The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Old (2012) RFC with one proponent and one opponent. –Be..anyone (talk) 11:18, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
An editor had requested comment from other editors for this discussion.
The discussion is now closed, please do not modify it.
There are a number of dedicated contributors to Commons who upload images, categorize them, check the new uploads for Commons acceptance criteria, and when, in their esteemed view an image some images serve no academic value or utility or violate norms, mark them for Deletion.
However, it has been seen that there are number of people on Commons who never upload a single image. Yet these people erratically mark images for deletion, participate in Deletion Request Discussions to randomly vote Delete in most cases or Keep in some rare cases. Surprisingly, their edit count increases dramatically and on a cursory look they may seem to be ardent contributors. But a closer look would reveal their non-serious intentions. This RFC is about how to handle these issues. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 06:08, 11 May 2012 (UTC).
I strongly oppose this proposal. While I am not a DR regular, I think "DR addiction" is not a serious problem (examples please?) Any disruption can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. On your third point: I believe the reason IPs cannot upload images is because while some files are never reviewed by another user to check whether there are problems. DRs don't have this problem because every one is reviewed by an admin to determine whether or not to delete the file. I don't think an IP ban, contributor limit, or blacklist is a good idea, because there are contributors (I am one) who don't have 100 uploads, but (I hope) do a decent jobs at making DRs. Same thing with IPs. I firmly hope this proposal isn't implemented. David1217 (talk) 00:31, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
"DR addiction" is also a problem just as drug addiction. One user was blocked because of incorrect and mass nomination of files as "out of scope", editor warned twice but still continues to nominate - as per the comment posted by an admin on the block page.
Other issues - uploads, limits, etc depend on consensus. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 09:05, 20 August 2012 (UTC).
I think any "DR addiction problems can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. And I still firmly oppose the limits. David1217 (talk) 02:19, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.