[WikiEN-l] Re: yet another image lost for posterity

[Mark Wagner]

On 11/28/05, Arwel Parry <arwel at cartref.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> In message
> <31073ef90511281617x7d096a26m53c249a3f1d17e3a at mail.gmail.com>, Mark
> Wagner <carnildo-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org> writes
> >Assuming Wikipedia is running along smoothly, an administrator can
> >delete one image every twenty seconds, if they don't notify the user
> >first or remove the image from pages where it's used, and if they do
> >only the quickest check to see if the image is tagged correctly.
> >Deleting all these images would take 185 man-hours of effort.
> >
> >If the administrator removes the image from articles where it's used
> >before deleting it, it takes about 40 seconds to delete an image.
> >This increases the effort needed to 370 man-hours.
>
> Just a minute - are you honestly advocating that images should be
> routinely deleted without removing links from articles which use them?
> Because in that case I STRONGLY object to this attitude. For some time
> I've been coming across articles on my watchlist which suddenly have red
> image links in prominent places: apart from looking damned ugly, it's
> highly give a highly unprofessional impression of Wikipedia. It should
> be OBLIGATORY in my opinion for the people deleting images to FIRST
> remove the links to them, and hang the extra work involved!

Guess why images tagged as "fair use" but not used in any article
(such as the image Anthere was complaining about) are being deleted so
quickly?  It's because the images can be deleted without removing any
links to them.  Links from talk pages shouldn't be removed, because
doing so would disrupt history, links from userpages can be ignored
because they shouldn't have been made in the first place, and links
from templates have mostly been taken care of by the drive to remove
fair-use images from template-space.

--
[[User:Carnildo]]