Template talk:Unknown license

For the centralized discussion, see WT:Files for discussion, WT:Non-free content, and WT:Image use policy.

Purpose

This is supposed to be a non-threatening option that newbies can pick for image upload licenses. We would rather they pick this, which lets us know they need help, than for the user to incorrectly pick some valid license. The template is intentionally less threatening than the rest of our missing license templates, thus no stop-hand. When we see images tagged as such we should gently help the user fix it, with lots of wikilove. If there is a copyright problem, we can explain that too.. again with lots of wikilove. See WP:BITE. --Gmaxwell 15:53, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Put images in Category:Images with unknown copyright status?

Should this template put the image in Category:Images with unknown copyright status, the same as Template:No license? Stephen Turner (Talk) 11:59, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Now MediaWiki:Licenses does that, via Template:No license from license selector. dbenbenn | talk 02:03, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Experienced editors

I changed the wording from "an experienced editor should help the uploader…" to "a more experienced editor" because it implies the editor who uploaded the file has little or no experience. I wouldn't say that about me, and I uploaded a file which has a copyright status I am unsure of. I'm not very experienced with images, I'll say that, but I certainly know a thing or two about Wikipedia. Just a little thing, but wanted to mention it. --Fbv65edel ^{(discuss | contribs)} 19:51, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Requested move 14 March 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 04:07, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

---

Template:Don't know → Template:Don't know license – Too vague, could be confused with something else. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:09, 14 March 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. ---CX Zoom(^he/_him) (^{let's talk}|_contribs) 12:38, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

• Support could very easily be confused with a fact not being known etc. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:02, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
• Support alternative, weak support as proposed I suggest Template:Unknown license as it's less colloquial. 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 20:34, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
• Support for alternative - I would support Template:Unknown license as per EpicPupper, as it more clear and concise Kpddg ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:43, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
• Move to Template:Unknown license per the above. Steel1943 (talk) 03:14, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.