Image templates and Image Policy FAQ

[rbarenblat]

Hi everyone! We've been hard at work on refining our proposed Image Policy FAQ, and at long last, here it is -- below the cut. We hope that it answers your questions about images on Fanlore (ranging from "How do I add an image to a Fanlore page?" to "What kinds of images on Fanlore can I expect to have warnings?") Along with this FAQ, we're debuting a set of image templates which we hope will make the uploading of images (along with their meta-data) easier.

We welcome questions, comments, and feedback on the FAQ and on the image templates. Members of the wiki committee and members of the Board will be keeping an eye on this post and we'll do our best to answer questions in a timely way. RL does occasionally keep one or another of us offline; thanks in advance for bearing with us.

With no further ado...



QUESTION: How do I add an image to a Fanlore page?

There are two steps which you can do in either order. You need to upload the image, using our image template and then you need to link it in the appropriate page. Probably the easiest way is to edit the page you want to include the image on and add the link first. It should look like this:

[[Name_for_your_image_with_no_spaces.jpg|thumb|This is a caption for my image!]]

When you save this edit, you will then see a red link for the image name. When you click on this, you will be taken to the upload form.

QUESTION: What information should I include when uploading an image?

When you are uploading an image, you will see a small form like this:



Please include as much information about the image as you can in the *Summary* field. Please edit the image page itself (i.e. access 'edit' on the page that you are on after uploading an image) to add the following information if you have it:

Creator: who made the image

Description: a text description of what's in the image (helpful for people using screenreaders or browsing without images)

Copyright: whether this image is in the public domain or if the copyright is owned by you or someone else.

Source: where you got the image from (eg, the URL if you found it online, "I scanned this from a zine I purchased in 1997 at Escapade," etc)

When you're editing the image page itself, please use the following template: http://fanlore.org/wiki/Template:ImageSummary

QUESTION: Do I need to add anything else, or can the image stand on its own?

When you upload an image, you'll be prompted to offer information which will go in the image's summary box (e.g. creator, description, copyright, source.) Images go on their own pages; article pages can link to those image pages, and that's how the image will come to appear alongside some text. Remember to use our image summary template to describe the image (it's here: http://fanlore.org/wiki/Template:ImageSummary)

If you're uploading an image for a specific article page, please include some text about the image you've uploaded within that article: explain why the image is important or interesting, tell readers what trends it illustrates or represents, write about why you wanted to preserve the image in the first place.

QUESTION: Can I upload copyrighted images on Fanlore without the permission of the creator?

Yes, as long as doing so would be a fair use! Here are some key aspects of fair use of images:

First, please make sure you give credit to the creator! (It’s also helpful for future editors if you make a note where you obtained the image.) Attribution is very important; we want to give honor to the fanartist(s) who created the work in the first place.

Second, the images should there to illustrate a point. Please consider whether putting the image on Fanlore adds new meaning or message. If you're going to upload an image, please also include some commentary on why the image is noteworthy. Fanlore is not an archive, so it's not appropriate to upload all of the artwork created by a given fan artist just to create a gallery of that artist’s work. Instead, we might upload a selection of images to illustrate that artist’s style or range, alongside some text about that artist and their work, and then link to the artist’s personal website instead. Or an image might be used to illustrate a particular fannnish trope, or a particular trend in fanart. Or, if the page is about the artwork itself, the article should make note what is interesting or important or beautiful about it.

Third, you should use the resolution/image quality you need to make that point. For instance, if you were working on a Fanlore article talking about illustrated borders on zine covers, or a particular artistic technique in icon-making, you might need a very high-resolution image to make your point. If you were writing a page about the details of a particular artwork, you’d want a good enough copy to be able to show those details. In other cases, a lower-resolution image will be enough.

QUESTION: How do I know what resolution is appropriate?

This is a very good question, and the answer is: use what resolution you need to make your point. Please use your best judgment! The OTW Legal team will review cases if a complaint is made.

QUESTION: What about images I've already uploaded? Do I have to go replace all of them with low-resolution versions?

You do not! If a complaint arises, and a review by the Legal team concludes that a lower resolution image would be more appropriate in a given case, it can be replaced then.

QUESTION: I am a fan artist and low-resolution images of my work are posted on Fanlore. They look bad! I want my work displayed in better quality.

If you give permission, we will be happy to upload higher-resolution images of your work to replace the low-resolution ones as quickly as our editing resources allow. (You are also welcome to do this yourself, of course, but we will make an effort to do it for you if you are unfamiliar with wiki editing.) We can also arrange to make sure that low-image versions are linked to higher-resolution versions on your site or elsewhere, if you provide us with the links.

QUESTION: I am a fan artist and I don't want any of my work displayed on Fanlore. Will you take it down?

As described above, some uses of images without permission are fair use, and as such we don't remove images automatically on request by the creator. Protecting fair use rights is hugely important for the benefit of all fan creators -- these are what give fan artists the right to make their work in the first place.

However, we are all fans here and want to respect your concerns as well. We will gladly work with you to ensure that your work is being used according to fair use rules. We will also make sure that your work is credited appropriately, link back to your own site, and if you wish use higher resolution versions of your work.

QUESTION: Wait! Someone uploaded my image without permission and it's not being used in any article. What should I do?

You have options! One option is to add text which contextualizes the image, or to ask the person who uploaded the image to do so. Another option is to leave a note on the talk page asking for the image to be deleted because its use doesn't fit fair use parameters.

QUESTION: What kinds of images on Fanlore can I expect to have warnings?

Images that are sexually explicit, depict rape or sexual assault, or depict people or characters who are underage engaging in sexual activity should have warnings on Fanlore. Users are responsible for reading and heeding the warnings provided by the person who loaded in the image. Risk-averse users should keep in mind that not all content will carry full warnings and consider whether they should set up filters for viewing images, as described below. If you think an image should have a warning, feel free to add the warning; bear in mind that other users may edit the page.

QUESTION: I just saw a disturbing image with no warning! How do I add a warning?

We have templates for Sexually Explicit Images, Images Depicting Non-con and Sexual Assault, and Underage Persons in Image. They can be found in the Templates section of the wiki, and here are direct links:

http://fanlore.org/wiki/Template:SexuallyExplicitImage

http://fanlore.org/wiki/Template:ImageDepictingNon-conOrSexualAssault

http://fanlore.org/wiki/Templates:UnderagePersonsInImage

You can add a warning by editing the page and adding the appropriate template.

QUESTION: Can I filter out all images when I am browsing on Fanlore?

Yes, you can. We have detailed instructions for how to filter out all images when browsing Fanlore. You can find them here: http://fanlore.org/wiki/Help:Filtering_images

QUESTION: I have other questions about images which aren't covered here.

Contact us and ask, and we'll do our best to answer promptly!

Comments

[ratcreature]

But it is a confrontation. There are interests that conflict, and not both are going to be fulfilled completely. To pretend that it is not a confrontation is dishonest. Right now you seem to obscure the wiki's intended course of action when such a conflict arises in its own FAQ, because put plainly it is not what fandom considers okay.

What should be the case is that if fanart is uploaded without permission and distributed on the wiki, and then the fanartist explicitly objects, the burden is on the wiki to make a really good case that they absolutely need this image to achieve their goal, and if that is not the case it needs to be deleted in accordance with the artists wishes. I'm not saying the fanartist's wishes need to trump everything else automatically, but right now artist wishes count for nothing, because the default amounts to "we keep it either way, but we'll try to make it useful in the wiki if right now we just grabbed your art as random eye candy, and if you ask we even link back to you and give you credit for your own art."

If someone wants to "document" fanart that the artist does not want archived on fanlore, they can still to do it in text talking about it, just like we do with fanfic. I'm not saying an objection should stop an article about a piece of fanart. The wiki doesn't archive copies of fanfic and fanvids to document their history either. With plenty of articles about fanfic, I'm a bit lost because they are in the zines, I haven't read the story, no way to check it out, and yet because fanlore respects authors more than artists, the fanfic text is still not put on fanlore as pdf for my reading pleasure. And especially in case of fanart still online anyone can see the art anyway if it is linked, it's just not embedded to make the wiki prettier.

[madgirl]

I left a broader (and a bit rambling) response to some of the general points here to facetofcathy below, but I did want to make a note about the fanfic/fanart comparison. One issue is that it usually is possible to talk about fanfic pretty clearly just by describing and quoting it - whereas "quoting" art is almost always going to involve showing it, just because the way we understand visual images is different than the way we understand text. If we're talking about preserving the meaning behind a discussion of a work, then if a piece of fanfic disappears from where it is linked to, then the quoting/discussion will probably still make sense, whereas with art it is much less likely that a description can do justice to the commentary. Unfortunately it's just a difference in the medium. As far as how much of the art is appropriate in order to maintain that meaning, that's why we consider issues like resolution, size, etc.

[ratcreature]

It is quite possible to describe artists and art, and talk about it without showing it, much like authors can be covered without quotations. Most of the fic author pages I've come across on fanlore (like for example the DS author profiles) don't quote anything from the fic but rather quote reviews and feedback to the fic, yet almost all artist pages show a whole gallery of art without talking about any of the pieces. I assume that is because quotations aren't pretty but pictures are and it's no almost work to include the images you grabbed, but it is effort to say something about an artist.

Further, there almost no articles about individual pieces of fanart that discuss that piece of fanart specifically, while there are some pieces about individual vids and stories. Actually I can't think of a single one article about a single fanart picture. Individual pieces are rarely even discussed in any way in other articles. Fanart is used to show a zine (often many, many art pieces from a single zine), to show a trope, or in galleries gathering everything from an artist that found its way onto fanlore.

I have started several articles covering art genres on Fanlore (like the Still life or documentation/ephemera article) and managed to be fairly comprehensible (I hope) without including images, and even if an image was needed to cover a whole genre it is unlikely that you absolutely need the fanart of an artist who objects, and couldn't use art from an artist who is fine with it.

[madgirl]

You're right in that it is possible to describe art without showing it; it's just the case that many people will prefer to. As I noted to frogspace below, part of the point of this policy is to clarify that Fanlore isn't an archive, and to encourage people to think about why/how they're using an image if they choose to. And it may well be that someone will choose to use text to describe something instead, as you did. We just don't want to suggest that people can't use images when appropriate. And if conflicts with artists come up then those will be handled using the principles discussed below.

[frogspace.livejournal.com]

One issue is that it usually is possible to talk about fanfic pretty clearly just by describing and quoting it - whereas "quoting" art is almost always going to involve showing it, just because the way we understand visual images is different than the way we understand text.

That's one reason why I want art (and other images that are far less controversial, like for example screenshots, banners, icons, promo pictures, etc.) on the article pages, also because it looks much better with art than without. However, documenting art by describing it is no more difficult that documenting a story by describing it, and showing doesn't have to mean showing the whole image. When I want to talk about Spock's alien genitalia I could show a thumbnail of his double-ridged penis from one of Gayle F's works, I wouldn't have to show the whole image. Showing just the penis? That would be quoting a piece of art.

If I want more (and I do! I want so much more! I LOVE fanart!!!), I need to consider that by uploading an image to Fanlore the wiki is archiving that image. Uploading a piece of fanart I copied from another page (That's a different situation than taking a photo or making a scan of something you own; creating the digital file to begin with) is uploading a piece of fanart to an archive. And Fanlore functions in this regard like most archives. You can browse the wiki by fandom categories and just click on the images you like to see the full-size version of. From there you can follow a link to a page where the image is used, but you don't have to. You can just admire the art, maybe save it to your computer, then return to the fandom category and pick the next image to watch, all that without ever clicking on any text pages. If it works like an archive, it should follow the fannish norms about archiving someone's work (in most cases that means getting permission when you use the digital file the artist created on another archive).

Fanart isn't just something you can grab to illustrate a point (any point, apparently it's okay as long as it's not completely pointless), it's also a fanwork. And as such it should be treated like a fanwork.

[madgirl]

These are really good points. And distinguishing Fanlore's function from that of an archive is one of the reasons that this image policy has come into being. What we're trying to encourage is the serious use of the wiki for commentary, and for people to think about why they're uploading an image, and whether the use would be just as appropriate with a thumbnail or low-resolution image and a link to the full version. Fanlore isn't an archive, but we also don't want people to think that they can't use images of fanart when appropriate. I totally get why you think it is problematic for someone to just throw up an image casually, but our hope is that this policy will actually make editors think more about how and why they're using it.

[frogspace.livejournal.com]

Fanlore isn't an archive

I hear you, but saying so doesn't make it true. Fanlore currently hosts 14,801 images. That are circa 1,400 images more than there are article pages. If someone asked me where they could find some good K/S art, I would point them to this link: http://fanlore.org/wiki/Category:Star_Trek_TOS_K/S_Art

The wiki is freaking amazing and such a treasure trove that I don't even know what to say. However, to keep it this way and to build on what we have, I think it's vitally important to look at what the wiki actually is not just at what it's supposed to be. Writing something like "I've seen a piece of fanart in another archive that would be perfect for a page I'm working on. Can I use it?" and then give instructions that are in compliance with fannish norms for that kind of situation *and* fit the general fair use idea shouldn't be that difficult.

[rbarenblat]

But it is a confrontation. There are interests that conflict, and not both are going to be fulfilled completely. To pretend that it is not a confrontation is dishonest.

Yes, of course, if two people have conflicting interests, then no one is served by pretending that their interests are the same. But it's important to me that the conversation not be a confrontation -- I think once two fans start regarding each other as adversaries, then the conversation is already in trouble! I would rather assume that we're on the same "side" and see if we can find a way to understand one another's point of view, instead of going into a conversation with the assumption that it's going to be confrontational.

I'm at work today and my online time is a bit limited, but I wanted to say that we appreciate your feedback on this policy, and we'll do our best to take your concerns into account as we tweak and polish the policy over the next few weeks.

[ratcreature]

Maybe it's a communication style issue, how this approach comes across to me. I hear there are significant differences across the Atlantic compared to here, how disagreements and such are handled and what people are most comfortable with. E.g. I don't think a conversation is "in trouble" just because it is confrontational at the outset, actually to me that feels often more honest and productive than some wishy-washy thing where a lot seems to be some feel-good-phrases (like in the customer service language menioned earlier) while the conflict is obscured. Like, in your FAQ you even say "[we] want to respect your concerns as well" to make the already vague "we respect your concerns" even vaguer by saying that you "want to respect" rather than that you actually respect anything, let alone might act on concerns expressed.

[rbarenblat]

This is a really good point. Yes, I think you're right; I think that different conversational styles are normative on different sides of the Atlantic (and I'm sure the same could be said comparing either side of the Atlantic with other places in the world), and that can contribute to misunderstandings. Thank you for reminding us of that.

On a more personal note: I think it may also be true that some people are naturally inclined to be non-confrontational (and I am one of those people! :-) I may be erring on the side of being less confrontational because that is how I am comfortable, and I naturally assume that others are also comfortable under the same circumstances which make me comfortable. (Which may not, of course, be true at all!)

[(Anonymous)]

Ditto to what ratcreature said. From my POV the discussion is very civil and constructive. Please don't mistake different discussion styles as an indication of trouble. Being as direct and honest when addressing conflicts is a perfectly normal approach over here. Keep in mind that at least two people in this discussion belong to a culture where it is not uncommon to say "no" when your grandmother asks if you liked her (horrible) birthday present. ;)

[(Anonymous)]

*sigh*

Still not logged in. -_-

~Doro (frogspace)

[rbarenblat]

Thank you, Doro, for joining ratcreature in reminding us that different discussion styles prevail in different parts of the world! That's a really useful point for us all to keep in mind.

The horrible birthday present example made me laugh because omg, if I answered that question honestly my whole family would be appalled and angry with me! That's a great example of the differing cultural contexts we're all bringing to this conversation...

What's hard for me personally (speaking now as an individual, not on behalf of the committee or the org) is that I find confrontation very uncomfortable. So I need to figure out how to participate in conversations like this one in a way which will feel honest and upfront to ratcreature and to you (and to others who feel similarly) -- but which won't leave me feeling anxious or like I'm being attacked by my fellow fans! :-) That's obviously my responsibility, and I'll work on figuring it out, but it's definitely a work-in-progress.

[facetofcathy]

I want to clarify what I said about customer service language, tone and intent.

The example I used, your call is important to us, is a bad mode of communication, not because of the chirpy tone, but because the context it is used in, being kept on hold for an eternity and then connecting with someone often tasked with actively not helping you, directly contradicts the truth of the statement.

Posing a question, will you remove my art if I ask, and then never answering it makes the we respect you language a lie. That's why I think its a bad form of communication that will predictably raise hackles.

When I am discussing this policy, I am talking about my personal reading of it as text and my speculation about how other fans might read it. I am not criticizing the intent of the authors or Fanlore or the OTW on this issue. At this time, I have no idea what the intent is.

The OTW is an expressly political organization, and I support them for that reason. The issue at hand, the exercise of Fair Use, has an expressly political component to it. To assume that all fans are on side with those politics and will not immediately see Fanlore and the OTW as the other side is not how I would expect this discussion to play out should it arise.

Concrete suggestions:

1. Define Fair Use in the FAQ, and acknowledge that it's a US doctrine, not universal.
2. Either reword the question about removal, or answer it more directly.
3. Put in some language about editors getting permission in the first place and how they should record it.
4. Scrap any suggestions that fans should contact editors directly about removal, or use the talk pages as the only avenue of communication, and include links to the appropriate contact forms for people who do not wish to have a Fanlore account.

[rbarenblat]

These are very useful suggestions, and they're on the agenda for tonight's meeting of the wikicommittee (as are the other suggestions and issues which have been raised in these discussion threads) -- thank you! More coming soon, after the committee meets and we actually have a collective response to all of this. :-)