|This is an archive of past discussions from Wikinews:Water cooler/policy/archives/2020. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
Question regarding local images
Hi. In the course of a discussion at Wikinews:Flagged revisions/Requests for permissions, I came across an issue that I think the community needs to clarify: the policy of images being local vs on commons when they qualify to be hosted on commons.
"Images which meet the Definition of Free Cultural Works (see the specific licenses meeting this standard) should be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository shared by all projects." — Wikinews:Image use policy, highlighting added for emphasis
For example (from the discussion), Ireland votes to overturn 35-year-old constitutional ban on abortion uses multiple images hosted on commons. In that discussion, it was suggested that, as a precaution, reviewers or authors should upload local copies of files used, and not just for images that can reasonably be expected to be updated on commons.
For files that the user does not expect to be updated, should reviewers / authors, when intending to use a file that has a license suitable for commons, but is not already on commons (eg user's own work)
- Upload it to commons, and upload a local version
- Upload it to commons, and not upload a local version
- Not upload it to commons, and only upload a local version
For files that the user does not expect to be updated, should reviewers / authors, when intending to use a file that has a license suitable for commons, and is already on commons
- Upload a local copy in addition to the commons file
- Not upload a local copy
Or, as the question applied to me recently: should a reviewer, who finds that an article uses a file on commons, upload a local copy as a matter of practice, even with no expectation that the files on commons may be updated?
- On that last point: A reviewer does not ordinarily take on the burden of doing chores like that. The reviewer should notice if it hasn't been done right. (Generally, if the reviewer should check something, the reporter (when they're experienced enough to know) should also have checked it first, and acted accordingly; that full overlap of checking is a key to making the en.wn review system work well.) If the reviewer sees a stability problem with an image they should probably either remove the image or, if appropriate, not-ready the article. (Judgement based on specific circumstances plays an important role, of course.) Things subject to update are one kind of instability; an image having a problem and being nominated for deletion on commons is another. --Pi zero (talk) 23:50, 15 February 2020 (UTC)