Doctor Cimmerian

Yeah we're doing this.

Hokay. As of this posting we have over 2,200 articles on the site with images that have not been checked by staff. I am leading off with this information so we all understand the enormity of the task ahead of us to bring the entire Wiki into compliance with our licensing and sourcing requirements. This thread is meant to help solidify staff support for a course of action. I've been tasked with handling this problem by licensing and I think now is a good time to start talking about solutions.

First of all let's have a little refresher on what a properly source and licensed image is. A source must be posted in the discussion page of an article. That source must indicate a Creative Commons License or have been released by the image's creator for use on the wiki or that the image must have entered the public domain. Additionally the image's Creative Commons License must not include a no-derivatives clause.

Furthermore the source of the image must originate offsite. Images which source back to the wiki itself do not count for the purposes of proper image attribution. This will be more important for legacy image enforcement than it is for new image enforcement which is why I'm emphasizing it here. An image

Before talking about the process by which legacy images will be dealt with, let's reflect on the success of our previous initiative on this topic. We have arrested the growth of unsourced images on the site completely. That 2,200 article count from earlier is the same count it was 8 months ago, minus a fairly minor number of images we've dealt with over that time. In fact the process in question is so successful that only 2 or 3 people (Lily, specifically, deserves a lot of the credit for this) have been able to keep up with new image enforcement fairly comfortably.

The Process

I believe a modified version of this process will be a good method for dealing with legacy images. We will simply start with the earliest articles and work our way forward. Relevant staff will be directed to perform the following actions when performing legacy image enforcement:

1: Utilize reverse image lookup services to determine if the image is in compliance with our license. This might include google image searches and TinEye reverse image search. Staff will need to be trained somewhat in the proper usage of these tools.

2: If a compliant source is found, it is to be posted in the page's discussion thread as a staff post in the highest position it can be posted (for visibility). Generally this means a reply to the first post in the discussion.

3: If a compliant source is not found and the article is rated lower than (a number we're going to discuss in this thread) the image code is to be removed from the article. A staff post must be made in the discussion thread (again in the highest position possible for visibility) The image is not to be deleted (This allows the author to more easily fix the problem) from the article itself.

4: The author is to receive a message explaining the issue and linking them to the relevant forum thread from the staff that enforces the page. This will also include directions not to re-add the image to the page without proper sourcing and licensing. This message will include a small paragraph-long tutorial on how to look up images sources themselves and what properly sourced images *are*.

5: Articles with unsourced or improperly licensed images that have a rating higher than (a number we're going to discuss in this thread) are to be added to a stickied forum thread in the licensing sub-forum on 05. Those images will remain until replacements can be sourced from the community.

The author will need to be contacted as well to let them know that they can either properly source, see the image removed, or deal with the results of the contest (I see this as a possible sticking point for some people).

6: Once the image sourcing is sorted one way or the other, the page will have its _image tag replaced with _cc by the enforcing staff member.

You will note that this process takes place all at once, without the 48 hour waiting period we allow for new articles. The 48 hour waiting period is simply to allow newer authors the opportunity to add their sources before we go meddling in their articles. All legacy images are between 8 months and 9 years old as of this posting, and the author has had ample opportunity to source the images in that time.

Immediate enforcement allows for a timely conclusion of this work. We're talking about over 2,200 articles, and the enforcers will need the freedom to cut through wide swaths of the backlog when they get free time.

Big articles.

We have an additional problem, of course. A large number of highly rated and iconic articles also contain images which go against our current images policy. Earlier in the outlined process you probably noticed that articles over a certain rating will be temporarily exempted from the image removal portions of the process.

Ideally we can get this list made first, and then work on the rest. This will give the authors time to respond to the PMs. Nothing should be done until these authors have at least a month to respond to these PMs.

Once a full list of articles is completed, we'll have a listing of articles which fit the rating requirements to examine further.

We have a number of highly qualified and talented artists in the community who are also invested in the works here. Talking to community outreach, we believe a good solution to this problem involves a contest (or series of contests) to replace the images in those iconic articles. Without stepping on community outreach's toes, I think submission and voting from the community on which images best suit the articles makes sense. The finer details of that process would be left to them and probably administration in general.

I think that approach is a fine one, but the rating threshold is hard to determine. Let's talk numbers: The top 100 rated articles with unprocessed images start at +252. The top 50 start at +538. Some of these are likely compliant but I'd put that number at 10% at most. I don't know how manageable this is going to be but the enforcement outside of these articles is likely going to take us at least a year, regardless.

We have to decide how big this part of the project is going to be. I'd personally suggest +500 and higher. That 60 total will probably get knocked down to 50ish after enforcement is run on them. Maybe lower (I highly doubt it'd be any lower than 40 to be clear). This will be for the officially run contest or contests. I would suggest that if a user submits an image (with the quality evaluated by CO, probably) for a page rated lower than that that's had enforcement run on it, we definitely add it to the page.

So what do I want from you?

None of this is set in stone and all of it is just a proposed process. There are two major points I need your input in before we solidify any of this: What are your opinions of the process (what works, doesn't work, what would you change and why?) and what is the rating threshold you'd suggest for the contest worthy articles?

Let's get to the discussion.