Commons talk:Oversighters

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

Page re-write[edit]

I have added some more information to the page. Comments welcome. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 11:38, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Mailing list?[edit]

I for one have had to request oversight at least three times now, and have always found that the oversighter I emailed always seemed to be inactive at the time. Once the request is handled an additional email is sent to the other oversighters "per policy". Instead of emailing each oversighter individually, or having to cc each one of them in I suggest some form of mailing list is set up where a user sends requests, and one of the three oversighters responds (ensuring they cc the sender). I suspect this would enhance response time, as well as improve communication between oversighters. Thoughts? Tiptoety talk 15:48, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

For the record: "per policy" is just that. We three oversee each other, and every request we get is copied to all of us with a note as to what we did. It works well, I think, I think we trust each other about as much as any three people who've never met could. As for improving communication "between oversighters" there's no actual problem there, we communicate just fine, IMHO. The problem a list fixes is making it easier for NON oversighters to communicate with US. Just thought I'd clear some things up. A list is a good idea, but not because we oversighters have a problem communicating with each other :). ++Lar: t/c 04:25, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
I agree with Tiptoety. Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 18:05, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
I have requested oversight few times and I have always mailed Lar (and I've always got a fast answer from him! :) ) but it seems a good idea for me. In eswiki, for example, we have a mailing list for our oversighters too (and they are only 3) and as far as I know it is giving good results. I think that having a mailing list for the oversighters is an advantage and a easy way to handle the requests. --Dferg (talk) 18:25, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone know how to set up a mailing list via Tiptoety talk 20:48, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

There is a mailing list for oversight on :en[1], might help you to build this one. --Túrelio (talk) 20:50, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

You have to follow the procedure explained on meta at m:Mailing_lists#Create_a_new_list --Dferg (talk) 20:53, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Alright. I am going to wait to hear from an oversighter prior to setting them up a mailing list. ;-) Tiptoety talk 21:04, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

We need a mailing list because mailing one oversighter, whichever one you pick, is a recipe for not always getting the fastest responses. Telling people to mail all three of us doesn't work well, hardly anyone ever does. Most of what I see coming in lately is someone discovering that some thing 3 months old needs fixing, which doesn't need top urgent crash priority, but because sometimes the request IS hot, a mailing list would be goodness. If someone wants to put in a request, great. I've adminned lists before so I guess I can admin this one if there is some reason we shouldn't all 3 be admins. Thanks for stirring this about. BTW the name should be oversight-commons to be || with the newly created 'crat list (which I note not all the crats are on yet, sigh... someone should just subscribe them all :) ) ++Lar: t/c 04:17, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Meh, I went and created the bug. see 20819 ++Lar: t/c 04:21, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
... Uh-oh... I did too: [2] :-P Tiptoety talk 04:37, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Someone marked it as a duplicate, problem solved. (I am not very savvy when it comes to bugzilla). Tiptoety talk 04:49, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Mailing list has been created. I've suggested to my fellow oversighters that we all be admins of it. ++Lar: t/c 02:25, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I have changed the introduction to note the recently created mailing list (with a link to it). Please feel free to revert if you consider that innappropiate. --Dferg (talk) 13:09, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
We don't have all the kinks worked out yet, it may be a bit premature. The wording looks really good though. ++Lar: t/c 17:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Looks good. Tiptoety talk 03:43, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

inactive oversighters?[edit]

Could the oversighter team please take note of (and reply to) Marcus' question at Commons talk:Oversighters/Requests/PierreSelim, which is unrelated to Pierre personally, but was triggered by Odder's rfO rationale. --Túrelio (talk) 13:24, 23 July 2013 (UTC)