Not sure how DMCA requests work, but do they need proof? Seems a bit dumb to take down the page on Mothers Day, which I'm fairly sure does not contain infringing material. Also how would a page be restored to the results? ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me!05:40, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, they do not need any proof, which is why most DMCA notices are bogus. The only way the page can be restored in Google results is if someone files a DMCA counter-notice with Google, which could be done by anyone that has added content to that page. Nosferattus (talk) 03:25, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I imagine some bit of AI is automatically sending out these DMCA takedowns and Google simple complies with them all. There should be a significant punishment for those sending in fake DMCA takedowns but that would require an act of government I imagine. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:53, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"To what extent is the Wikimedia Commons community invested in the dissemination of knowledge via images on Wikipedia articles?" Pretty heavily, in my experience. But it is the Wikipedia community (rather, each one of the 300 or so of them) who decides what is shown on (or linked to from) their Wikipedia, not the Commons community. [Courtesy ping to User:SDeckelmann-WMF ] Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits13:42, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Re Deckelmann's comments on Wikimedia Commons: There's not as many videos honestly, but a lot of images, really incredible ones that's false, there are also many videos including pretty incredible ones. Over 100 000 videos from YouTube alone, and Google & DuckDuckGo apparently censor them from their 'Videos' tab. One example category of high-quality videos is this but there's also many other ones (many of them in here) (btw video2commons used to import nearly all of these seems currently broken for a month and WMF is not taking care of it but leaving it all to volunteers). the primary focus of the Commons community is the collecting of free content, rather than its dissemination. Yes, there is not much consideration so far about whether the platform is actually used, useful, and known – a top issue in that regard is, I think, how it's indexed in Web search engines (see the proposal linked above). Two further proposals for example would be to integrate Wikimedia Commons into the open source NewPipe mobile app and to improve to Commons app (e.g. enable playing videos). I think there's a lot that could be done if we were to think about this system holistically and the ways in which they, the different projects complement or don't complement each other. and How much more powerful and effective would it be if we were really thinking hard about the ways in which we could showcase all of the incredible images Agree – see m:Community Wishlist/Wishes/Suggest media set in Wikidata items for their Wikipedia articles. Also see this discussion at Commons talk:Media knowledge beyond Wikipedia. --Prototyperspective (talk) 16:26, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Minor point, does the "Video" tab of Google search send the user to anywhere besides YouTube? I find that the tab gets me only YouTube, but using the general tab and adding the word "video" to the search item opens up the world of clips, merely heavily weighted to YouTube. Jim.henderson (talk) 01:58, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, not just YouTube and Vimeo but lots of even quite small sites. Just made a short check and it showed dailymotion, IGN, facebook, mubi, shutterstock, tiktok, Videoclip.bg, etc. Also news sites like dw.com, cnn or theguardian. Note the filetype is in the url on Commons too, e.g. ending with .webm. Btw, PeerTube tech could be an option if there ever are any load issues. Also I think we should try to make Commons categories (exampleexamples) show up when people search the Web for e.g. "subject images" or "subject free media" etc. And video2commons works again now. Prototyperspective (talk) 17:35, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2025-03-22/News and notes
← Back to News and notes