Wikipedia talk:Non-free content

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Non-free content page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74: 14 days

The project page associated with this talk page is an official policy on Wikipedia. Policies have wide acceptance among editors and are considered a standard for all users to follow. Please review policy editing recommendations before making any substantive change to this page. Always remember to keep cool when editing, and don't panic.

To help centralize discussions and keep related topics together, Wikipedia talk:Non-free content criteria redirects here.

CC BY-NC

It would be helpful if this page specifically mentioned the CC BY-NC license to make it clear how it applies. I'd add it myself, but I'm not sure where it might fit best. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 04:54, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NC - non-commercial, which means it is not free for reuse by anyone. So its considered a non-free license. This is stated in the lede at the very top "use works for any purpose in any medium, even commercially." Masem (t) 05:04, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm saying that the license itself should be mentioned, because right now "even commercially" is the only reference to this sort of thing. The page doesn't explicitly say anything to the effect of "non-commercial licenses such as CC BY-NC are required to comply with non-free use requirements", which seems like a pretty key detail to be unspecific about. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 05:10, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a section of non-exhaustive list of acceptable and unacceptable licenses, then. — Masem (t) 05:40, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on criteria for use in lists

Hi all,

At Turing Award, we've had a longstanding issue with well-intentioned users adding non-free-use images, for which we eventually had to add disclaimers in the article source like this:

> Per WP:NFCC, non-free images are not to be used on lists. If you have any questions or would like to help with sourcing free-use images in the public domain, please start a discussion on the talk page.

I'm wondering about the accuracy of the above, though. Is it true that non-free images used on large lists is not generally appropriate? I can't quite find this substantiated in the main article page here (WP:NFCC) as it doesn't mention lists in particular. Thoughts on this would be welcome! Caleb Stanford (talk) 19:24, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFLISTS provides guidance on use of non-free images in list articles. There is no blanket prohibition on use of non-free images in a list article, but the particular case in the Turing Awards article is covered by point 4. If another non-free image of an element of an article is used elsewhere within Wikipedia, referring to its other use is preferred over repeating its use on the list and/or including a new, separate, non-free image. -- Whpq (talk) 01:06, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While there's no blanket prohibition, in practice we would never use a non-free image in a list like this, even if the person is dead, and even if we would never find a free image of the person. Some lists like this remain in a permanent state where some elements never have a picture. That's ok. --Hammersoft (talk) 01:16, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Free illustration vs. non-free photo at Talk:Godfrey_Binaisa

Could use additional input at Talk:Godfrey_Binaisa#Restored_non-free_photo, regarding the usage of a free illustration vs. a non-free photo in a biography of a deceased person. Thanks, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 19:52, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amending NFCC#1

Given that the community has placed general restrictions on the use of AI generated images, at least for certain topics, it may be appropriate to modify nfcc#1 to acknowledge that non all free images are usable. So something like (bolded is new) Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose and meets all applicable policies and guidelines. Masem (t) 14:00, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adherence to other applicable policies and guidelines is implicit in the use of all images. Perhaps it could be added as a clarifying note or example in the unacceptable images examples. -- Whpq (talk) 17:48, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think that would be a good change. I was not sure whether a non-free image could be used in place of a free AI one that could be created, even if the use of AI is banned (it isn't a policy or guideline yet). I certainly don't think it is implicit, and adding a clarifying note to unacceptable images examples does not resolve the issue. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 03:56, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I don't understand what this would clarify and how that relates to AI images. Is the thought behind this that under the current NFCC wording, someone could say make an AI image of a person or an AI album cover for a recent album and thus that "or could be created" is not met? CMD (talk) 08:26, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The case arose from a user trying to add an AI image to Science fantasy. Given the newest of the genre, most of any work representing it is likely to be copyrighted. While AI could generate an appropriate image that would be freely licensed (since under US copyright rules, AI generated images can't hold a copyright), that would not be a suitable replacement per this clarification as the community has generally said no to using AI images (save where the context of AI generated images is relevant). Masem (t) 12:11, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at WP:MCQ § List of Alexandrov Ensemble soloists

You are invited to join the discussion at WP:MCQ § List of Alexandrov Ensemble soloists. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:18, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]