Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - Pay What You Want for the Learn to Code Bundle, includes AngularJS, Python, HTML5, Ruby, and more. ×

Comment pictures (Score 1) 560

wikipedia doesn't need books because hosting books is not its purpose. however it needs lots of multimedia contents to illustrate its articles, and most importantly, pictures. there are many excellent historical pictures that are still copyrighted. for example i find it sad that there are no pictures associated to the pulitzer prize article, for obvious reasons. i think that getting the copyright of a good archive of well-known pictures would be a great enhancement to wikipedia

I have a theory that it's impossible to prove anything, but I can't prove it.