No rule. As Wikipedia editor, I invite everyone to upload they photos to Wikipedia. Why is every photo on Wikipedia with a flash and from 2003? Because that's when they were first uploaded, and nobody ever cared to replace them with better pics
Is there a reason so many celebrities have dogshit old photos on their wiki pages? I had assumed it was more to do with the images being legal to use than the vibes-based approach you’re implying
Probably the case with celebrities, but you can't just trademark a picture of a meal without an ounce of branding.
Maybe they wouldn't let you upload a chain specific burger, but you could easily use a photo of any old burger you made or bought from a random place.
With celebrities you would have to upload a picture without any specific rights holders I'd imagine.
Copy the right issue. You have to own copyright to the picture to upload them. The picture has to be in the free use domain. As such, no professional photographers will upload pictures because they took them to sell them, not to upload them for free to the Internet. And celebrities themselves usually won't upload picture of themselves because they get money from publishers using their pictures and/or because they don't care. As such, the only photos that can be uploaded to Wikipedia are those shitty photos fans take of celebrities on conventions, etc.
Photos on wikipedia of celebrities and other public figures need to be photos found in the public domain. Notice that many celebrity wikipedia photos are from conventions like San Diego Comic Con or similar.
[And then there's German Wikipedia, where someone scanned a slice of bread.](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Pumpernickel#Farbton_des_Fotos?)
Translation:
"Hmm, am I just used to darker factory-made Pumpernickel or does the slice on the page look a bit light? It looks like normal dark bread..."
"Might be the camera flash, it's clearly Pumpernickel."
"No flash, I scanned the slice. I compared the color with the real thing. It's the 'real' stuff without any beet molasses though, so it might in fact be a bit lighter."
I think both pictures are cluttered and pretty bad as an encyclopedic image of tortilla chips.
Compare [the current picture for "Burrito"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Burrito.JPG). God knows why it's just on a table without a plate, but at least it's illustrative, it looks decent, and there aren't any people in it.
The picture is meant to be of the queso. See it in use here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chile_con_queso
And that's what I find confusing about the "normal" photo here. It barely shows the queso; in fact, the queso is partially cut out of frame. The lighting is better, sure, but other than that it is a terrible picture to illustrate queso.
Anyway for the OOP, if you can take a better picture then you can just replace the current one. That's kind of the whole idea of the site.
[Portrait of a Sausage Roll Served on a Tortilla (Flash Photography, 2017)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sausage_roll#/media/File:John_Campbell's_Irish_Bakery_Sausage_Roll_(34278149014).jpg)
[Worst Waffles Ever (2015)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Waffles.webmhd.webm)
[Meatloaf Served on Carpet (w/ Natural Lighting, 2015)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meatloaf#/media/File:Sekan%C3%A1_007.jpg)
[Danish Meatballs and Hairy Arms (2006)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meatball#/media/File:Frikadeller.jpg)
[Glowing Angel Food Cake (2009)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponge_cake#/media/File:Angel_food_cake_texture.jpg)
[Dramatic Ceviche (2008)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creole_cuisine#/media/File:Ceviche_de_caballa.JPG)
[Then there is this.](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AVillage_pump_%28policy%29&diff=163917803&oldid=163917331#Requiring_reliable_sources_in_media)
Like how the main picture for the "Human" article is just some random Asian farmer in the forest. Like, any picture would work, I just wonder who he is
No rule. As Wikipedia editor, I invite everyone to upload they photos to Wikipedia. Why is every photo on Wikipedia with a flash and from 2003? Because that's when they were first uploaded, and nobody ever cared to replace them with better pics
Frankly, I'd feel bad. Someone put a lot of effort into taking that picture. I don't want to replace it.
Every more modern Wikipedia food photo looks like it’s from a business stock photo so I really appreciate the remaining 2003 vibe.
Is there a reason so many celebrities have dogshit old photos on their wiki pages? I had assumed it was more to do with the images being legal to use than the vibes-based approach you’re implying
Probably the case with celebrities, but you can't just trademark a picture of a meal without an ounce of branding. Maybe they wouldn't let you upload a chain specific burger, but you could easily use a photo of any old burger you made or bought from a random place. With celebrities you would have to upload a picture without any specific rights holders I'd imagine.
Not sure if it's real but there was that guy who made a video of how it's his mission to upload the worst pic of every celebrity to their Wiki page
Copy the right issue. You have to own copyright to the picture to upload them. The picture has to be in the free use domain. As such, no professional photographers will upload pictures because they took them to sell them, not to upload them for free to the Internet. And celebrities themselves usually won't upload picture of themselves because they get money from publishers using their pictures and/or because they don't care. As such, the only photos that can be uploaded to Wikipedia are those shitty photos fans take of celebrities on conventions, etc.
Photos on wikipedia of celebrities and other public figures need to be photos found in the public domain. Notice that many celebrity wikipedia photos are from conventions like San Diego Comic Con or similar.
[And then there's German Wikipedia, where someone scanned a slice of bread.](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Pumpernickel#Farbton_des_Fotos?) Translation: "Hmm, am I just used to darker factory-made Pumpernickel or does the slice on the page look a bit light? It looks like normal dark bread..." "Might be the camera flash, it's clearly Pumpernickel." "No flash, I scanned the slice. I compared the color with the real thing. It's the 'real' stuff without any beet molasses though, so it might in fact be a bit lighter."
Well now I need to see the bread slice in question.
[bread](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumpernickel#/media/Datei:Pumpernickel.jpg)
Looks like cork.
Like sound-isolating foam pulled from a 70s recording studio booth
Lmao wtf that's the worst way possible to do it
I like it. It’s giving character
I would join that discussion, but the idea of hearing another German person talk about bread sounds completely unbearable to me.
I think both pictures are cluttered and pretty bad as an encyclopedic image of tortilla chips. Compare [the current picture for "Burrito"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Burrito.JPG). God knows why it's just on a table without a plate, but at least it's illustrative, it looks decent, and there aren't any people in it.
The picture is meant to be of the queso. See it in use here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chile_con_queso And that's what I find confusing about the "normal" photo here. It barely shows the queso; in fact, the queso is partially cut out of frame. The lighting is better, sure, but other than that it is a terrible picture to illustrate queso. Anyway for the OOP, if you can take a better picture then you can just replace the current one. That's kind of the whole idea of the site.
I'm not sure that's queso at all in the "normal" picture. There's a pretty big texmex chain that serves a jalapeno ranch like that.
Most foods photos on wikipedia really do like the editors just took photo of their own meal tbh
They probably did.
Wikipedia really is just another social media site, except anything can only ever be posted once.
Um, no. You all still can upload pictures your meals to Wikipedia
[Portrait of a Sausage Roll Served on a Tortilla (Flash Photography, 2017)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sausage_roll#/media/File:John_Campbell's_Irish_Bakery_Sausage_Roll_(34278149014).jpg) [Worst Waffles Ever (2015)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Waffles.webmhd.webm) [Meatloaf Served on Carpet (w/ Natural Lighting, 2015)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meatloaf#/media/File:Sekan%C3%A1_007.jpg) [Danish Meatballs and Hairy Arms (2006)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meatball#/media/File:Frikadeller.jpg) [Glowing Angel Food Cake (2009)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponge_cake#/media/File:Angel_food_cake_texture.jpg) [Dramatic Ceviche (2008)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creole_cuisine#/media/File:Ceviche_de_caballa.JPG)
Holy shit those are some awful looking waffles
I laughed when she lifted the lid. They match the plate surprisingly well.
I think the nation of Belgium should be entitled to compensation for that waffle video
i don’t know where to stick this but [vienna bread with motion blur](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_bread#/media/File%3ATin_vienna_bread.jpg)
meatballs look pretty good
[Seems like it applies to pets too](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrostatics)
To be fair, this is an excellent example for the page.
cuisine*
[English muffin served on the floor](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_muffin)
Why the fuck is it on the floor what the hell
i’ve seen some kitchen islands or counters with tiled surfaces
Yeah, I'm not convinced that's a floor.
LET THE MUFFIN HIT THE FLOOR! LET THE MUFFIN HIT THE FLOOR! LET THE MUFFIN HIT THE FLOOOOOOOOOOOOOR!
At least it's on a plate?
[Then there is this.](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AVillage_pump_%28policy%29&diff=163917803&oldid=163917331#Requiring_reliable_sources_in_media)
I thought it was going to be another terrible waffle picture. I was incorrect.
This is a discussion I never knew I needed to see haha
If people would care to upload photos of their meals to Wikipedia, instead of Instagram, we wouldn't be in this situation
Like how the main picture for the "Human" article is just some random Asian farmer in the forest. Like, any picture would work, I just wonder who he is
He's only human after all, don't blame it on him
BRO IS THAT THIRD PICTURE FROM CHUYS ALSO HAPPY CAKE DAY
it's an aesthetic
I’m hardly a photography expert but I think the Wiki one looks fine
Wait, what percentage of photos on Wikipedia were actually taken before 2003?
Oh hey, chuy’s.
Happy Cake Day
r/TheRealQuestions