Wikipedia talk:Requested pictures/Archive 1

message: I think it maybe time to think about archiving this page into multiply sections. Details on how to do this can be found at Wikipedia:How_to_archive_a_talk_page  (Peachey88 10:32, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Archive Page??

message: Probably many of you know this, but let me just tell the others about it:
If you go to Google , then click on Images, you'll be able to search for everything - from a simple screwdriver to an image of the White House! --webkid 23:19, 12 Aug 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine. Unfortunately probably 99.999999% of the images found will be covered by some copyright, which will probably effectively prohibit its use here. -- RTC 23:36, 12 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Google Images

message: It seems like quite a few of these requests have been fulfilled. Or at least it seems that way to me, but I have no idea if the images on the pages are what the person who requested them had in mind. It'd be nice if whomever requested them, removed the request once they were satisfied, but lacking that, should we start to remove some of the entries (maybe move them to Wikipedia:Fulfilled picture requests)? That way, those that are most needed will stand out. Dori 03:35, Nov 15, 2003 (UTC)
--------
Someone requested: *A picture for Crushing by elephant.
Um, I don't think anyone in their right mind would want to see an actual picture of someone being crushed by an elephant, but then what? Gawping spectators? I'm really not sure what would apply here. Lee M 01:12, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Too bad! :) - snoyes 21:41, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Fulfilled requests

message: Wouldn't it be easier to archive the entire thing and start afresh with new requests? Dori | Talk 05:49, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)
:It would be even better to get most of the requests fulfilled so they can be removed :-) -- Wapcaplet 22:16, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleaning up 

message: There seem to be heaps of Wiki pages that describe geographic locations or would benefit greatly from geographic maps. Someone with a copyright-free atlas could really improve many pages. Is there such a project anyone is working on?
I couldn't find any reference to any.
Zuytdorp Survivor 01:39, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map Project ? 

message: A very small (starting) collection of knots (all either Puplic Domain or GNU FDL) can be found here. If you have special not fullfilled wishes for knot drawings, please tell me which you wish first on my german discussion page and I'll do my best ;-). Since I'm German I won't know all knot names if they are not in "Bedford: The Knot Book" - in that case 
a link to some properitary web illustration might be a help for me (of course I'll draw my own illustration and won't use that). 
For the German Wikipedia most of your illustrations are unluckily not usable, since it is often not clear which licence state the illustration has. (There is an agreement, that we don't use "fair use" and similar.) So if your knot pictures *are* in truth PD or GNU FDL, it would be nice to recognise that more easily....
--Hella 23:08, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Knots

message: With as long as this page is getting, I think it best to stick to a policy of removing requests when they are fulfilled. If someone simply posts a note saying "OK, I fulfilled this request" then there's not much reason for the request to remain here. Fulfilled requests can, of course, go to Wikipedia:Fulfilled picture requests. -- Wapcaplet 03:09, 9 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I kind of like them to stay on the page for a few days before the fulfilled requests are removed. I think it makes the contributors feel good about contributing - at least it does with me ;-) Chris 73 | Talk 14:27, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: From what I can tell by a few checks, there are numerous fulfilled requests that have been left on here for quite a while. Is there anyone with more time than I who can do a cleanup? Kickstart70 05:20, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fufilled requests 

message: I think it might be useful to make a page specifically about the details of contributing pictures as a photographer, with specific examples. The information on this seems scattered right now, and I think it would be helpful to have it all in one place so photographers know exactly what to do and how to do it.
For example, I was wondering:
*As a photographer, is there anyway I can take a picture for wikipedia and restrict commercial use (under a Creative Commons license) which is compatible with the free doc license?
Information that would be combed together for this section:
*Licensing options, not just listed as "GNU FDL" or "Creative Commons", but as explicit examples (e.g. I want anyone to use this photo however they want, appropriate license:public domain; I want to allow noncommercial use of this photo with attribution, appropriate license:*; etc)
*Step-by-step instructions from uploading the image, to adding the license text, to adding to an article; right now this info seems to be spread accross several articles
Jeff 06:48, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guide for photographers? 

message: there is no such an image  neither  why it says so in the page?
They are placeholders; as it says at the top of the page:
* You can also request an image by adding the image  Image:No_image_yet to the article. This image is a placeholder for requested images.
I'm not sure why there are JPEG and GIF versions. Anyhow, the idea is to link to that placeholder from articles that need images; they will then show up as "What links here" for that image. -- Wapcaplet 20:36, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Image:No_image_yet'' 

message: I noticed in one of the articles I had been looking in on that someone added a "photo" that was actually a jpg or gif of a record-album cover from the late '80s.  Another article has a picture of an author that I'm certain was on the back flap of one of his books.
Are these okay?  It seems to me that they might be okay (i.e., non-infringing) because they are drawn from a sort of "publicity" usage and have thus been out in public.  On the other hand, they may not be okay (non-infringing).  Can anyone tell me?   (J.R.)
:Yes, there is a belief that we have fair use of covers (generally just the fronts). They are typically tagged with Template:Albumcover, Template:Bookcover and so on. iMeowbot~Mw 00:48, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  People Pictures: CD, Record, Book Jacket Pics OK? 

message: Just a heads up... -- AllyUnion (talk) 23:43, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Photography]] 

message: I have made a category for the reqimage template which is :Category:Articles needing images. This would fill up quickly. I propose we will have sub categories for this. For example, sub category for requesting images of people, another for maps, another for screen shots and so on. In this way, it will be similar to stubbing. - Zondor 15:29, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propose sub-categorising requested images 

message: I propose we update the current template and add  as a new template. 
Please see my proposal and talk pages: Reqimage, Articles needing images. Original proposal, on the  Reqimage talk page, made on (02:20, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Strike out non-used template.  <>Who?¿? 18:17, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:Who/ReqImage|Updating the template]]

message: This category is too big to be useful. A drawer is just looking for things to draw, just as a mapmaker (:Category:Wikipedia map requests) is looking for things to map, etc. Lumping all of these into "pictures" is no longer a useful way to work. Do others agree that this needs to be split? -St|eve 17:58, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It might be good to organize them out into three different categories, but perhaps don't put them on separate pages, or if we do, heavily interlink them.  Some graphics people are comfortable working in some or all of those categories, and people who are willing to dig through existing fair-use material can often come up with stuff across categories.  Another consideration is that  I think this page is currently under utilized, and we shouldn't do anything that makes it harder for others to add items here.  -Interiot 19:21, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Underutilization may be due to its current state of organization. IAC, the Wikipedia page isnt important - its more important to get the Categories separated but organized (and related), and basically point people directly to the categories if they are looking for work. Relying on any hand-taken lists as an active requests list is a thing of the past, and using something like Template:Mapit is clear enough, or Template:Drawit is more clear and organized. SinReg-St|eve 17:09, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Yeah, I was looking for things to draw or diagram but it's hard to find specific instances where this is appropriate or necessary. --Sketchee 22:30, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate "pictures" into "photos," "graphics," and "drawings" 

message: I'm not sure if a note should go on the main page or not, but there is a category set up for images on Wikipedia which are currently tagged as "fair use" but could be plausibly re-created as "free" images. One thing desperately needed are free photographs of different makes of modern U.S. automobiles (almost any variety is needed), for example, and there are a number of maps which could have their informational content re-drawn onto free outlines, etc. See :Category:Fair use image replacement request. Thanks. --Fastfission 03:45, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use replacement requests

message: Is it part of Wikipedia politics to try to have (at least) one image per article ?
I have a good bunch photo I've made that could illustrate some articles: comics covers, Subbuteo players (could illustrate evolution), Field Hockey crosses from the 50s, 70s,..., Lincoln cars pictures, ... and I'm wondering whether it is a good idea to upload some of them. Lvr 17:27, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, having pictures is good. Please read the Picture tutorial for help with images and remember to add the correct image copyright tag to any images you upload. WAvegetarian (talk)  (email)   (contribs) 18:00, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. There picture are all done by me, so there is no problem for rights.Lvr 10:00, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's Wikipedia politic toward images ? 

message: It would be nice if there were a subset of this page for diagrams in particular. The reason is because at the moment it is impossible for me, without going through the whole list, to see which of these are diagram entries, and I think setting those aside would get them filled quicker. The reasoning is simple: any user with some ability at Adobe Illustrator or Inkscape can create a diagram (especially if the requester gives an example from the web of what type of thing they are looking for), whereas there is simply no way I could ever fulfill some of the photography requests and very unlikely I'd be able to fill the basic image requests. There are a lot of Wikipedians with grpahic design ability, this should be encouraged in some way... --Fastfission 02:04, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I think it unfortunate that the page Requested pictures shows only "List of Photographs requested" which seems to neglect the value of good line diagrams and animations.Cuddlyable3 14:12, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A possible thought

message: Uploaded an image of Bisto gravy to the Bisto page. Spark13579 04:48, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Added image

message: Since you can only take a photo of something that exists near to you (and there are tens of thousands of geo-stubs lacking pictures), can I suggest subcategorizing this category?
* :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs by location - probably the biggest
** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Europe
*** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Germany
**** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Berlin (for instance)
* :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of people
** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of historical people
*** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of German historical people
** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of people by nationality
*** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of German people
**** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of German entertainers
**** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of German football (soccer) players
**** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of German politicians (specific categories might work quite well if there are enough articles to populate them)
* :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of objects
** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of aircraft
** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of automobiles
** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of ships
* :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of organisms
** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of micro-organisms
** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of fungi
** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of plants
** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of animals
*** :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of African animals
Any thoughts? TheGrappler 18:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be a good idea since it would allow you to watch particular subcategories that you're interested in. However, it will require people to manually find the appropriate category, and they might not want to do that; also, we won't be able to include the category by means of the template anymore. But what we could do is like how stub-sorting works - someone requests a picture, and that goes onto the main :Category:Wikipedia requested photographs, and then users more familiar with the subcategories places it into the appropriate one. enochlau (talk) 02:04, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea - rather than using a whole batch of templates to achieve this, I guess it would be easier to adapt the current template to use a parameter. Another idea is that the category page itself could be used to give more detail to the request e.g. if there is a particular aspect that is wanted for the article (an example I can think of is the article is for a person, and what is requested is a picture of a statue or painting that can be found in a certain town, then the category page can include "further guidance" on what is being asked for). TheGrappler 02:35, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm not sure a set of categories would do any good. They don't pop up in your watchlist when an article is added to them, so you have to manually look at them every once in a while, which I believe is a big contributor to getting request categories ignored. I think a set of subpages would be much more valuable. Just start with some high level topics and only break it down when the volume of a particular subtopic overloads the page. So Wikipedia:Requested pictures/Spain for example. Then it would pop up on people's watchlist that have an interest or ability to take pictures of Spain or already have one meeting the current request. But the categories are better than nothing I guess. - Taxman Talk 11:30, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good point, thanks for pointing it out! I guess the other advantage of using a list on a page is that the specific details of the request can be given. On the other hand, it wouldn't be updated so easily. It would be good to get some more feedback on this and see how people would react to subpages rather than categories! TheGrappler 16:39, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Good idea in breaking down the list into regions the current version is difficult to use.  Commons:Picture requests also has a request page for images, Maybe Wikipedia should be deferring editors to Commons for requets. Two reasons one is Commons has been established a repository specialising in image/media files we should encourage images being loaded there to make them available across all wiki projects. The other reason is that Commons is language neutral so when you request for say an image Berlin Train Station not only do english speaking editors see the request but also German speaking editors see the request so there a better chance of the request being fulfilled. Another benefit would be that wikipedia wouldn't need to provided as much storage space for as many images because more image would loaded into commons Gnangarra 00:44, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree we need to get more people to upload onto Commons rather than WP - the big problem is that Commons pages don't appear on WP editor's watchlist. Perhaps a note encouraging people to upload on Commons if possible would be a good idea? TheGrappler 05:42, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I also agree we should defer more of this to commons, but I agree with the problem TheGrappler notes. Is it solved by having request pages here, but encouraging uploading only to commons? That duplicates the request effort, because ideally you would request at commons too for the possibility that another language Wikipedian will see the request. Maybe just ask that if people make the same request on Commons and here to link from each request to the other. If we go with subpages here, I think we should keep it really broad, like Europe, Asia, NA, SA, Africa. Any overlap is just more duplicated effort, so maybe just geography categories and an Other and Diagrams for now? The Europe subpage for example could cover everything you could take pictures of in Europe such as monuments, animals, etc. Other could be used for things you could take a picture of anywhere. - Taxman Talk 12:34, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

text: This may be a good idea.  We need to encourage those in the area and who have digital cameras to actually take those pictures and submit them here.  Denelson83  23:54, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is definately an issue with the crossover of information from wikipedia's to Commons there would also be the problem of linking back to the article and/ or the person requesting the image. Possible solution is a bot that take updates from here and creates them in commons. Gnangarra 14:11, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Featured articles/Featured Pictures use a template system that you can monitor for changes could that format be used here. The template could be something thats added to the talk page of an article the editor needs to just fillin image request in the template and it populates the request pages. when the request is filled the photographer just add the image back to the talk page and removes the template. The request pages would show the addition of the templates when they occur.  Gnangarra 14:20, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Subcategorizing [[:Category:Wikipedia requested photographs]] 

message: I've created the above cat and started to add images to it. The specific map desired by the requestor may not be present but there are maps of Chicago on the project. Meanwhile, I'm working on at least one generalized blank map of the city that others can use to create more specialized maps to suit. John Reid 01:50, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:Maps of Chicago, Illinois]] 

message: This page would be more useful if it was split up into a single page of photos that could be taken in many different places (eg, sports, activities, foods, etc), and those that effectively have to come from one place (eg, Eiffel Tower, photo of Greenwich...). These would each appear on a page by place. Then, photographers could more easily find photos that they would be capable of taking. There's absolutely no point me even looking at bridges in America. Whereas a bridge in France I could potentially visit and take a photo of. And a photo of an orange, anyone could take. So, to summarise:
*Requested photos
**Requested photos/anywhere
**Requested photos/specific place (links to all the below)
**Requested photos/France
**Requested photos/USA
**... Stevage 14:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggest restructure by place

message: Does anyone object to the removal of links in the titles? For example, the title of the people section has a link to people. It's somewhat confusing, at least to me. Since titles are not usually linked, I expect it to go somewhere useful, like a subpage of the Requested Pictures article or something. It looks like they're all common words that anyone would know and the actual pictures requested are linked. Do they serve a useful purpose or will I have to seek psychotherapy for my irrational link expectations? -- Kjkolb 12:26, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed them. If anyone prefers the old way, feel free to revert. -- Kjkolb 08:17, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linking of titles 

message: I have found an extensive collection of public domain images provided by the US government.  Lawilkin 18:08, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  good image source 

message: I have added the image request for CapTel USB, however, I doubt the fruit of the effort, considering FCC prohibits relay providers and telecommunications access programs from disclosing their customers, unless someone happens to know a CapTel USB user by sheer dumb luck and has their permission to photograph the user during a conversation. I also doubt the success of replacing the other fair use images, but any attempts add any images to the article are appreciated. Taric25 18:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image requests for the article [[Telecommunications_Relay_Service|Telecommunications Relay Service]] 

message: Please see this thread, which explains everything :) Thanks --Quiddity 03:53, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Graphic lab 

message: If I take an image from a site, and heavily edit it, does it then become "my" image, and do I then have the rights to it?  Where is the line drawn? Paul Haymon 05:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you make creative changes to an image, yes the result is yours and you own the copyright to that new image. However, if you don't have the proper permission, it's also a copyright violation and basically unusable.  If the source image is released under a free license such as GFDL or CC, then you just have to follow the rules of the license - e.g. if the source is GFDL, then you own the result, but you're required to release it also under the GFDL (and if the source is under some "ND" variation of CC, then you're not allowed to make derivatives, and we're back to a copyright violation). See Wikipedia:Media copyright questions or Wikipedia talk:Copyrights/Can I use... if you have more questions. --Davepape 14:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I see.  So essentially, the original image must be released under a free license.  Thank you. Paul Haymon 23:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you also have to credit the source and possible detail changes. I remember reading the GDFL license some time ago, but I'm not sure now. Be sure to read the Wikipedia article on the license of the image or media you wish to use. Richard001 04:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "A picture is worth a thousand words" and a diagram one has crafted by hand can be a valuable improvement to a Wikipedia page. IMO the benefit is maximised for contributor and Wikipedia if a diagram is contributed as a gift, in exactly the same way that editors contribute their texts. It actually takes some effort (tagging) and legal hairsplitting to release artwork to public domain, but I manage it. Now comes my rant... We must all be allowed to EDIT explanatory artwork, it's not sacrosanct. But "Artist X" draws some diagrams for Wikipedia, and builds up quite a gallery of them on his User page. He says this is to help people ask him to do more of them. He wants to emblazon his name on each image. He is not happy with Wikipedia's image guidelines, and has mounted a petulent attack on "Wikepedia's treatment of its artists" on his page (since withdrawn but not forgotten). While "Artist X" keeps reminding us of his unselfish benevolence, his Wikipedia images are contributed under GDFL. This is a license form that was conceived to retain some benefit to software writers, in a spirit of encouraging free use and further development. Woe to he who dares to edit a diagram in Wikipedia by "Artist X"! This person promptly registers a complaint that he has not been credited. "Artist X" (the real person has different name) rationalises that diagram "Y" and its modifications should all come from him alone because he "has the original files".Cuddlyable3 08:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: True artists can be a lot touchy when it comes to their work even if they've released it with GFDL best option is to upload to new page retaining similar naming and acknowledge the source material and  the artist with direct links in the description ie this is a variation of image foo.svg created by user:foo. If its just a minor variant why not ask the artist first anyway Gnangarra 08:50, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know what qualifies an artist as "true". I don't see why I should ask his/her permission for editing that everyone is free to do, or why that particular artist can't be satisfied that changes in Wikipedia are easily traceable. Wikipedia's strength is that it is a group effort, rather than anyone's ego trip.Cuddlyable3 11:27, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing existing images 

message: I have tried to find a list of required math pictures (not photoes, but draiwings of some math objects - maybe I can help with some), and was unable to find it. Seems that on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requested_images there is a link 2.26 Mathematics going to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requested_images#Mathematics where is a second link to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requested_pictures#Mathematics_2 This seems to be a broken link. Anyway, neither link contain some actual requests that I expected (like: draw a diagram that is illustrating this or this theorem or smth like this). I am new to Wikipedia, so maybe doing something wrong, please, give me a correct link in this case. Thank you and sorry for my bad English.
::easier way is to leave a message on WT:WPM saying that your able to provide images/diagrams. Gnangarra 08:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with math images (misprint somewhere?) 

message: A lot of requests on this page have been fulfilled and just struck out instead of removed. In a few days I intend to go through this page and removed all the requests that have been fulfilled. Thoughts? --Banana 19:23, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ok going to do this soon. --Banana 03:18, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Good idea, thanks.  (SEWilco 03:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fulfilled requests not being removed