Commons talk:Quality images candidates

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

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Commons:Quality images candidates.
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23

"Insufficient quality"[edit]

It wasn't a long time ago that we had a discussion here and agreed that this kind of uninformative reason for declining a photo shouldn't be used, but that an attempt should always be made to state what is insufficient. Yet I've seen a lot of backsliding on this. Just do a search through this page and you'll see a lot of "insufficient quality" reviews. Since we agreed no longer to do this, can we try to remember that and act accordingly? Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:44, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

I agree, we are not going to get contributors to realise why their nominations are lacking unless we tell them why. Rodhullandemu (talk) 22:05, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
+1 --George Chernilevsky talk 14:14, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
+1. “Insufficient quality” is an insufficient reason ;–). We must tell people what exactly is wrong with an image. --Aristeas (talk) 09:33, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
I've updated MediaWiki:Gadget-QICvote.js so that it automatically prompts users to fill in a reason for declining. -- King of ♥ 18:12, 14 July 2020 (UTC)