Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dank (talk | contribs) at 05:34, 4 July 2011 (quarterly policy update). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

(Your article's descriptive subtitle here)

•  E-mail
•  Facebook
• [REDACTED]  Twitter
• [REDACTED]  LinkedIn
• [REDACTED]  Reddit
•  Digg

Text text text text text.

In brief

• Good article monthly roundup: This June, the number of good articles rose to 12,237. This means that, for the first time, 1 in 300 of Misplaced Pages's articles have been quality assessed as passing the good article criteria. This proportion has been steadily improving since the good articles programme was launched in 2005. An additional 1 in 1100 articles have attained the higher quality featured article status, although this proportion has remained relatively steady for several years. This month's increase of 194 GAs was somewhat better than May's 181, but was still well below the project's average for the last 12 months. One controversial suggestion discussed this month as a solution to the perennial nominations backlog, was encouraging nominators to review each other's articles. This received a mixed reception from experienced reviewers due to concerns about apparent conflicts of interest during quid pro quo reviews.
• NARA Wikipedian in Residence interviewed by Wikinews: User:Dominic has been interviewed for Wikinews about the position of Wikipedian in Residence at the National Archives and Records Administration. See "Wikinews interviews US National Archives Wikipedian in Residence".
• The quarterly policy update is available at WP:Update. Contributors are welcome for this and future updates.

Discuss this story

Re the DMCA take-down issue, whatever happened to the doctrine of ostensible authority? – ukexpat (talk) 13:09, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

On the same issue, why haven't the pictures be uploaded as fair use to en Misplaced Pages? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 15:48, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Although there was apparent authority at the time, the copyright owner has directly refused permission. As such we have no right to use the images. As for using on enwiki, they'd be hosted on US servers, so we'd just get a new take down notice, surely? If the original permission-giver had been the copyright owner themselves rather than a representative, it'd be harder for a take-down notice to be enforced, as he would have directly given a release under a suitable license. Although it's a shame to lose the images, they presumably aren't so essential as to make any articles they were used in useless - or can we expect some article deletions as a result of the illustrative pictures no longer being available? -- PhantomSteve.alt/talk\ 18:07, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

If anyone wishes to restore one or more of these images as NFC compliant images on En, mail me and I will send them to you. The firm should also be informed of these uses. If another take-down request is issued, you then have the option under the DMCA of issuing a counter claim claiming it as fair use. See How to File a DMCA Counter Claim. Dcoetzee 19:25, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

A far more insidious problem occurs with TI calculator encryption keys. These were uploaded by an anonymous source, taken down as a result of DMCA as an "office action". Because it is an office action no-one can reverse it, the "office action" won't be withdrawn unless a DMCA counter-claim is made, and only the anonymous editor is allowed to make a counter claim. Therefore the "office action" rules, as they stand, allow anyone to effectively protect the unprotectable, by uploading it to WP via a puppet, then issuing a DMCA takedown. Rich Farmbrough, 15:15, 16 July 2011 (UTC).

• Misplaced Pages Signpost archives 2011-07