has lots of other work to do, is not interested, etc. Even the topic of climate contrarians near UNCCC sounds scientific, doesn't it? I think that if you revive this article, it will be very good for Wikinews, for this user, and for the environment (as some of the "skeptics" or just common diesel car drivers can find this article realistic). I think only an experienced Wikinews user can manage with such significant and responsible task. Q/0/k 22:29, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brian McNeil (talk · contribs) seems to have edited the article somewhat to get it up to standards. Maybe I'll try a bit as well, this is certainly a worthy topic. Tempodivalse [talk] 03:16, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes. The lede needed beaten about a bit and the conference-end was a good excuse to try and resurrect it. If you can call it OR, I looked up the climate contrarian guy's website; apparently owns hundreds of others. --Brian McNeil / talk 03:20, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"If you can call it OR" - do you expect me to do it? I think I am not very experienced to make up an Original Research. But the conference is already over. The article is getting less and less newsworthy. Please, help. Q/0/k 05:44, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New article -Blue moon to occur on New years Eve

Hi, I am new to Wikinews. I submitted an article about the blue moon stated to occur this New years eve along with 3 relevant sources. It was removed within 3 minutes of creation for copyright violation from one of the sources. I understood the objection and rewrote the article since then, and attached a picture from the commons. Can a administrator please check if its OK now and move the article from Temp, the story would be irrelevant in less than a day if it takes too long to move it. Thank you.Theo10011 (talk) 19:08, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tempodivalse did it already. Thanks again.Theo10011 (talk) 19:11, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]