FeedsReplying to a comment on Citizendium One Year On: A Contributor's Perspective
First off, thanks for talking about the quality of CZ articles
Secondly, it is pure unalduterated hogwash that the project has "decided to not accept images from public domain works that have been digitized." The only times where this is the case is for certain instances where, for example, for a photo of a piece of PD art that was created OUTSIDE of the United State, because such a photo does create a new copyright, or else a lower set of protections, depending upon where the photo is from. Surely your training in Library Science should have given you a more sophisticated view, such as I am saying. Even the Wikimedia Commons recognizes this sort of thing, see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Com...
Please peruse http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Catego... for the many instances of public domain media in CZ articles.
The instance you are talking about is of an image that originated in Japan. I deleted the image for a few days while researching what the scoop was with Japan in these regards, while you pushed strongly for a cavalier attitude, stating "We obviously cannot prove that there are not other laws that may apply without looking at every law in the jurisdiction at hand" - clearly a cavalier attitude, and false on its face, because one can quite easily determine the laws in nearly all countries.
The image in question is at http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Image:...
As for you being a Citizendium "insider", your account was created on 7 June 2007 and you requested that your account be deleted, and it was on 21:58, 11 July 2007 D. Matt Innis (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "User:James A. Flippin" (user request). Why you would then call yourself a CZ "insider" after three months later after 1 month experience is a stretch by any standard.
Reply
We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options,
try reading the
wikipedia article or the
official style guide.
