Commons talk:Valued images

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Pictogram voting info.svg This talk page is not heavily trafficked
Consider posting to Commons talk:Valued image candidates since it is the main talk page of this project.

Templates[edit]

This thread has been moved to Commons talk:Valued image candidates#Shall a multi-purpose award template be used instead of dedicated VI templates?. -- Slaunger 05:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Template[edit]

We need to change it ;)

<!-- de -->[[Commons:Qualitätsbilder|{{#language:de}}]] |
en[[Commons:Value images|{{#language:en}}]] |
<!-- es -->[[Commons:Imágenes de calidad|{{#language:es}}]] |
<!-- fr -->[[Commons:Images de qualité|{{#language:fr}}]] |
<!-- ja -->[[Commons:高画質な画像|{{#language:ja}}]] |
pl[[Commons:Wartościowe grafiki|{{#language:pl}}]] |
<!-- ru -->[[Commons:Качественные изображения|{{#language:ru}}]] |
<!-- zh-hans -->[[Commons:优质图片|{{#language:zh-hans}}]] |
<!-- zh-hant -->[[Commons:優質圖片|{{#language:zh-hant}}]] |
{{edit|Template:Lang-Value}}

So, I will talk with transalators Przykuta 14:58, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there was an error in Template:Lang-VI: I opened Template:Lang-QI when editing (a cut and paste error). Very confusing indeed. That is now fixed.
Translations are welcome, but maybe it is wise to hold the horses just a few days as I expect there will be some adjustments of the VI pages the first few days (especially when the first images are promoted, probably on June 3), which will lead to double work in keeping translations updated. Cheers, -- Slaunger 21:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Scope standarization[edit]

Commons:Valued images by scope is going to get out of hand quickly if we don't come up with some way to organize the scopes. I suggest:

  1. Categorizing similar to COM:FP: Animals, Plants, People, Objects, Places, Events, etc.
  2. Coming up with a way to standardize scope. Is it "a wasp feeding on a fly", or "wasp feeding on fly"? Is it "The construction of the Manhattan Bridge", or "Manhattan Bridge, construction"? If it's the former, I suggest grouping like scopes together. For example, if we have, "The Manhattan Bridge", and "The construction of the Manhattan Bridge", the latter is a narrower scope than the former, so we could organize them as such:
  • The Manhattan Bridge
    • The construction of the Manhattan Bridge

Scope is what makes this project valuable, so if the scopes aren't well organized and easy to navigate, it hurts the project. – flamurai 04:46, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Not sure this will be seen here. Suggest re-posting on Commons talk:Valued image candidates (see note at top of this page). --MichaelMaggs 06:16, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
✓ Done For further discussion, see Commons talk:Valued image candidates#Scope standarization – flamurai 06:48, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Excluding video[edit]

I disagree on excluding video. Category:OLPC video has some very good free videos!--Kozuch (talk) 06:58, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

I suggest posting to Commons talk:Valued image candidates as not many are watching this page. As to your comment, video is not excluded because we do not like video. It is because the current criteria are targeted on images. That was the most simple to start out with. You are welcome to propose and help develop criteria, which can also be used for Valued Video (VV).-- Slaunger (talk) 08:27, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Quality_images_candidates/candidate_list#January_5.2C_2009--Kozuch (talk) 12:46, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Pink Background[edit]

The pink backround color for candidate pages is distracting. Is is possible to change it with a neutral light gray?--Nevit Dilmen (talk) 20:12, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Graph on the main VI page[edit]

On May 2010, the number of promoted VI (107 for the moment) will excess the maximal number (100?) designed in the graph displayed on the main VI page :-D (or perhaps this maximum is automotically ajusted?) --Myrabella (talk) 20:07, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Categories[edit]

Please take a look at: Commons:Village_pump#QI/VI/FP_categories. Thanks - A.Savin 11:18, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Attempt to delete and censor image that is Featured Picture quality on multiple language Wikipedias[edit]

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,

-- Cirt (talk) 22:32, 15 December 2013 (UTC)