Template talk:Assessments

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


Valued image[edit]

Adding the valued image does not work well, see e. g. File:Sant Vasily cathedral in Moscow.JPG. After adding the parameter "valued", most of the text within the template changes into italics. Also the link to the scope of the valued image is missing (there is no parameter for it). Jan Kameníček (talk) 21:44, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

I don’t know what the problem is, but it seems to be in Template:Assessments/translate/en, because it appears only with English interface. Unfortunately the most users use English interface. --Tacsipacsi (talk) 17:17, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I see it now. It seems that the English version of the template tries to mention the scope, but in a bad way. Does anybody know how to fix it? The scope should be there. Jan Kameníček (talk) 18:44, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Wallpaper suggestion[edit]

To begin with I'm not sure what the original intended idea behind this was but it's showing up in places you'd expect it the least, like suggesting the Buchenwald Slave Laborers Liberation would make an excellent wallpaper. Not sure if this is set automatically or manually but in cases like this it's ranging from... weird to outright offensive, depending on the viewer. KennyOMG (talk) 02:25, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi KennyOMG, the wallpaper suggestion is not something that has been done automatically. It appears because, and only because, the argument wallpaper=1 has been inserted as an argument to the template for this file page back in 2012 by Shizhao. I do not know why this user has chosen to mark this file page as a suitable wallpaper back then, but I agree it does not appear as the best editorial judgement as it could cause distress for users looking for potential wallpaper photographs. Of course users are free to use this image as a wallpaper if they for some reason want that, but in that case I think it is reasonable that they actively search for this image itself. I have therefore removed the wallpaper argument from this image again. -- Slaunger (talk) 17:02, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
I see, Slaunger, so if I see instances like this in the future just remove the wallpaper=1 part and be done with it? Thanks! KennyOMG (talk) 17:44, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
KennyOMG: That's what I would do. Be bold and remove it if you find an image is not in any way reasonable as a wall paper. If someone disagrees, they will revert and then you can discuss the suitability/insuitability of marking it as wallpaper. Remember in this process to also to be a open-minded though and show empathy for different cultures, gender, countries, religions, etc. regarding what is perceived suitable as a wallpaper. This particular case is rather obvious for me though. -- Slaunger (talk) 17:55, 10 January 2017 (UTC)