Site Notice |
---|
We have a limited coverage policy. Please check our coverage page to see which articles are allowed. |
Difference between revisions of "File talk:Right Arrow.png"
(→Licensing and Other Things) |
Greenpickle (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
:::::::{{User:Tacopill/sig}} 17:25, 13 March 2011 (UTC). | :::::::{{User:Tacopill/sig}} 17:25, 13 March 2011 (UTC). | ||
+ | |||
+ | "[https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Berne_Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Literary_and_Artistic_Works Copyright under the Berne Convention must be automatic; it is prohibited to require formal registration]". And as you can see, this covers most of the world. Maybe you're confusing this with patents/patent offices? | ||
+ | |||
+ | Yeah, I meant with all templates - ''all'' pages, in fact (excepting user sub-pages and files, of course). - [[User:Greenpickle|GP]] <sub>[[User talk:Greenpickle|talk]]</sub> 17:45, 13 March 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:45, 13 March 2011
Licensing and Other Things
Hey, where are the licensing templates? - GP talk 09:28, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Oh, also, is this okay? Just used what I had on my computer; Tango's was too small. Are we going for a certain colour? - GP talk 09:29, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
- The license are available in the drop down box on the uploaded page, as pictured to the right. Or, you may look at this related category.
- It's fine to upload this. One day, however, I do plan to replace it with something more original. Still, it will do for now. Thank you for uploading it.
- Tacopill (Talk) 23:23, 10 March 2011 (UTC).
- The templates in that category indicate the content of the file: in some cases it's always going to be, say, fair use, but in others, the template either assumes the file is copyrighted or gives a list of licenses it might fall under. This is ambiguous and not very flexible: if license is not defined by the content, it should be clearly stated on the description page what the distribution terms of the file are. Take this image: the obvious template, according to its content, is "Wiki File", but that assumes fair use, which is not the case.
- Also, what's with the silliness on
{{License/Wiki File}}
? And{{License/Copyright Nintendo}}
is a different style to the others and overlaps with a lot of their use-cases. - GP talk 09:03, 12 March 2011 (UTC)- If it's ambiguous, wouldn't that make it more flexable? :D. ALso, how would it a "Wiki File". It was not generated to be a wiki exclusive, such as Template:File or Template:File was, i believe to be.
- As for it's sillyness, It was designed to be a mock template of the fair use templates, since anything created exclusively for the wiki wouldn't be subject to copyright, unless they filed for it.
- Anyway, would you do me a huge favor and create the missing licence templates, and fix the one's we currently have?
- Tacopill (Talk) 23:28, 12 March 2011 (UTC).
- Also, what's with the silliness on
- Oh, I assumed a 'wiki file' was a file for use on the wiki, but not as part of article content - logo, favicon, banners, etc.. Having a template for files exclusive to this wiki is a bit silly, 'cause there's no way you can promise it won't be used anywhere else, especially if, as you say, you don't expect them to be copyrighted files.
- AFAIK, copyright doesn't work like that: if you create something and say it's copyrighted, then it's copyrighted.
- I guess I could. I also don't like the inconsistency in capitalisation in template names: what should the standard be? (My opinion: do it how Wikipedia does it (every word lower-case except for proper nouns (and the first letter, of course))). - GP talk 16:32, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
- I guess we could switch the use of the "Wiki File" to being as you stated: Files for the Wiki's use, but not for article content. (Sounds boring, but o well).
- I guess I could. I also don't like the inconsistency in capitalisation in template names: what should the standard be? (My opinion: do it how Wikipedia does it (every word lower-case except for proper nouns (and the first letter, of course))). - GP talk 16:32, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
- Last i checked, one can only have a copyright when one files for it....with a Copyright Agency. There's also implied copyright, which you get for by time-coding an idea; but I'm not sure this would be the case. I mean, if i could just create something and automatically copyright it, what would be the purpose of copyright agencies?
- When you speak of inconsistency of templates, do you mean overall or just the license templates? if the former, feel free to move them to the appropriate titles, since i am not the best at anything that comes to language. If the latter, then what do you mean? they are all capitalized :D.
"Copyright under the Berne Convention must be automatic; it is prohibited to require formal registration". And as you can see, this covers most of the world. Maybe you're confusing this with patents/patent offices?
Yeah, I meant with all templates - all pages, in fact (excepting user sub-pages and files, of course). - GP talk 17:45, 13 March 2011 (UTC)