WordPress.org

Make WordPress Themes

Change History (9)

#1 @chipbennett
6 years ago

  • Owner set to chipbennett
  • Status changed from new to assigned

#2 follow-up: @chipbennett
6 years ago

  • Resolution set to not-approved
  • Status changed from assigned to closed

Creative Commons-licensed images are not GPL-compatible.

Also: as much as I love Myrtle Beach, I believe the myrtlebeachhotels.sc URL is not appropriate.

#3 in reply to: ↑ 2 ; follow-up: @RedBMedia
6 years ago

Thank you for the review. Can I please get some clarification on these three points?

  • Why are creative commons-licensed images not GPL-compatible, when I can attach traditional copyrights to CSS and JS? It seems that CC should be more compatible than regular copyright.
  • Can you please clarify whether myrtlebeachhotels.sc is or is not an appropriate URL? Simply saying "I believe" doesn't give me much direction. If I want to resubmit the theme I would like to know ahead of time if the URL needs to be changed and why.
  • If these issues are resolved can I submit a new version for review?

Thanks,

Joe

Replying to chipbennett:

Creative Commons-licensed images are not GPL-compatible.

Also: as much as I love Myrtle Beach, I believe the myrtlebeachhotels.sc URL is not appropriate.

#4 in reply to: ↑ 3 ; follow-up: @chipbennett
6 years ago

Replying to RedBMedia:

Thank you for the review. Can I please get some clarification on these three points?

  • Why are creative commons-licensed images not GPL-compatible, when I can attach traditional copyrights to CSS and JS? It seems that CC should be more compatible than regular copyright.

Themes submitted for inclusion in the official Theme repository are required to be 100% GPL or GPL-compatible. This requirement includes all bundled resources.

  • Can you please clarify whether myrtlebeachhotels.sc is or is not an appropriate URL? Simply saying "I believe" doesn't give me much direction. If I want to resubmit the theme I would like to know ahead of time if the URL needs to be changed and why.

Sorry for the ambiguity. The myrtlebeachhotels.sc domain is not an appropriate URL.

  • If these issues are resolved can I submit a new version for review?

Absolutely, and we welcome the submission!

#5 in reply to: ↑ 4 ; follow-up: @RedBMedia
6 years ago

Can you please further clarify why myrtlebeachhotels.sc is not an appropriate URL? I know it must seem obvious to you. But, as a developer that works with many commercial clients, having a framework or set of guidelines would save us a lot of time, and makes your process seem more legit. Arbitrary rules don't help anyone.

Joe

Replying to chipbennett:

Replying to RedBMedia:

Thank you for the review. Can I please get some clarification on these three points?

  • Why are creative commons-licensed images not GPL-compatible, when I can attach traditional copyrights to CSS and JS? It seems that CC should be more compatible than regular copyright.

Themes submitted for inclusion in the official Theme repository are required to be 100% GPL or GPL-compatible. This requirement includes all bundled resources.

  • Can you please clarify whether myrtlebeachhotels.sc is or is not an appropriate URL? Simply saying "I believe" doesn't give me much direction. If I want to resubmit the theme I would like to know ahead of time if the URL needs to be changed and why.

Sorry for the ambiguity. The myrtlebeachhotels.sc domain is not an appropriate URL.

  • If these issues are resolved can I submit a new version for review?

Absolutely, and we welcome the submission!

#6 in reply to: ↑ 5 ; follow-up: @chipbennett
6 years ago

Replying to RedBMedia:

Can you please further clarify why myrtlebeachhotels.sc is not an appropriate URL? I know it must seem obvious to you. But, as a developer that works with many commercial clients, having a framework or set of guidelines would save us a lot of time, and makes your process seem more legit. Arbitrary rules don't help anyone.

Primarily, because the site has absolutely nothing to do with WordPress.

Something that we deal with - frequently - is Themes submitted for the sole purpose of gaining backlinks. While we are absolutely in favor of developers receiving proper credit for their work, the line is blurred when that backlink credit goes not to a developer, but to a commercial entity that has nothing to do with WordPress, or anything even remotely germane to WordPress.

This is one of the most difficult aspects to police, and creating objective guidelines that address every nuance and aspect for abuse/misuse of credit links becomes an exercise in Whack-a-mole that ends up producing guidelines with the volume and complexity of the CFR, and that paints legitimate developers into an ever-smaller box.

I do apologize that the guidelines thus come across as arbitrary, and we are working on developing wording that more adequately and objectively explains our intent.

If you would like a second opinion on the question of appropriateness of the myrtlebeachhotels.sc URL, I would be happy to have the other admins weigh in. It is our intent to be consistent and fair in reviews (which is why I stated "I believe" in my original review comments - to imply that you were welcome to ask for reconsideration).

#7 in reply to: ↑ 6 ; follow-up: @RedBMedia
6 years ago

Our intention wasn't to necessarily build back links but rather to build awareness with travel "beach" bloggers by giving away a free theme. If I attach a link to my site (the developer) then its pointless, I don't care if travel bloggers know me.

I understand that the site has nothing to do with WordPress, other than the fact that we are giving away a WordPress free theme.

Would it make a difference if I took out the footer link? and left the link to the site in the style.css? That way we wouldn't be "building backlinks" but we would still get some exposure.

Joe

Replying to chipbennett:

Replying to RedBMedia:

Can you please further clarify why myrtlebeachhotels.sc is not an appropriate URL? I know it must seem obvious to you. But, as a developer that works with many commercial clients, having a framework or set of guidelines would save us a lot of time, and makes your process seem more legit. Arbitrary rules don't help anyone.

Primarily, because the site has absolutely nothing to do with WordPress.

Something that we deal with - frequently - is Themes submitted for the sole purpose of gaining backlinks. While we are absolutely in favor of developers receiving proper credit for their work, the line is blurred when that backlink credit goes not to a developer, but to a commercial entity that has nothing to do with WordPress, or anything even remotely germane to WordPress.

This is one of the most difficult aspects to police, and creating objective guidelines that address every nuance and aspect for abuse/misuse of credit links becomes an exercise in Whack-a-mole that ends up producing guidelines with the volume and complexity of the CFR, and that paints legitimate developers into an ever-smaller box.

I do apologize that the guidelines thus come across as arbitrary, and we are working on developing wording that more adequately and objectively explains our intent.

If you would like a second opinion on the question of appropriateness of the myrtlebeachhotels.sc URL, I would be happy to have the other admins weigh in. It is our intent to be consistent and fair in reviews (which is why I stated "I believe" in my original review comments - to imply that you were welcome to ask for reconsideration).

#8 in reply to: ↑ 7 @chipbennett
6 years ago

Replying to RedBMedia:

Our intention wasn't to necessarily build back links but rather to build awareness with travel "beach" bloggers by giving away a free theme.

That awareness will come primarily from the Theme being hosted in the official repository. You're welcome also to promote the Theme to visitors to myrtlebeachhotels.sc. Both forms of exposure will provide considerably more exposure than the Theme linking back to myrtlebeachhotels.sc.

If I attach a link to my site (the developer) then its pointless, I don't care if travel bloggers know me.

If the point is to drive traffic to the Theme, and your Author URI has information about the Theme, then your stated objective - to build awareness with travel "beach" bloggers by giving away a free Theme - is served.

The question becomes one of: do you want to build awareness of the Theme, or of the myrtlebeachhotels.sc site? If it is the former, then ample opportunity exists to build that awareness without backlinking to myrtlebeachhotels.sc. If it is the latter, however, then that exemplifies why we have to be so strict about appropriate credit links.

Ultimately, it has become clear that commercial entities that want to contribute a free WordPress Theme solely for the purpose of contributing to the WordPress community generally do not take issue with the credit link requirements, and that those that do take issue generally have other motives for submitting the Theme. This is a rather blanket observation, and such observations are rarely universal, but it does become the basis and starting point for evaluation.

I understand that the site has nothing to do with WordPress, other than the fact that we are giving away a WordPress free theme.

You're welcome to give away a WordPress Theme for free, and such generosity is appreciated. But hopefully you understand why commercial sites - especially those otherwise unaffiliated with WordPress - face a higher level of scrutiny with respect to appropriate credit links, and with respect to the nature of the content on the linked resources.

Would it make a difference if I took out the footer link? and left the link to the site in the style.css? That way we wouldn't be "building backlinks" but we would still get some exposure.

I don't think so. In that case, the Theme essentially becomes a "sponsored" Theme, which also is not allowed in the official repository.

Again, if you would like a second opinion, I would be more than happy to have the other admins weigh in.

#9 @cais
6 years ago

I use a fairly simple rule of thumb when it comes to these links and their acceptability, it applies in this fashion:

  • I simply visit the link to get a "first" impression

If that first impression gives me anything other than one of being directly related to the theme then it is not an acceptable URI.

In this case, my first impression is this is an odd page for a "hotels" related page to be hosting. Therefore, it is an unacceptable.

Perhaps this is subjective but beyond that I agree with Chip's points regarding how the guidelines are applied to credit links as he has related them; and, I support his decision regarding this particular link.

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.