Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia talk:POTD)
Jump to: navigation, search
Reporting caption errors
Please do not post error reports for today's POTD caption here. Instead, post them to WP:ERRORS. Thank you.


Code Result
Ralaqu.jpg This user enjoys the
Picture of the Day.¤

No more pictures[edit]

There are no more Pictures of the Day after January 29, except for one or two per week in February. I'm not saying that we need pictures; I'm just making sure that someone has thought this through. If it isn't just an archive problem or an "oops I forgot", then we need to make sure the Main Page doesn't have a big red "Not Found" where the picture should be. Art LaPella (talk) 05:22, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Hi Art, sorry for the late reply. As How stated in the above thread, my computer was out of commission for the better part of a month, so he took back the reigns for a couple weeks. How and I have different styles; I tend to keep a two-week bumper, while How tends to schedule one or two days before. That's why we had some empty dates when you posted this comment.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:27, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

POTDPageCreator: Template:POTD/2017-05-07 has unexpected content[edit]

While attempting to create Template:POTD protected/2017-05-07, I found that Template:POTD/2017-05-07 does not begin with {{POTD {{{1|{{{style|default}}}}}}. Please fix it, or create Template:POTD protected/2017-05-07 manually. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. If you have any questions or comments that my operator should see, please post a notice to User talk:AnomieBOT. Thanks! AnomieBOT 22:00, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Monkey selfie[edit]

No idea what forum should be used for this, but I would like to protest in the strongest possible terms against the use of a monkey selfie as PotD on WP. (June 1st)he

This is a copyrighted image, by the human photographer, and WP should not be hosting it, let alone advertising the fact as PotD. Doing so further discredits WP as not observing photographer's copyrights. Certainly to blatantly use it in such a way is deliberately provocative. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:31, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but US courts have disagreed with that claim. There is no question that the work is in the public domain in the US. However, I agree that using it as POTD may be in poor taste. We certainly don't need to be adding insult to injury. howcheng {chat} 17:31, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
US courts had, in relation to a different and earlier image, already given the opinion that animals can't create a copyrightable artwork or hold such copyright. But that's not something that anyone (other than PETA, who get everything wrong) is claiming here anyway.
Nor are US courts arbiters of world copyright: this is a photo taken by a UK photographer, in Indonesia.
Wikipedia's invented view (which hasn't been anywhere near a court) is that this photograph is the work of the monkey, but the monkey can't hold copyright. That's against the US court view (which says that monkeys can't create) and also against European law which holds that the human photographer was the artist responsible, thus holds the copyright. More to the point though, Wikipedia's continual gloating over repeated, prominent use of this image gives a very poor portrayal of Wikipedia, as a copyright pirate that delights in finding opportunities to exploit photographers. That is a long-term harmful viewpoint for WP and WMF to take. PotD should not be encouraging this. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:09, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Arguing about the copyright status of this photo at this point is moot and beyond the scope of this page. Although I agree with you that we don't need to be poking the bear, I will defer to the POTD scheduler, User:Crisco 1492, whether or not we want to feature it as POTD. howcheng {chat} 17:09, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Andy, Wikipedia's view is that the monkey took the photograph, as in "pressed the button that opened the shutter and caused the image to be captured". That is far from identifying the monkey as the "creator" under US copyright law. There is the physical act of taking a picture, nothing more.
Regarding your argument that "US courts [are not] arbiters of world copyright", Wikipedia, with its servers being located in Virginia and its headquarters in California, is bound solely by US copyright law. Even if the image were recognized as copyrighted outside of the United States (a doubtful claim), as stated at Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights, Wikipedia "accepts content that is free in the United States even if it may be under copyright in some other countries"
If the sole claim against using the image is copyright, it is groundless in both US copyright law and in Wikipedia policy. As Howard has said, "Arguing about the copyright status of this photo at this point is moot".  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 04:03, 24 May 2017 (UTC)