Template talk:Attribution

Template:Attribution is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories.

Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. Functionality of the template can be checked using test cases.

user stipulation

Could this template be modified so that if a user is not specified that the template won't leave code showing in the template? I noticed on Image:You're Pitiful.jpg that it now says "This image is copyrighted, however the copyright holder [[:User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] allows the image...". The source is not a wikipedia user, and as such cannot be put as a variable into the template. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 16:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this tag is used in lots of places without specification - the code needs to allow that whole section to be blank if no options are specified. Radagast 05:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally one should be able to insert a username, or a corporation name, and have it link to either the userpage (if the person put |User:Blah) or the wiki article on the corporation (if the person put |Microsoft). I tried fiddling with the code, but am an amateur...either of you are more than welcome to give it a try :) Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 06:21, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I also added a new variable to specify link text - so if you want to link to your user page with your name, you can do {{attribution|User:Tdmalone|Tim Malone}}, for example. I've added some brief instructions to the template page as well. --Tim 22:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

conflicting category usage

Is there any way to cause this template to add the page in question to Category:Images requiring attribution only if the optional coyright-holder argument is not present? As it stands, Category:Images requiring attribution contains a certain number of links to images that are attributed, via this very template. Examples: Image:Don River, TO.jpg, Image:Exo01.jpg. —Steve Summit (talk) 02:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(copied from WP:VPT) I think it's the category name that's misleading: I believe it's meant to be understood as "images with a license that requires the copyright holder to be attributed". The fact the it's a subcategory of Category:Conditional use images would seem to support this interpretation. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 22:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As Ilmari said, my understanding of this category isn't for images requiring a clean-up to specify their attribution, they are for images that are free for public use assuming they are attributed. Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 22:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deprecated?

With the focus on free images, isn't this template a bit deprecated? If you claim an image is copyrighted, you still retain some rights and can revoke usage at any time under copyright law in spite of whatever wording is in the template. Users should be encouraged to release images to public domain or under multi-license GFDL/CC rather than this. You can't have your cake and eat it too. —M (talk • contribs) 17:47, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes...you can. The copyright holder is allowed to put the requirement of attribution as a clause, and there's no reason why not. Sure it's "better" to release it under GFDL or public domain, but you can't simply try to "phase out" copyright by insisting Wiki will no longer recognise it. Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 03:50, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Commas

Would someone familiar with syntax please edit it so that when a name is specified, it reads "The copyright holder of this file, foo, allows anyone..."? It's just a maze of curly brackets to me. I'd try it, but I don't want to break it. — SheeEttin {T/C} 22:03, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

more flexible user specification

I have to say I agree that the template would be more useful if it supported links offsite. Most of the photos on Wikipedia that use attribution-style licenses come from non-Wikipedia users originally. (See Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Attribution.)

Perhaps something like this would work better:

{{attribution|Copyright Holder's Name|url|user=Wikiusername|text=Required attribution text, if any}}

required parameter 1 is the legal name of the copyright holder, e.g. "Joe Smith" or "Pepsico";
required parameter 2 is a URL, preferably the source of the photo, but otherwise any URL that can be used to contact the author, including a mailto: link;
the optional "user" parameter links to the copyright owner's Wikipedia user page, if they have one;
the optional "text" parameter can be used to supply the exact attribution text required by the copyright, if any.

This would yield:

The copyright holder of this file Copyright Holder's Name (User:Wikiusername) allows anyone to use it for any purpose, provided that the copyright holder is properly attributed. Redistribution, derivative work, commercial use, and all other use is permitted. Required attribution text goes here.

Ideas welcome. Tim Pierce 04:11, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 12 December 2012

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Hi. I'd like to suggest we change the icon on this template with File:Commons-emblem-copyright.svg. The latter resembles the red copyright icon and the registered trademark icon which are already being used in copyright templates in Wikipedia and looks like this:

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 10:42, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thanks. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 10:20, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adding an e-mail parameter

A TfD was recently closed regarding {{CopyrightFreeAttributeEmail}}. This template was essentially a duplicate of this template, but included the following e-mail parameter:

Furthermore, the copyright holder requests a courtesy email of use be sent to '''{{{2}}}''', but not required for use of image.

Should this code (or something optional/similar) be added to this template? I should note that I am neutral on this subject, but am starting the discussion due to concern expressed at the TfD. Primefac (talk) 17:48, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Machine-readable metadata

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I’ve placed an implementation of this template that includes machine-readable markers in the sandbox as part of the File metadata cleanup drive. Please deploy. A demonstration that the sandbox version is functional can be seen at Template:Attribution/testcases. —RP88 ^(talk) 20:00, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:02, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 21 December 2018

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

It doesn't seem to cause errors, but I suspect the curly quote in <span class="licensetpl_attr”> should be a straight quote. — Anomalocaris (talk) 08:31, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:34, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 4 October 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Add the content from this template's sandbox. This allows the use of custom attribution text Matr4x-404 (talk) 22:30, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: You can already use custom attribution text. @Matr4x-404 you can do this by using a double pipe "||" as shown in the template documentation to add whatever text you may need. Adding another attribution format in the form of large text at the top would require consensus first. Terasail ^[✉️] 17:19, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]