Forum:Fair Use Rationale in Upload

It appears that having the fair use rationale stuff automatically placed into the summary box on the upload page is allowing users to upload without actually editing it, since the image policy just says that the fair use rationale template needs to be there, along with license data for it to be allowed. This has resulted in many uploads (most of which are deleted) recently containing invalid rationales because users are now being lazy in filling it out, which means users are actually having to look at images before tagging them for deletion (before it was much easier to see if an image was violating the policy or not). Please use this thread to discuss whether having preformatted fair use rationales has any real benefits to the wiki. --Speysider Talk Page 15:51, February 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * I think that it does. It aids people who make proper image uploads, and if people upload images without filling them out, despite the job being made easier to them, and after having been warned about it, it only makes their blocking more justifiable. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 16:34, February 24, 2013 (UTC)


 * I knew this would come up sooner or later. Thats the reason I preferred preformatted templates... But they were very hard coded. So starting from scratch, I made a robust, flexible template. Clear cache and see the upload page.~  Ultimate  Supreme  16:57, March 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * I have tested it and it works, so I think we should keep it. Jacce | Talk | Contributions 05:38, March 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * Do we need these fancy additions to the upload page ? It doesn't matter if you put in all these fields since half the people will ignore them. Plus, your new addition does not use the proper fair use rationale template either which breaks the consistency of use across the wiki. Can we please actually have these changes discussed so that people can drop their opinions in about them before putting them in ? It's getting annoying when people make changes without bringing it up with the rest of the wiki, since there has been quite a few changes made that have been made without actual discussion made with the rest of the site and some of which I think are pointless. I dislike sysops going off and doing their own thing without talking to the wiki. At least Wikia staff have the courtesy to make a thread in these forums when they're about to make a change to the wiki so that we can discuss it and make suggestions on improving their idea, but there's at least 1 sysop here who doesn't bother to say anything to us and just makes changes and expects us to just deal with them. I also just reverted an unnecessary change to our template as it was changed without any kind of discussion as well. --Speysider Talk Page 13:14, March 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm of the same mindset as Jacce. It's been tested, it works, it stays. There is no reason to change it, to come up with new methods, when the one we have works plenty well. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 13:59, March 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * That is not the right line of thinking. Just because it's been tested and it works does not instantly mean it cannot be changed back. Ever heard of the word "community consensus" ? Yeah, that thing when the community decides on changes ? Clearly half of you don't care about it or just think that 2 sysops and one random user is the community (which it is not). Start rethinking your mindsets or this wiki is going to end up like a dictatorship. --Speysider Talk Page 16:30, March 19, 2013 (UTC)

Great. It seems you have overlooked many important facts:
 * The only neccessary fields in the template are Source and Description.
 * The others are optional and have preset defaults. They can be overridden:
 * It provides flexibility to the experienced users to change it as they like.
 * It provides a properly formatted rationale to the new users.


 * The JavaScript has been designed accordingly:
 * There is a check on source and Description fields.
 * You can't upload if its blank.

Both have been perfectly synced. Styling is a minor issue. Its completely css styled. It can be changed anytime. It seems you misunderstood Jacce's post. Though I would prefer him to come and clear it up. If you want, I would wait for a week. All supports, suggestions and questions are welcome. I will be happy to answer them.~ Ultimate  Supreme  16:43, March 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * There is also a Switch to Basic Upload form button.


 * I did not misinterpret his post, I am simply stating my opinion of these changes happening without consultation with any of the memberbase. Did you even consider that people might not want this ? Like Cerez said to you on your talkpage, there was absolutely nothing wrong with the old layout, there was no need to change it. Like the old saying goes: "If it's not broken, don't fix it". The old form was fine, it wasn't broken, so why was it changed ? You need to start considering a lot more than just your own personal opinion when making these changes, namely:

When you've done that assessment, you should then talk to the members here. If there is a resounding opinion of "No", then that means don't do it. If I had to liken these changes to someone, it likens me to Google making changes when people don't want them and Google asking for people's opinions, while not giving a damn about them because they're going to make the change anyway. Please, for the sake of the wiki, stop making changes without actually chatting to us members. Do you see Wikia staff just making changes without making some sort of announcement, here or on Community Central ? No. --Speysider Talk Page 16:52, March 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Is the change necessary ? Do the members want it ?
 * 2) Is the system broken as it is ?
 * 3) Does this change require me to change templates ?

It was necessary. Yes offcourse it was. Don't you see how much messy image uploads have been? Compare it with the uploads done today by the new user. He had been warned 3 times but still could'nt do the rationale's properly. See his todays uploads. They were fairly good. Interestingly, it you who said that we need a change in the current upload system and thats the reason you created this forum in the first place.~ Ultimate  Supreme  17:01, March 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * I didn't create this forum to incite random changes on an upload form. I created this forum for the purpose of discussing why we need to have preformatted fair use rationales on it. And they were only good because they were being done for him, this kind of system is for people who can't be bothered to do anything and is for lazy people. People who need to have the rationale spelled out for them are not the kind of users this wiki should be harbouring, and making things stupidly easy for them just incites people to not upload properly. There is one fundamental thing you are not getting from my messages and that is communication. Your not talking to anyone before making these changes, your not asking for people's opinions before making these changes and overall your just changing things and making people deal with them. Basically, you don't want to listen to people's opinions, which is extremely bad and won't do this wiki any good. Do you want this wiki to get a reputation of being run like a dictatorship ? --Speysider Talk Page 17:07, March 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm confused. Granted awesome last semester of college notwithstanding, I notice a brand new Image Tagging thingy in use and I think "Alright cool. It's right there now. Makes uploading easier. Yay Java!" And then I see Speysider talking about a dictatorship. What exactly did I miss?--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 17:25, March 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * I didn't say this was a dictatorship. What I said was that if people continue to make random changes without telling anyone, announcing it, or even asking anyone's opinion if it's wanted, then it will be a dictatorship. --Speysider Talk Page 17:26, March 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay...still not seeing a problem with the fair use rational in upload. If anything it makes life easier.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 17:29, March 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * When it was originally just filling in the Summary box with a template, I was fine with that. But I'm not fine with the whole concept of the form and a whole template just being changed on a whim without discussion. Making such a change surely requires discussion with the wiki base. This thread was started when I was noticing people were just uploading images without changing the rationale, because I felt it was a way for people to get around the "files need a rationale" so that people could upload blank rationales and use them, since their images had the rationale there, thereby they weren't violating a rule. Staying with the simple form that doesn't fill itself out (where you need to insert it manually) was better because then we could see who was violating the image policy or not, but now it's hard to tell. --Speysider Talk Page 17:32, March 19, 2013 (UTC)

Typically if people upload files and don't bother with the rational, they would simply not add it anyway. That doesn't change, what it does change is the need for someone to manually add the rational. Requires to many clicks, copy pasting, ect. I'm not seeing what is changed, just that the rational is now in the upload page. Yes, it probably should have gotten a formal announcement, but I'm not going to look a gift horse in the mouth. This is a good change and not one to bring down the fire of dictatorship and the like.
 * Now this does lead me to ask; who put this new awesome thing into the upload form in the first place?--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 17:38, March 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * Agreed. There is nothing "dictator" about the change. Whoever did it made it so that it was easier for our users, and myself, I might add, to add fair use rationale to images. There is no need to get angry about it or throw a fit. Its not going to change things for the worst, and clearly there a quite a few around here that find it helpful and an overall positive change. Whoever did it deserves a "thank you" from us all. (I believe that someone is UltimateSupreme, but I could be mistaken; if so THANK YOU! ^_^) ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 19:16, March 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * Gradients stopped being cool when Angelfire died. ~SnapperTo 19:18, March 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * Why do I get the feeling nobody is even reading what I'm saying ? Also, stop taking parts of my sentences and misinterpreting them. It's annoying the hell out of me that you keep doing it and I'm sick and tired of it happening. Read the god damn sentences properly and stop misinterpreting my words. TTF, you are the prime example of people who take my words out of context and you've done it in about 3-4 forum threads so far that I've started. Please stop it. >_<
 * All I'm trying to say is that these changes need to be discussed BEFORE THE CHANGE IS MADE so that everyone can drop their opinions in, but clearly most of you like to go the route of making changes, not announcing them, then getting mad at people who try to point them out. The only people getting angry is you lot because I made a complaint which you don't want to listen to. You know that I could just go to Wikia and complain about you not listening to the members, as this is a wiki based on its members, not the admins, which is why I'm saying that if you keep continuing to make changes, then shouting down anyone who tries to object, it will turn into a dictatorship. Key word: if. --Speysider Talk Page 20:07, March 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * Watch your language when you respond. We don't need cursing muddling up good-natured discussions. You brought the issue up, and you've now received your feedback from more than just me. Enough. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 21:32, March 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * Overall, I agree with speysider that important topics should be discussed together, but, on the other hand, I don't see anything wrong with sysops changing something so they can receive feedback for it. After all, admins ARE responsible to lead the way of the wiki to some extent and they are admins because they have the qualities to do it. The ideal way would be something like "look here, community, I made these changes here and there. what do you think about it?" if the feedback is positive, things can stay, if the majority is against it, things should be changed. also, sometimes, the changes are not that significant for the majority on the wiki. I would have never realised the change myself, I think. But on the other hand, I would not been affected by it as well.
 * I don't know how to end the discussion in a way everybody would be happy about, since I can't see any side here giving way to the other. Don't you guys think it's kinda sad how the community here is just as torn as the people shown in the recent chapters?Norleon (talk) 21:54, March 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * @Snapper2: Whats are Gradients and why do I think I remember Angelfire?--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 22:50, March 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * All of the crappy websites you visited in the late 90s/early 00s were probably hosted by Angelfire. Many of these websites used color gradients which had a mathematical correlation to their level of suck.
 * The template, when I view it in Firefox, appears to have a color gradient. I don't know why it does that since it appears as a solid color in IE. Regardless, I'd prefer the new template look as much like the old one as possible. ~SnapperTo 23:00, March 19, 2013 (UTC)

Ah now it's coming back to me. Good ole Angelfire. Anyway on topic, where is this new template? Because I use the upload form and I get the old one.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 23:04, March 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * Speysider reverted the switch. The new proposed template can be seen at . ~SnapperTo 23:08, March 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * That don't look bad. Darker, but not bad.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 23:09, March 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * Again, I don't see the problem with it. I actually like it quite a bit. I say keep it. What do you guys think? ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 23:10, March 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd like point out that the wiki's concern about "valid" fair use rationales is laughable. If it really wanted to make genuine claims of fair use, the wiki should not:
 * Prefer 1080p images; for fair use, images should be scaled down to the minimum size that is needed for them to illustrate whatever they're meant to illustrate.
 * Essentially have a picture-per-paragraph-policy; for fair use, images should only be used when they are absolutely vital to understanding a particular subject.
 * Even entertain the idea of a boilerplate fair use rationale; for fair use, each rationale should be unique to the image and the circumstance(s) under which it is being used.
 * I don't fully agree with how the wiki uses images, but I don't feel it should be trying to satisfy the definition of fair use either. So to be up in arms whenever an image doesn't provide all of the "necessary" fair use information is ridiculous. ~SnapperTo 23:30, March 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * And all that was Speysider's reasons against this new format?--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 23:37, March 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * No, his reason was that someone changed it without discussing it with him. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 23:38, March 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * He also does not like that the new template fills itself out because that defeats the purpose of fair use. Or something. My own point was that that boat sailed a long time ago. The only actual valuable part of the fair use rationale, for the wiki's purposes, is providing a source for the image. ~SnapperTo 23:46, March 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * *sigh* . There is no change at all. Earlier the Javascript filled in everything and the uploader had to just fill in the Source and Description which was all the time left blank :( Now we can have a check on it and prevent upload if blank. The optional fields are auto-filled by the template if left blank.
 * As I said earlier Gradients (colours) is something really very minor. Its pure css. It can be changed anytime very easily. It appears like that in IE because of the fallback mechanism ;)
 * The template has pre-formatted stuff but it is over-writable.
 * Speysider's concersns are pretty obvious:

"People who need to have the rationale spelled out for them are not the kind of users this wiki should be harbouring, and making things stupidly easy for them just incites people to not upload properly."
 * He doesn't want us to make things easier. Glad this did not happen when we decieded to migrate to semantics and use Semantic forms.~ Ultimate  Supreme  03:12, March 20, 2013 (UTC)

Thinking about it deeper, I think I can just modify the old to work with the new Js. It would not affect the old images in any way.

Would that be OK with everyone? ~ Ultimate  Supreme  07:15, March 20, 2013 (UTC)


 * @Salil: I don't mind that change. Do note that I'm not trying to stifle change, that I'm merely giving my honest feedback :)
 * @TTF:  No, his reason was that someone changed it without discussing it with him.  That's not the reason. The reason is that this is a change that affects all users of the wiki and therefore it should be discussed before being implemented. Also, I find it laughable that you thought I was using curse words in a post I made earlier in this thread, which I didn't. I haven't stooped that low to start using crude words. >_>
 * @TU3:  And all that was Speysider's reasons against this new format?  See above message to TTF. Plus, I do not like it when systems are designed to make people lazy, doing so just suppresses issues with people ignoring policies and makes it easier for people to put in bogus nonsense into the fields. --Speysider Talk Page 10:15, March 20, 2013 (UTC)