Talk:Drafts/Media file license chart
The intention with this chart is to give wiki users an overview and easy guideline what to do when uploading image files regarding an applicable license.
Mainly the existing license templates are the basis of the quoted licensing in the chart.
To keep it simple there should just be limited details and limited variety of image types with the most frequent ones (already quite voluminous) in my opinion.
One goal is to offer a link on file upload page to the chart.
It would be useful and pleasant, if you could review the draft and give further contribution or feedback! Matters are:
- Scope and detail of the content
- Correctness of the content
- Styling
- Wording / language
- ...
(Chris2map (talk) 13:23, 6 January 2022 (UTC))
Discussion
Looks good. --Tigerfell 
(Let's talk) 23:01, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
Sollte nicht an erster Stelle darauf hingewiesen werden, dass wenn immer rechtlich erlaubt, ein Bild (einfache Logos, eigene Fotos) bei wikimedia commons hoch zu laden ist? Denn nur dann kann dieses Foto entsprechend der gewählten Lizenz gemeinnützig überall eingesetzt werden bzw. es erfährt ein breiteres Nutzungsspektrum und kann meist auch sinnvoller kategorisiert werden... Gruß René aus Mainz --Reneman (talk) 19:19, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- Danke für Deinen Hinweis! Die Tabelle ist ein Bestreben, eine schnelle Hilfe zur Auswahl einer Lizenz in häufig vorkommenden Fällen von Datei-Uploads zu geben. Meiner Meinung nach sollte diese nicht überfrachtet werden (es beginnt schon unübersichtlich zu werden). Dein Hinweis auf WM Commons ist meiner Ansicht nach bereits mit dem ersten Satz auf der File-Upload-Seite gut platziert (MediaWiki:Uploadtext) und müsste hier nicht auch noch eingefügt werden, oder wenn doch, dann höchstens vielleicht in den Fußnoten/Erläuterungen. --Gruß, Chris2map (talk) 19:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Promote to Media file license chart?
Maybe it can be promoted to Media file license chart? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:05, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- I don't have anything more to add at the moment and it looks like nothing is coming from others either. So I would move the current page from the draft to the official namespace. I think it's definitely a help, better than none. Any comments? --Chris2map (talk) 07:53, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yes. I suggest Wiki: namespace, because it's not related to OSM, but only to the Wiki. So Wiki:Media file license chart. maro21 14:45, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Moved to Wiki:Media file license chart --Chris2map (talk) 17:47, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Recommended licenses
For photos taken by yourself the recommended licenses are cc0 and ccbysa, are there reasons for not including ccby?
- No, you're right! We missed the CC-BYs. I will update this. Thanks! --Chris2map (talk) 17:02, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Missing "map made from OSM data"
This is relatively commons.
Needs to have at least two variants, before license change and after Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:58, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
- Template:ODbL OpenStreetMap and Template:CC-BY-SA-2.0 OpenStreetMap are applicable at least Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:59, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
More likely layers: CyclOSM
how this one is licensed? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:04, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
- https://github.com/cyclosm/cyclosm-cartocss-style/blob/master/LICENSE.md Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:05, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
- https://github.com/cyclosm/cyclosm-cartocss-style/issues/615 Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:10, 5 March 2022 (UTC)