Commons:Village pump/Proposals

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Shortcut: COM:VP/P · COM:VPP

Community portal
introduction
Help desk
uploading
Village pump
copyrightproposals
Administrators' noticeboard
vandalismuser problemsblocks and protections
Welcome to the Village pump proposals section

This page is used for proposals relating to the operations, technical issues, and policies of Wikimedia Commons; it is distinguished from the main Village pump, which handles community-wide discussion of all kinds. The page may also be used to advertise significant discussions taking place elsewhere, such as on the talk page of a Commons policy. Recent sections with no replies for 30 days and sections tagged with {{section resolved|1=~~~~}} may be archived; for old discussions, see the archives.

Commons discussion pages (index)


Please note
  • One of Wikimedia Commons' basic principles is: "Only free content is allowed." Please do not ask why unfree material is not allowed on Wikimedia Commons or suggest that allowing it would be a good thing.
  • Have you read the FAQ?

 

Proposal to increase minimum image dimensions for featured pictures, and set a minimum for featured animations and video[edit]

Please participate at Commons talk:Featured picture candidates#Proposal to increase minimum image dimensions for featured pictures, and set a minimum for featured animations and video. --Pine 06:02, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

List of used photos: "USED UPLOADS"[edit]

It would be very nice if there was a point "List of used photos" ("USED UPLOADS") on the menu. (I have uploaded hundreds of photos. I am happy to know, see what use. (No matter where))

for example:

English | USER | 0 | 0 | Talk | Preferences | Beta | Watchlist | Uploads | "USED UPLOADS" | Contributions | Log out

--Molgreen (talk) 12:27, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

https://tools.wmflabs.org/glamtools/glamorous.php
In Preferences under Gadgets, you can turn on that tool for categories, so you have a link to see usage for all images in that category. I don't know of a way to get a link added for a user's uploads, but you can do that once you go to the tool page. Carl Lindberg (talk) 06:35, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Fine. Thank you very much. That is very helpful.
Something I would additionally wish: a link to the corresponding to the images. (So I can learn which images / motives for others are interesting. So my wish for the menu item "USED UPLOADS".)
--Molgreen (talk) 14:23, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
When you are using the tool, click the "Show limited details" -- that will show you a breakdown by image. "Show details" gives you links to the individual articles (though you can also just go to the image page on the individual project to see those as well). I agree it might be nice to have a per-user link to the tool in the sidebar if turned on in preferences, much like categories. Carl Lindberg (talk) 15:42, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Many Thanks. That's what I was looking for. And yes, it would be very nice if this would be preset. --Molgreen (talk) 16:20, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
@Molgreen: Another thing to try... go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets and turn on "Global Usage Badges". The tool works on COM:MyGallery, and will indicate global usage count for an editor's uploads (It's 'my gallery', but you can change the targeted editor once the tool is actually loaded). Reventtalk 23:46, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

New criteria for speedy deletion[edit]

Hi. I notice lately that Wikimedia Commons has been flooded with personal photos that are out of scope. Should we amend the speedy deletion policy as follows?: The following media will now be nominated for speedy deletion: Personal photos(unless the person was notable) Do you like my idea?--100.36.171.168 16:34, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Personal photos are allowed if used on user pages. We also have no notability guidelines, and using Wikipedia's is not always the best (wikibooks may still have use for some things, Wikinews, etc.) Those type of things are really still a judgement call that likely needs a DR. Speedy deletes don't really give uploaders a chance to defend their stuff. Carl Lindberg (talk) 16:50, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Very bad idea, IMO. Speedy deletions are for images where there is obviously no particular need for admin discretion... cases where either there is an obvious legal need for deletion, or the community consensus is so well established that debate would just be a waste of time.... things like copyright violations, re-uploads of previously deleted files, and duplicates. "Scope" is always a judgement call... it's a matter of opinion, and so should be open to discussion.
There are 'personal photos' of unremarkable people that are in scope, because they usefully illustrate something like a behavior, ethic group, mode of dress, medical condition, whatever.. Even if a image is simply 'uploaded' as spam does not directly imply that it might not fill a unique gap in our collection. Sometimes they simply end up being used to make the examples used in an article like 'selfie' more diverse. Reventtalk 23:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Exactly: User:Revent tells it like it is. -- Tuválkin 03:43, 23 July 2016 (UTC)