Commons talk:Featured picture candidates

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

QICbot is dead?[edit]

I guess that is not working. --Laitche (talk) 23:43, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

I don't know, but here it's more FPC :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:50, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

New contributors' votes[edit]

A low quality image was recently nominated by a new contributor who had only 3 edits and 0 days. This user failed in the processus of creation of the page, so I had to fix a few problems in the code before tagging it {{FPX}}. Not only the quality was far insufficient, but COM:FP says "Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for his/her own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed.". Now I'd like to know if there are exceptions to this rule. If the quality is good for example, can new contributors with less than 10 days and 50 edits support their own nominations ? -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:43, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi, It is quite obvious from the wording you cite, and it is like this since this rule exists. Regards, Yann (talk) 05:44, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Absolutely not obvious. What is obvious on the contrary is that editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote and editors whose accounts have less than 10 days or less than 50 edits cannot vote. Your interpretation is certainly wrong. And if I'm asking someone else, that's because you've suggested to ask someone else. So don't be surprised and don't answer once again with the same statement than the one you can't prove. I believe you made a mistake removing this template and you're also wrong to pretend new contributors can vote. At least that's not in the text, and that's not in the archives neither until now. I wouldn't see the use of writing official guidelines in order to act differently -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:39, 12 September 2018 (UTC) errors from my side amended -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:32, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
I guess he meant the sentence "Everybody can vote for his/her own nominations", which is certainly thought as an exception out of the "10 days / 50edits" rule. --A.Savin 06:58, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
So create a fake account, nominate your work, support it as nominator, then you get one extra support ? After that, just disappear. Nonsense. If that rule exists, that's certainly to avoid cheating IMO. And to avoid technical errors. I've just fixed the name of the author / uploader which was also wrong -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:26, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
I think it's similar like in case of cross-wiki meatpuppetry -- it's easy to mobilize seven supporters with more than 10d/50e each, but in practice experienced editors who are active at FPC take much more critical look at such nominations. We had cases of meatpuppetry here, but all that noms failed in the end, as far as I can remeber --A.Savin 07:44, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I remember Pumpkinsky/Halfgig spoiled many nominations by voting twice. So this rule is one more security. That's safer for the FP section to respect its guideline. I'm not in favor of saying something and doing something else, all the more so when we've been here for a long time. The rules are here and should be respected, or changed accordingly to the consensus. I think this is how Wikimedia works. And there's still freedom for the regular users. If the rules must be special for the new contributors AND nominators, then the guidelines may be explicitly amended, but only after concertation / discussion, and personally I would find absurd to change this part. For now, there's no exception stated, so no is just no -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:05, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
The text does not say "editors whose accounts have less than 10 days or less than 50 edits cannot vote". If it did, it would have to explicitly say that nominator-votes is an exception. Instead it mentions two groups (which may often overlap) who can vote and mentions one group that can never vote. It has worked without confusion for years. All systems are open to some abuse. We want to encourage new nominators (especially new photographer nominators at this time of WLM). Although Pumpkinsky/Halfgig managed to add a single extra vote to some of their nominations, it had a pretty marginal effect on the total that succeeded, making one wonder why go to all that bother to get a gold star. These rules were also copied over to Photo Challenge, where users with few contributions but who entered a challenge with photos are allowed to vote. And since Photo Challenge is meant to be even more "newbie friendly", we often are relaxed about editors with just less than 50 or who were active on another wiki project already. -- Colin (talk) 12:12, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
1) "You can smoke outside" doesn't mean you can smoke outside for sure, and inside maybe too. No, it just means you can't smoke inside. No ambiguity 2) The system has certainly been confusing for years, since only last month a similar invalid vote was struck out by me. Now we just have to agree -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:57, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Basile, could you just please accept you misunderstood. What you are claiming, about smoking rules, just isn't correct in English unless said in rebuke to someone caught smoking inside. The simplest logical understanding is to take both statements at face value, rather than try to guess some implication of the opposite. That nobody spotted your error last time, just reflects an assumption of good faith and competence. I wouldn't read into it that anyone agreed your were right last time. -- Colin (talk) 16:25, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Last time, I was right. Because last time, the IP supported a nomination that they could NOT support. They could not support because the guidelines say "Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed". So what happened last time : the invalid vote was reported unsigned and simply struck out like that as it was right to proceed.
Now, misunderstanding something, or something misleading ? "Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote." So if you have 3 edits for example, you just cannot vote. Same if you have 1 day or 2 days you cannot vote. Simple, obvious, explicit. "Everybody can vote for his/her own nominations." It means you can support the image you propose to others for reviews. Nobody is forced. You can abstain if you wish, or oppose if you're stupid, but supporting is allowed in any case. Particular rule, different from the photo challenge. So what about those new contributors with less than 10 days or less than 50 edits, can they vote for their own nominations too ? Is there an exception specified somewhere in the text ? No. Does their profiles match with the first requisite ? No. "You can smoke outside the kitchen. Everybody can eat" doesn't mean you can eat and smoke inside because everybody can eat, no. Sure it's written nowhere that we can't smoke inside, but it's obviously implied. At the condition you respect the first requisite, you can eat like everybody. Smoking outside or not smoking at all, we just don't like the smoke / Support your own nomination after 10 days and 50 edits or support any nomination, we just prefer regular accounts. The other interpretation is very intricate IMO -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:52, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Although the person shouldn't have voted last time, you weren't entirely right because the reason you gave was not "Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed". You seem determined to read the positive statement "Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote." as an absolute inverse negative. When women got the vote, nobody said "Oh, now that 'women can vote' I guess that means men can't". This is a silly argument and I'm done. -- Colin (talk) 11:28, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
"Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for his/her own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed." comes from Commons:Featured_picture_candidates#Voting in the instructional section. If you have a look at Commons:Featured_picture_candidates#General rules in the Featured picture candidate policy section things get crystal clear: Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Exception: registered users can always vote in their own nominations no matter the account age and number of edits. It's been like that since 2011. --El Grafo (talk) 12:43, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
✓OK Thanks, El Grafo -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:23, 13 September 2018 (UTC)