News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Wikipedia May Be a Font of Facts, but It’s a Desert for P... by tokenadult on Monday July 20, 2009 @11:11AM (#714494)
"A few celebrities, like Plácido Domingo and Oliver Stone, have had the foresight to provide their own freely licensed photographs. And considering the money that stars spend to maintain their image, it is surprising that more have not invested in high-quality, freely licensed photographs for Wikipedia and other sites. Perhaps they don’t recognize how popular Wikipedia is. In June, for example, Ms. Berry’s article had more than 180,000 page views."

There we have it. If the subjects of the photographs care about how they look on a very widely viewed website, they will see to it that a good-looking photo with the appropriate license is submitted to Wikipedia. If some of the current photos are really, really bad, the photograph that would improve the status quo could be taken by almost anyone. For more image-conscious celebrities, they will still want to hire a photographer with experience and good equipment, but all it takes is a contract (freedom of contract is a wonderful thing) that the photograph will be licensed in the way that Wikipedia desires, and the photograph can go to Wikipedia.

Re:Wikipedia May Be a Font of Facts, but It’s a Desert for P... by cdr on Monday July 20, 2009 @02:11PM (#714827)
See other comments here and elsewhere - deletionists are a major problem on wikipedia, and especially so when it comes to photos. The photo problem really is mostly a wikipedia problem.