Posted under General
(That's just original research. Please correct me if I'm wrong.)
post #1053549 and post #post #1053865 have sources, but they are tagged source_request nonetheless. They don't have copyrights, though.
This happens with many other new posts, too.
So, the tag source_request is used to ask for either sources or copyrights? Or, alternatively, should we use copyright_request (an almost empty tag) for the latter purpose?
EDIT:
Mentioning post #1053865, too.
Updated by Anonymous9000
I always thought source request meant to find a link to the actual image from either a blog of the artist or pixiv page. Not just any random blog site.
Edit: post #1053865 ~ Someone added the source but didn't take down the tag.
Updated
source_request in my opinion is a request to know where the image ultimately originates. If the image is a game cg for instance, if the name of the game and game_cg are tagged, then I consider the request fulfilled. If it's a scan, then I wouldn't consider the request fulfilled unless the name of the publication it originates from has been identified somewhere (tagged, as a pool, in the source field, or comments). It's not really about knowing the copyright IMO. I tend to think of tagme for that.
I've used source_request for cases where I don't know the copyright. tagme is useless in this regard, since there are so many different ways of using it.
I agree with EB.
Ideally, every image's source field should contain its origin as accurately as possible. That means a web address if it has one, a description of where it came from otherwise. The latter can be dropped if it can be determined by tags or pools.
Source_request is used when this information is not present.
Copyright_request sounds like the right tag to use for... copyright requests.
copyright_request only has two posts, and it wasn't one of the proposed tags back when we discussed using these request tags, so you'll have to excuse me for not knowing about it.
The earliest comprehensive discussion for request tags I can remember is forum #15554, which I've been using source_request as the thread suggested. The problem with "source"_request is that we have a source field, which is confusing in how to apply the tag.
Updated
Log said:
The problem with source request is that it's used for both copyright and source field requests, it always has been.
Then, (assuming we won't ever use copyright_request) the wiki of source_request would be improved if it mentioned things said in this thread.
(current wiki)
No source for the image is known, but is desired by one or more members.
(example of future wiki)
The origins of the tagged image are unknown, incomplete or unsatisfactory.
Only remove this tag when all the items below are known.
- The copyright of the image. (i.e., all the mangas/games/etc. depicted in the image)
- The original source of the image in the "source" box. Often it should be a link to the actual image from the author's blog or pixiv page. (And not just any random blog site.) Original game GCs and screencaps only need the copyright.
As the progenitor of those posts in question, here are my 2 cents.
I use source_request like, as some said, to find the ultimate source of the picture, may it be pixiv/artist blog/site, not just from some chan/board/wherever i roam to pick images up.
I use tagme as a request to other people to check if there is any more tags to be added, as sometimes, i may have missed something.
I used copyright_request in the rare cases of "I think I know what series/title this came from but I can't remember" things.
-z905844
I have used source_request the same way as Hillside Moose to mean roughly copyright_request, though in addition to a viable official URL if it exists.
I guess the reason I don't use copyright_request is because if I don't know the series an image is derived from, I also don't know if it comes from a series at all (original), thus not even having a copyright. That's sort of semantics though since we generally treat original as a pseudo-copyright anyway.
If we want to officially codify copyright_request as a request for the series an image comes from (or confirmation that an image is an artist original), and source_request explicitly a request for a source URL, it wouldn't bother me.
It might be presumptuous though to assume that a free and live source URL even exists, whereas the series/copyright should always be providable if one exists and it's recognized.
Shinjidude said:
If we want to officially codify copyright_request as a request for the series an image comes from (or confirmation that an image is an artist original), (...) it wouldn't bother me.
+ 1
Shinjidude said:
It might be presumptuous though to assume that a free and live source URL even exists, (...).
If somebody knows the ultimate source URL for sure, it should not matter whether said URL is free and live; the information should be shared anyway.
I can imagine at least two uses for that info. Firstly, the source page (possibly featuring artist commentary or something else worth researching) might be available in a web archive database, such as the Wayback Machine. Secondly, a debate regarding the ultimate source page might arise e.g. between the uploaders of different versions of the same image.
I wonder if the source information field could have some kind of (hidden but viewable) secondary slot for date info, such as "originally published 12th Nov 2008, retrieved 3rd May 2009, source page currently unavailable". I imagine this slot would rarely be filled by uploaders, but occasionally its contents would prove valuable.
Updated
Shinjidude said:
If we want to officially codify copyright_request as a request for the series an image comes from (or confirmation that an image is an artist original), and source_request explicitly a request for a source URL, it wouldn't bother me.
+1
I'd support just using them in the most straightforward way:
copyright_request = "I can't provide the copy: tag, help."
source_request = "I can't fill the source field, help."
And since original is copy: too, the tag can be used just as well if you want someone to confirm that it is original.
jxh2154 said:
copyright_request = "I can't provide the copy: tag, help."
source_request = "I can't fill the source field, help."And since original is copy: too, the tag can be used just as well if you want someone to confirm that it is original.
+1 to this; I think source_request makes a useful sister tag to artist_request in this sense.
