Hokay.
As of this posting we have over 2,200 articles on the site with images that have not been checked by staff. I am leading off with this information so we all understand the enormity of the task ahead of us to bring the entire Wiki into compliance with our licensing and sourcing requirements. This thread is meant to help solidify staff support for a course of action. I've been tasked with handling this problem by licensing and I think now is a good time to start talking about solutions.
First of all let's have a little refresher on what a properly source and licensed image is. A source must be posted in the discussion page of an article. That source must indicate a Creative Commons License or have been released by the image's creator for use on the wiki or that the image must have entered the public domain. Additionally the image's Creative Commons License must not include a no-derivatives clause.
Furthermore the source of the image must originate offsite. Images which source back to the wiki itself do not count for the purposes of proper image attribution. This will be more important for legacy image enforcement than it is for new image enforcement which is why I'm emphasizing it here.
Before talking about the process by which legacy images will be dealt with, let's reflect on the success of our previous initiative on this topic. We have arrested the growth of unsourced images on the site completely. That 2,200 article count from earlier is the same count it was 8 months ago, minus a fairly minor number of legacy images we've dealt with over that time. In fact the process in question is so successful that only 2 or 3 people (Lily, specifically, deserves a lot of the credit for this) have been able to keep up with new image enforcement fairly comfortably.
The Process
I believe a modified version of this process will be a good method for dealing with legacy images. We will simply start with the earliest articles and work our way forward. Relevant staff will be directed to perform the following actions when performing legacy image enforcement:
1: Utilize reverse image lookup services to determine if the image is in compliance with our license. This might include google image searches and TinEye reverse image search. Staff will need to be trained somewhat in the proper usage of these tools.
2: If a compliant source is found, it is to be posted in the page's discussion thread as a staff post in the highest position it can be posted (for visibility). Generally this means a reply to the first post in the discussion.
3: If a compliant source is not found the image code is to be removed from the article. A staff post must be made in the discussion thread (again in the highest position possible for visibility) The image file is not to be deleted (This allows the author to more easily fix the problem) from the article itself.
4: The author is to receive a message explaining the issue and linking them to the relevant forum thread from the staff that enforces the page. This will also include directions not to re-add the image to the page without proper sourcing and licensing. This message will include a small paragraph-long tutorial on how to look up images sources themselves and what properly sourced images are.
5: Once the image sourcing is sorted one way or the other, the page will have its _image tag replaced with _cc by the enforcing staff member.
You will note that this process takes place all at once, without the 48 hour waiting period we allow for new articles. The 48 hour waiting period is simply to allow newer authors the opportunity to add their sources before we go meddling in their articles. All legacy images are between 8 months and 9 years old as of this posting, and the author has had ample opportunity to source the images in that time.
Immediate enforcement allows for a timely conclusion of this work. We're talking about over 2,200 articles, and the enforcers will need the freedom to cut through wide swaths of the backlog when they get free time.
Big articles.
We have an additional problem, of course. A large number of highly rated and iconic articles also contain images which do not comply with our current images policy. These images must be removed as well, and I don't think we should wait longer for these to receive replacement images than how long we wait for any other article.
We have a number of highly qualified and talented artists in the community who are also invested in the works here. I believe most of the iconic articles will find a number of people willing to create or find compliant images.
Directing such a process is beyond my expertise and honestly it's a bit beyond the scope of my mandate with regards to legacy images enforcement, but I have given it some thought regardless.
My original thought was to hold a contest for replacement images. After talking to Roget (who I approached for his advice on how such an off site community contest might be held), I was convinced that this approach would be far too unwieldy and would likely take too long. However, I do believe we can compile a list of "notable articles" that need replacement images and allow for submissions from the community.
Either the images subteam or community outreach or licensing or all staff or something entirely new can be created to judge and verify the sources of submissions. I'd suggest that one article be handled at a time, concluded, and then the next article can receive submissions. We'll start with the highest rated articles and work our way down until we're satisfied that the most iconic of articles have been sourced properly.
Also, important note: Though we will be removing images immediately once we get to an article, I would not feel comfortable adding a community sourced image to someone's article until we've at least attempted to contact them and get their opinion on the submissions and/or blessing for us to choose. I think a month of waiting for a response is enough before we add the new image in.
So what do I want from you?
None of this is set in stone and all of it is just a proposed process. I'd like your opinions on everything I've set out in this thread. Once I've solidified down something I think most of us can support, I'll create a voting thread. I imagine that may be a ways off but I could be wrong.
Once we have a solid process for enforcement in hand, I'll begin recruitment of individuals to do this work. I suspect even with the streamlined process above we're looking at over a year's worth of work. I hope for a shorter timeline, but reflecting on previous ventures I am not optimistic.
Also considering the scope and importance of getting this process right, anyone with O5 access is invited to post their opinions here. Furthermore if anyone in the community has an opinion send me a wikidot PM and I will post it in this thread (with a response from myself, if it is warranted).
So let's begin the discussion. I'll put a month long timer on this.