Template talk:Non-free use rationale

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Field for NFCC#2?[edit]

Why does this template not have a field for information related to WP:NFCC#2 (commercial opportunities)? That's a crucial part of many rationales. I propose adding a field "commercial role". Fut.Perf. 08:56, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Comment: the alternative {{Non-free use rationale 2}} does have that field. – Fayenatic London 16:35, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Also, I suggest we add an extra field "author", factoring out that information from the "description" field. Too many people never realize that they are supposed to add the author information under that heading. This change would also make the template more compatible with the free {{Information}} template (i.e., if you realize an image tagged with {{Non-free use rationale}} is really PD or something, you should be able to simply exchange the template name and end up with a valid {{Information}} template with all the relevant fields remaining the same.) Fut.Perf. 09:02, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


Twice this template uses hyphens when it should use dashes. Could |''- WARNING: please be changed to |''– WARNING: and |''- NEEDS ARTICLE NAME'' be changed to |''– NEEDS ARTICLE NAME''. Thanks, Jenks24 (talk) 07:22, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Tra (Talk) 00:47, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

New field for copyright holder[edit]

Templates such as {{Non-free software cover}} specify that the rationale must include "the source of the work and copyright information", but this template does not have a field for copyright info. I propose to add one.

Should this expansion also deal with the unanswered point about "author" raised above? – Fayenatic London 16:23, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

apostrophe missing[edit]

In the section "...would be unlikely to impact the copyright owners ability to resell or otherwise profit from the work," there needs to be an apostrophe in the above underlined and bolded word. If a single owner, it goes before the s, if multiple, aftewards. If we are trying to be ambiguous, it needs to be rephrased as "would be unlikely to impact the ability of the copyright owner(s) to resell or otherwise profit from the work."

I prefer the third option. — trlkly 00:58, 17 July 2012 (UTC)


At File:Rongorongo G-r Small Santiago (raw).jpg, the tag says "This tag is not a sufficient claim of fair use", but does not explain why or what to do about it. All it says is to add parameters which are already added. — kwami (talk) 18:56, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Markup issues[edit]

When validating pages where this template is used, the follow errors are shown:

  • The cellpadding attribute on the table element is obsolete. Use CSS instead.
Caused by cellpadding="2". Convert this to CSS.
  • The summary attribute is obsolete. Consider describing the structure of the table in a caption element or in a figure element containing the table; or, simplify the structure of the table so that no description is needed.
This is caused by <code>summary="The non-free use rationale of this image; see WP:NFURG"</code>. The simplest solution is to remove this.
  • Duplicate ID rationale_header.
Caused by id="rationale_header". When this template is included on a page multiple times, the same ID is used. I don't see a use for the ID, thus the simplest fix is to remove it.
  • Duplicate ID rationale_desc.
  • Duplicate ID rationale_src.
  • Duplicate ID rationale_art.
  • Duplicate ID rationale_port.
  • Duplicate ID rationale_reduc.
  • Duplicate ID rationale_purp.
  • Duplicate ID rationale_otherinf.
These are the same as the previous issue. I don't see the need for all of these IDs.

---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 10:42, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Note that "converting" cellpadding="2" to CSS would require either editing MediaWiki:Common.css to add an appropriate class for use here or adding style="padding:2px" to every cell in the table. If possible, it would probably be better to just remove it entirely and use the "standard" padding.
Note that IDs are often present in this sort of template so user scripts of some sort can detect whether the template (and/or a certain parameter) was used. It might be a good idea to check for that before removing them. Anomie 14:48, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Example: File:Homenetmen.png; W3C markup validation for File:Homenetmen.png. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 10:46, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
It looks like the IDs were added by B when the template was created. I have queried him on it. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 10:55, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Well, I don't remember why I would have added them, but I'm going out on a limb and guessing that there were probably IDs in whatever I was copying it from and I just assumed that it was a standard practice to include them. I was strictly a C++ guy back then and didn't really know web standards so I doubt I even knew what HTML IDs were. (Obviously, I do know what they are now and if I were creating the template today, I wouldn't add IDs just for the sake of adding them.) --B (talk) 13:24, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Update at {{Non-free use rationale/sandbox}}. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 22:21, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 15:30, 14 November 2012 (UTC)


Why the hell isn't there an Author-Field ?? --Itu (talk) 02:29, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Good question. I support this, especially since it was discussed above at #Field for NFCC#2?. --Lexein (talk) 17:41, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Original uploader field[edit]

Is this the right place to request an original_uploader= field in all image info templates? If standardized, this could be filled in by the various uploading tools, and respected by the various bots, scripts, and editors who nominate images for deletion, or report that an image has become orphaned. For example: Orphaned non-free media (File:Logo of Pegasus Intellectual Capital Solutions.png), and image for which the original uploader info is not present in the current image html page "File history" section. Of course the Mediawiki revision history (View History at top of page) shows the original uploader (User:IbankingMM), but this is not used by Hazard-Bot AFAIK when reporting problems.
As we all know, resizings and re-uploadings by others over time tend to result in the original uploader's file being deleted, sometimes per WP:NFCC, sometimes due to space conservation.
I don't mind being notified about images which I've touched. But even though I (say) resized the image, I don't necessarily want to take over stewardship of it; that's the original uploader's contribution for which to advocate. But that person is, AFAIK, never notified of pending deletions, if a re-upload/purge cycle has taken place. Hence, the original_uploader= new field for all image description templates. Where should this be discussed? --Lexein (talk) 17:41, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 April 2014[edit] (talk) 06:35, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 06:42, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 9 November 2014[edit]

Please make this change, so that the description and source information detailed in this template can be used by MediaViewer and other tools that require machine readable information, when a {{Information}} template is not present. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 11:54, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Jackmcbarn (talk) 03:48, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 February 2015[edit]

The City of Clinton has a new logo and motto. You Belong Here has replaced History Pride Progress. I need to change the logo on the page. Sincerely, City of Clinton Communications Dept. Communications Dept.Clinton communication (talk) 16:04, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done: @Clinton communication: this is the wrong page to make an edit request on. The correct place would be on the talk page of Clinton, Mississippi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). G S Palmer (talkcontribs) 19:19, 17 February 2015 (UTC)


Many of the NFUR subtemplates are tagged as substitute-only but don't have any explanation why. Does anyone know? – czar 06:21, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 3 October 2015[edit] (talk) 21:55, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

  • Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --Stabila711 (talk) 22:24, 3 October 2015 (UTC)