Commons talk:Valued image candidates/candidate list
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Commons:Valued image candidates/candidate list.|
|Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8|
Bot went crazy?...
- This is because you do not come often enough. Seriously, it bugue when images have similar titles, as long as there is one in competition. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:58, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
- Are you sure that is the reason? One of the files has been tagged 6 times and its name is unique among the others. From what I see, the bot will go on repeating the process until the promoted nominations are in the page. I will try to come here more frequently, thank you! Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:36, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
- For 10 (ten) times now, have my last VI pictures been tagged with the VI seal: ] . Also for 10 times has the VI bot inserted into my talk page the correspondent notices. That is, once every 12 hours, from the moment the images were promoted. I don't know who is in charge of the VI bot maintenance but this has become quite a nuisance! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 14:36, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
- Ah Ah Ah ! Very funny: I've been visiting your talk page and indeed, this is a real invasion !! I've endured that a few time ago, me too. But please, may I take for me one or two of your useless tags ? Because you know what ? My four last promoted VI were notified only one time, but their description pages are... untagged !!--Jebulon (talk) 15:54, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
- Yes it is a wise bot. It repeats again and again for the poor oldest users in order to make them happy, and in general, for those who need repetitions to be sure they understand...ah ah ah toooooo !--Jebulon (talk) 20:44, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
- Very wise indeed. Its behavior is criptic in such a way that both the aprentice and the veteran get convinced that they are the best. Merry Christmas, my friend! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:50, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
- Acting up again? I've gotten VI promotions for the same image 4x in the past few days...-Godot13 (talk) 02:35, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Attempt to delete and censor image that is Featured Picture quality on multiple language Wikipedias
Notifying here as this image in question is a Valued Image quality image here locally at Commons.
Please see the deletion discussion at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Streisand effect.
This is an attempt to delete and censor an image established as Featured Picture quality on multiple different language Wikipedias, including (1) English, (2) Spanish, and (3) Persian Wikipedia.
I really don't think this is the best way to go about addressing these inherent issues.
Please let's not censor and delete images that are in-use and in-scope as Featured Picture quality images across multiple different language editions of Wikipedia.
Thank you for your time,
- Done. Solved, but this is not the place for such a discution...--Jebulon (talk) 23:04, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
VI is becoming a FP/QI bis
I see a trend in the VI contest where the quality is becoming the main criteria, thus this is becoming a FP/QI contest with slightly different parameters. It seems to me that the quality was not an important criteria when the contest was created, and I think it would be better that way. To me, the most important criteria is the definition of a proper scope for a document. However I see the scope becoming more and more narrow, looking like a description of the image. I think we should go back to the original idea. Specifically, we should not accept more than one scope for:
- one building; no more building from east/west/north/south/above/etc. There might be a few exceptions.
- one vehicule; no more vehicule front/back/etc.
- one person; only one VI for a person.
- I fully agree that the main criteria should be the scope. But as soon as there are several images within the same scope (which would be even more frequently the case when following your "one object/person - one VI" proposal), the quality of the images comes back into the game IMO. --P e z i (talk) 16:51, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
I agree, for part, with Yann. Some scopes are actually too narrow, and tend to be a description. As for buildings, we should only accept "interior" and "exterior", and maybe "facades", and "design", "photograph", and "painting", and "engraving", and.... Same problem for persons. We should try to reduce the scopes, but it seems difficult to establish a rule.--Jebulon (talk) 21:43, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- Exterior and interior, fine; maybe facade for a cathedral, but not for the Eiffel Tower or the Taj Mahal, which are symetric buildings. Otherwise, no. Yann (talk) 22:39, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
For building there should be more scopes than one. Side view of the church is different than facade, because of this, there should be 2 scopes for exterior and of course scope for the interior. For persons also there should be more scopes than one, because paintings are different kind of art than photos. Halavar (talk) 16:26, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Commons:Valued images/Recently promoted is a mess
This page is a mess. I removed an awful number of duplicates . One of them is still in the MVR review section (Commons:Valued image candidates/Iyasu's Palace 02.jpg), so it will be added again by the bot. This needs to be fixed. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:31, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- Curious, I had already removed some of this duplicates two weeks ago, after sorting. Exemple: File:SMP_May_2008-12.jpg. --Myrabella (talk) 07:25, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- I cleaned up the mess with MVRs. All promoted images gets VI status and users gets notifications of promotions. There is a problem with VICbot in MVR section. Images are not removed and we must do it manually, as I did yesterday and today. Halavar (talk) 00:30, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
It's getting better, but
- there are still a lot of images with a need for a category. At least, could you add categories for your own images?
- There is a recurrent issue with apostrophe ('). I think that's a problem with the bot, or it needs an change.
- I suggest that, from now on, we request the nominator to define in which category the image should be added.
- Bonne idée. Il "suffirait" d'implémenter le menu déroulant dans le formulaire de proposition. --Jebulon (talk) 19:58, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Some category issues:
- Godot proposed to add a category for "Numismatic". Opinions?
- In which category do we put the canals of Venice?
- In which category do we put doors and gates? i.e. File:Angoulême Porte 61 rue Minage 2012.jpg
- Could someone add categories to the numerous plants? I have no idea where to put these.
- In which category do we put parks and gardens?
- I've always wondered what the purpose of this type of work. Categories are set up, natural and orderly way. If we consider a category of a few dozen image, it is desirable which have: a gallery, a category "value image", "image quality" and "exceptional image." It is rather that we must work. The other way that seems redundant to me, heavy and useless. But I could be wrong. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:03, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
- It is sad that nobody seems to care about the issues mentioned above. If this page is not maintained, it should be closed altogether. Anyone still alive here? Yann (talk) 06:28, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- I am afraid that your question clearly shows the lack of interest in this page. For me it should be abandoned in favor of a different categorization. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:31, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
There should be 3 extractions of images (0:18, 12:18 and again 0:18 UTC) but as we see, images still exist and wait for the VICbot. Someone know what happend? Did bot stopped working? Halavar (talk) 00:34, 29 January 2014 (UTC)