User talk:Carrite

-- Cirt (talk) 20:00, 6 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi Carrite,

Along with more hundreds of others, you recently signed Letter to Wikimedia Foundation: Superprotect and Media Viewer, which I wrote.

Today, we have 562 signatures here on Meta, and another 61 on change.org, for a total of 623 signatures. Volunteers have fully translated it into 16 languages, and begun other translations. This far exceeds my most optimistic hopes about how many might sign the letter -- I would have been pleased to gain 200 siguatures -- but new signatures continue to come.

I believe this is a significant moment for Wikimedia and Wikipedia. Very rarely have I seen large numbers of people from multiple language and project communities speak with a unified voice. As I understand it, we are unified in a desire for the Wikimedia Foundation to respect -- in actions, in addition to words -- the will of the community who has built the Wikimedia projects for the benefit of all humanity. I strongly believe it is possible to innovate and improve our software tools, together with the Wikimedia Foundation. But substantial changes are necessary in order for us to work together smoothly and productively. I believe this letter identifies important actions that will strongly support those changes.

Have you been discussing these issues in your local community? If so, I think we would all appreciate an update (on the letter's talk page) about how those discussions have gone, and what people are saying. If not, please be bold and start a discussoin on your Village Pump, or in any other venue your project uses -- and then leave a summary of what kind of response you get on the letter's talk page.

Finally, what do you think is the right time, and the right way, to deliver this letter? We could set a date, or establish a threshold of signatures. I have some ideas, but am open to suggestions.

Thank you for your engagement on this issue, and please stay in touch. -Pete F (talk) 18:10, 26 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

Is it alright if we move the photo you uploaded to enWP to Commons? Generally files uploaded to Wikipedia are meant for more limited or copyright specific uses. Making it available on Commons while make it accessible on Meta-Wiki and VoteWiki. Thank you --Varnent (talk)^(COI) 06:43, 4 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Please do. Thanks. Carrite (talk) 16:48, 4 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

The photo will require permissions to be emailed to OTRS it will risk being deleted from Commons in the coming days. --Varnent (talk)^(COI) 00:54, 20 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Fuck Commons. Carrite (talk) 04:06, 20 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

In that case, the photo will be deleted. The elections committee will do our best to keep it up where we can. --Varnent (talk)^(COI) 07:29, 20 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Dear Carrite, unfortunately images uploading is not easy when the wiki editor is in the picture. The system mostly helps the wiki photographer. Getting a random non-wiki photographer to assist in adding images to wiki is a bit harder. My own picture was for example the reason I was the last person to post my candidacy. I am fortunate enough to know alot of wiki photographers who happen to have images of me in their archives. It is not nice to realise that you cannot upload pictures of yourself. But it is necessary unfortunately. You have first hand experience now. If you have any suggestions on how to make things easier, yet keep the high standards we have, I am all ears. Cheers, Taketa (talk) 05:47, 20 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Here's the concept: such a photo isn't a copyright problem for anyone. I posted it. If there were a potential issue (which there clearly would not be), the DCMA has a mechanism for forcing a take-down that would leave WMF safe and sound. Somehow the obsession with Free Free Free became the alpha and the omega for image use — which is a bit absurd given the fact that there is miles of room for legitimate use of non-free files under American copyright law. But, oh my god, its Commons, we can't do that!!! Carrite (talk) 14:53, 22 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Okay - but that's the community set policies that we have in place. You say it's not a copyright problem - but without some documentation - the Commons community has no way of knowing that's true. The idea is to prevent a DMCA request - and it's a pretty reasonable request in my opinion to want verification of the photo's ownership. Commons is not meant for fair use photos, it's for public domain or creative commons licensed photos available for wide use. If you are okay with the photo being deleted so you can take a stand on Wikimedia enforcement of copyright laws - that is your prerogative. I have done my job explaining how to keep it up and trying to get that setup, what you do with it is up to you. --Varnent (talk)^(COI) 22:59, 22 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

• The picture went up at English WP with a fair use rationale. One would think it wouldn't be that hard to link to the original file. Best regards, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 11:39, 20 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Photos uploaded to English Wikipedia can only be used on English Wikipedia for a number of technical and copyright reasons. The only files who can feed to multiple project wikis is Wikimedia Commons. Fair use rationale requires a statement for each time the photo is used, which negates the need for allowing fair use files to be accessed on other wikis. Fair use photos are meant to be uploaded to each wiki it is used on with a statement following that wiki community's guidelines on how fair use statements should be formatted. So basically, uploading it to English Wikipedia did not really serve any purpose. We have uploaded the photo to Vote Wiki, and can do so on Meta-Wiki if need be, but no, by design and intentionally, we cannot display a file uploaded to one specific project wiki. We can link to it, sure, but cannot display it. --Varnent (talk)^(COI) 22:33, 20 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Carrite:

It's true that my question deals with an important content dispute. Is that really prohibited? Maybe specific examples are required to properly understand or define more general policies. Many local politicians face questions today about police procedures. That debate isn't complete without asking the candidate about Fergueson, Missouri or the recent events In Baltimore. PhanuelB (talk) 23:25, 13 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Dear candidate. My general opinion about administration of Wikimedia is negative. Many texts and images had been removed with pretext of protection of rights of the owners of the copyright owners. The special permissions by the copyright owners were just ignored, and removed together with the files. In particular, this refers to images of the Soviet dissidents and their texts.

Below I suggest only few examples in order to let you know what is happening: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sofiya_Kalistratova&oldid=649939072 https://ru.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Софья_Васильевна_Каллистратова&oldid=93595 https://ru.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Леонард_Борисович_Терновский&type=revision&diff=1312548&oldid=585736

I investigated the case and I revealed that many removals were performed by bureaucrat Lozman, who has absolutely no experience with obtaining permission from the copyright owners and does not even remember, who made him bureaucrat. However, this is only example.

Sorry for being late, but I just received the invitation to vote. You still have two days to change my opinion about at least one of the candidates suggested. One example of complain by the author is available at site TORI, http://mizugadro.mydns.jp/t/index.php/Kouznetsov,_permission I mention it because it has English version, although many Russian authors were offended in the similar way.

Now I formulate the question:

Do you think it is still possible to handle the cases mentioned?

Do you think that you can find time to deal with the cases mentioned?

Sincerely, Domitori (talk) 08:05, 28 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Domitori - Deletionism of images is a big problem, although it is not really something that the WMF Board can do anything about, being essentially a content dispute. I will advise you as one Wikipedian to another. One thing that I have done is stop using Commons altogether. The place is populated by absolute fanatics, some of whom have deleted files for reasons of personal spite. Instead I upload files directly to English-Wikipedia, which has fewer lunatics and a better understanding of the American legal doctrine of "fair use," under which the American-based Wikipedia servers operate. So I suggest to you that one possible scenario would be uploading the files you need to the language-encyclopedia in question, not to Commons. That said, Russian copyright law is a mess and many items that would seem to be "safe" may actually be problematic. So do keep that in mind as well. Best regards, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 16:37, 28 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hey, you had the only substantive comment (from 2014) on a page I just redirected. Here's a direct link, in case you want to keep track of it or restore it somewhere. Special:Permalink/9136017 -Pete F (talk) 19:04, 28 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your participation during the Inspire Campaign focused on addressing harassment from June 2016. I'm interested in hearing your experience during the campaign, so if you're able, I invite you to complete this brief survey to describe how you contributed to the campaign and how you felt about participating.

Please feel free to let me know on my talk page if you have any questions about the campaign or the survey. Thanks! I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 03:23, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

(Opt-out instructions)

Hi - according to our records you received a free account for JSTOR through The Wikipedia Library. Because we’ve used up all of our allocated accounts, and it’s been some time since they were distributed, we want to redistribute any accounts that aren’t being used to users on our waitlist.

If you’re still using, or plan to use, your JSTOR access, no problem! Simply head over to the Library Card platform, log in, and request a renewal of your account. You should be able to do this from your user page, or the JSTOR signup page. If you can’t find the renewal button, or have any other issues or questions about this, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. We’ll begin redistributing inactive accounts in September; if you request renewal after then we will only be able to reactivate your account if we have spots remaining. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 20 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously voted in the 2021 Movement Charter Drafting Committee (MCDC) election.

This is a reminder that if you have not voted yet on the ratification of the final Wikimedia Movement Charter draft, please do so by July 9, 2024 at 23:59 UTC.

You can read the final text of the Wikimedia Movement Charter in your language. Following that, check on whether you are eligible to vote. If you are eligible, cast your vote on SecurePoll.

On behalf of the Charter Electoral Commission,

RamzyM (WMF) 15:24, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply