Policy Talk:Copyrights


We really need a policy on copyrights. Do we want to go the full hog, like wikipedia and require editors to make a fair use claim for usage of copyrighted images? Do we want to bar all copyrighted material? (Unlikely to work, for obvious reasons.) Etc. --Xoid 16:48, 29 November 2006 (CST)

I agree, this should be one of our top priorities. Are there any templates for policies we look over and choose? Nicjansma 21:26, 29 November 2006 (CST)
Templates? As in, something we could base our policy on or as in Wiki Templates? Either way, the answer is 'yes', but I'd prefer not to drudge up a bunch of links for both; finding a variety of sources just for one is enough work. --Xoid 21:51, 29 November 2006 (CST)
One of the reasons I didn't try and tackle that issue just yet is because we're in a more unique situation than my experience at Wikipedia provides for, since canon material is required for articles to be written. Either the policy will be simple ("re-write everything before posting it here") or an allowance is made for material to be re-posted here (MechGround is the only site I know of to have that, and I personally don't want to see advertisements and disclaimers to be displayed on each page). But...I would like to be able to provide TROs here, which seems critical (to me) to having a wiki as a storehouse of usable knowledge. CJKeys has done an excellent job of re-creating the fluff here through original writing, but based upon canon fluff. (I really want to have all the gaming data here...we already include some of it, but have it diffused by displaying it in a new format, via the infoboxes.)--Revanche (admin) 01:19, 30 November 2006 (CST)

Raising Its Head Again[edit]

Ebakunin is the fourth member to discuss the need for this to be completed. To be honest, I just don't feel smart enough on the subject to start it. I'd be glad to weigh in, but I really don't want to start anything that could either restrict us in what we are allowed to do, nor do i want the site to get in trouble. To be honest, unless someone does feel smart enough to tackle this, I suggest bouncing it back at Nic...sorry, Nic. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 22:25, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I copied and modified the copyrights page from the Star Wars Wiki (located here). It's a start. Smiley.gif --Ebakunin (talk|contribs) 22:45, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
You might want to check out BattleTechWiki:Copyright. --Scaletail 23:09, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, Scaletail, I didn't even know about that. I suggest moving "Copyright" to "Copyrights", as the site's underlying code automatically links to this page (i.e. we can't futz with it). --Ebakunin (talk|contribs) 23:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Of course. It used to go there. --Scaletail 23:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, now you both made me feel stupid. :P I thought Ebakunin's first take was rather awesome, and the fact that I had modified Scaletail's section not even 48 hours ago....well, I'm off to find a gas oven. Seriously, however you guys want to go, I'm fine with either (though I'm leaning to the specific nature of the singular form, with adaptions brought in from Ebakunin's take). --Revanche (talk|contribs) 00:13, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Using the original art of BattleTech covers[edit]

What is Sarna's stance on using the original images that become book covers? For example, Tan Ho Sim's cover of Divided We Fall is based on this image. I'd like to upload the original image for the Dominator entry instead of using the novel cover. Is this allowed? Thanks. --Ebakunin (talk|contribs) 16:14, 5 December 2020 (EST)

I am of the opinion that we should not be putting book covers in 'Mech articles, so I would be more than happy for you to upload the original. As long as it is properly credited it should be fine from a copyright stand point under fair use, If Deviant art has a message function or there are other contact details you could drop Tan a message and ask for his permission. --Dmon (talk) 16:30, 5 December 2020 (EST)
I find that I am of the opposite opinion from our esteemed Dmon.
"Fair use" would not apply as far as I understand it, because it only allows you to violate copyright for scientific or similar purposes, in a "fair" fashion, i.e. as limited as possible. "It looks nicer in the article" does not suffice, even less so when there's an actual book cover that we're already using.
Which leads into my second argument, that in the absence of a proper image I'd prefer to use the book cover for two reasons: It's the image that is more directly tied to the BattleTech IP than some third party artwork, because it was officially published as BattleTech; and it ties back to the book which I feel is in and of itself preferable.
Just my 2c (IIC?) of course. ;) Frabby (talk) 02:14, 6 December 2020 (EST)
Frabby's point also brings up the legality of cropped images. For example, you could trim all the text from the book cover, which would still leave most of the Dominator image for the article. What is the policy on cropped images? --Ebakunin (talk|contribs) 12:29, 6 December 2020 (EST)
Policy:Images#Uploading_guide See #4 for cropping.--Cache (talk) 16:32, 6 December 2020 (EST)

Game Rules Sections[edit]

copied from Talk:Special Pilot Abilities:

I have put a delete tag on this because right out the gate it has a HUGE rules section. I am of the opinion that rules are impossible to "rephrase". As a result any article dedicated to rules is going to be almost entierly plagiarism. At some point in the near future I plan to put a motion to the rest of the community to have the wiki go "rules free".--Dmon (talk) 07:49, 20 January 2022 (EST)

Got your point, and it is true it a huge list of rules which might impact the intent of the wiki. Then we do just put the pilots right?--Pserratv (talk) 07:50, 20 January 2022 (EST)
Yeah, lore stuff is 100% fair game as it can be rephrased, rules, if you rephrase you could be changing the rule, so in order to be clear, you are forced to copy the exact wording.. And that is a problem.--Dmon (talk) 07:53, 20 January 2022 (EST)
Then maybe we should just list the names of abilities and cost?--Pserratv (talk) 08:07, 20 January 2022 (EST)
Rules can be summarized without plagiarism. E.g. Blood Stalker: Decreases To-Hit Modifier against single enemy while increasing it against all others, until that enemy is removed from play. (Citation here)--Cache (talk) 08:12, 20 January 2022 (EST)
So names & descriptions but not exact rules you mean like modifiers and so on?--Pserratv (talk) 09:19, 20 January 2022 (EST). Let me amend the first two or three and you tell me--Pserratv (talk) 09:19, 20 January 2022 (EST)
That looks good to me. I would definitely like to see a reference on each to show people where to find the full information. --Cache (talk) 10:59, 20 January 2022 (EST)
That can be done. I'll take some time to do it.--Pserratv (talk) 11:18, 20 January 2022 (EST)
Dmon, I think we can take out the Deletion message. I'll keep descriptions as they are, no rules nor costs and I'll link the skills to the cards where they are explainedç, though most probably not today.--Pserratv (talk) 04:27, 21 January 2022 (EST)
Dmon is right to a degree, but I'm not completely on the same page. While we cannot reproduce rules here, we should still seek to have articles mentioning rules concepts like SPAs - at least give a description what this is and what rulebooks it is found in, perhaps a rundown list of SPAs that have been given, without going into rules detail. NB to a degree the game rules are already available as free download anyways, but that's probably the part of the rules that is so basic that we don't really need an article about it. Frabby (talk) 06:51, 21 January 2022 (EST)

copied from User talk:Talvin/Project Orphanage/Technology Orphans:

A number of these have game mechanic rules sections. Once I get clarification on a procedure for that, need to go through and apply said procedure. Talvin (talk) 21:07, 10 February 2022 (EST)
I am heavily in favor of banishing the rules entierly because as the wiki has become larger and more prominent with the fan base it has become harder to ignore the fact that having rules on the site basically breaks our own rules about plagarism.--Dmon (talk) 21:13, 10 February 2022 (EST)
I agree. However, I am a very small fish in this tank, and that is a policy issue: a big fish with teeth. Over on Discord, Cache promised to find me some guidance. Without something in writing saying "Do this", the guy who hasn't been here a week yet is not going to go around wiping sections out of pages wholesale. You perhaps could, I should not and won't. Talvin (talk) 21:16, 10 February 2022 (EST)
If the "game rules" are a list of game stats only, I think they should be deleted. SPA's, SCA's, and others that can be reworded, should be, in my opinion. And all should have a proper reference to point users in the right direction for the full info. It's easier to search here than across multiple rulebooks.--Cache (talk) 11:09, 11 February 2022 (EST)
My understanding is that this whole thing is going to move to a policy discussion page. Not sure which one. Talvin (talk) 11:15, 11 February 2022 (EST)

I am moving this discussion here, as it is the most appropriate location I can find. Please add new comments below. Thank you.--Cache (talk) 10:50, 12 February 2022 (EST)

To summarize my position so far, I believe the "Game Rules" sections in equipment articles that include only blocks of gameplay stats should be deleted and replaced with a reference to those rules. Those sections in unit articles containing SPA's, SCA's, and others that can be effectively reworded, should be reworded. They also should provide a reference for those rules.--Cache (talk) 11:05, 12 February 2022 (EST)

Copying from the Discord: Whatever is come up with, it needs to be something the little guys like me can readily implement. I can [delete rules sections from articles for policy reasons] 100 times an hour. Rephrasing things...I might need an hour to research that for one article, some cases. (Which means I will just leave it for someone else to worry about.) Talvin (talk) 11:08, 12 February 2022 (EST)
While a decision is taken, I'm summarizing the skills with just an explanation and no numbers, and the card there are refered to, at least trying to give hints on were to find the actual information if needed. Page to be reviewed is this one: Special Pilot Abilities--Pserratv (talk) 09:27, 17 February 2022 (EST)
Looking for clarification on this discussion: Where is the line drawn for plagiarism? At game rules or game stats? Game stats generally include everything in the infobox for units and equipment.--Cache (talk) 19:14, 18 February 2022 (EST)

Rules tag?[edit]

And putting this as a separate comment, as it is something I ask for regardless of what is decided here: can we get a tag like { {rules }} (gotta learn how to escape that out) to put on pages that need attention that also adds it to a category, like we do for cleanup and merge? I recognize that reaching consensus here is going to take a while, but I can tag them in passing so whatever is decided can be applied. Talvin (talk) 11:08, 12 February 2022 (EST)

I have no idea if I did it properly, but I created a page for this "project". At the top of the talk page for articles with game rules that require review, add {{WikiProject GameRules|tr=new}} --Cache (talk) 12:42, 12 February 2022 (EST)
Thank you for being bold! I'll put that to use right away. Talvin (talk) 12:45, 12 February 2022 (EST)
It's now added to the Main Page under "Sarna Institute's Current Projects" (bottom).--Revanche (talk|contribs) 12:57, 12 February 2022 (EST)
Thank you to both! I am now going to bow out of the discussion of "what policy should be", as I have made my concerns sufficiently known, I think. It's a potential legal matter, and that really needs the opinions of the staff more than my own. I'll spend my time getting ducks lined up to be shot down, plucked, thrown back in the water or whatever procedure you all finally settle on. Talvin (talk) 13:03, 12 February 2022 (EST)
While a decision is taken, I'm summarizing the skills with just an explanation and no numbers, and the card there are refered to, at least trying to give hints on were to find the actual information if needed. Page to be reviewed is this one: Special Pilot Abilities--Pserratv (talk) 09:27, 17 February 2022 (EST)