There is no denying that Commons does provide a significant service to other WMF projects, regardless of the definition and perception of what Commons is meant to be

What we keep coming back to are
  1.  That when a file is deleted on Commons if there is an option for it to be transferred to another project then we should be doing it, but this isnt happening automatically and very rarely manually.
    1. the reason being is Commons admins dont know they can,
    2. think that its not their responsibility to find out if there are alternative options
    3. arent language proficient to upload or seek help on other projects to ensure its a valid action
  2. When Commons does discuss the status of a file people who are using the file aren't necessarily being adequately made aware of the discussions
    1. there is no  notification that causes watchlist activity on other projects when listing a file
    2. the first time they find out about the discussion is either a dead link in an article, or a bot edit removing the file link. This just creates a hostile environment before meaningful discussion starts which further worsened by being responded to with "take it to delreview if you dont like it"
  3. If a contributor from another WMF project does comment they feel as if they are being dismissed as an SPA, and not being heard because they arent active participants at Commons.
    1. unfortunately they also experience being bitten,
    2. discussion being tagged as not vote or some other "if you came from outside commons go away we'll deal with it"

What we need to be looking at is fixing this communication problem, both before a decision is reached to encourage input and after its occurred to ensure best possible outcomes for all parties. We have been here before and will continue to keep coming back to this until we take steps to improve communication which results in meaningful success when and where possible

One of the first things on Commons we could do is assume the deletion reason is valid ie URAA, fairuse etcso lets  bypass Delreview and have a page for deleted file transfers requests. Where a simple request could be placed with just the file:name, destination, licensing on project and a tag to indicate it has been deleted on Commons and transferred on request with relevant links.

Additionally when bots remove the links to a deleted file they could place a boiler notice on the article talk page directing them to the discussion and that page so they can understand what has occurred and what they do next.

or we can........ suggestions, thoughts, speak up lets fix this and start discussing important things like which pub to meet at in London


On 24 June 2014 23:27, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi,
HELL NO

Commons is not an exhibition.. that implies that things can be found by people looking for "i. Anyway according to the main page "a database of 21,617,796 freely usable media files to which anyone can contribute".
Thanks,
      GerardM


On 24 June 2014 16:24, Neel Gupta <freedom.ne0@gmail.com> wrote:
Back to topic:

The purpose of commons is to be an Exhibition for public domain digital media, & the purpose of Wikipedia is to be an Encyclopedia.
The problem arises when commons can't keep the donated digital media, because US laws prohibit it. This problem is enlarged because every Wikipedia regional site uses commons as a digital media library, and moves all the PD works to commons, which then deletes half of them due to copyright incompatibility.


On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Rama Neko <ramaneko@gmail.com> wrote:
It makes as much sense to say that Commons is a repository for other Wikimedia projects, than to say that Wikipedia is here to provide encyclopedic context to the media of Wikimedia Commons.

Where the real asymetry lies is in the feeling of superiority of certain users of others projects who see Commons as a "service project", and from there construct the notion that jackbooting in and ordering people around is remotely legitimate (and, to be practical, has a chance to work).
There is a small number of users, always the same, who regularly attempt to push an agenda of lax copyright standards for Commons; when this fails they try to impose their proposed policies by drumming up support from people with vested interests from other projects, and notorious authoritarians. Has anybody ever seen an influx of Commonists flocking to wp.he to "treat it as a problem"?

That is where the real problem is. The issue is not hosting these media, they can be hosted locally on the projects that use them as "Free-but-not-on-Commons", or as "Fair use". The issue is beating Commons into submission, as an aim in itself. Well, pardon us if we object.

  -- Rama




On 21 June 2014 19:19, Yann Forget <yannfo@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Rama,

Sorry, but you have it all wrong.

1. Wikimedia is a repository for other Wikimedia projects. It is its
primary mission.

2. But this does not make Commons contributors second-class. On the
opposite, importing and managing files for other projects make them
first-class IMHO. ;oD

Yann


2014-06-21 10:04 GMT+05:30 Rama Neko <ramaneko@gmail.com>:
> Commons is not there to serve other projects. Commons is a project of its
> own standing, and the other projects are there to serve it just as much as
> it is there to serve other projects.
>
> It is really dispiriting to see how certain people see Commonists as some
> sort of second-class contributors. That is wrong in every sense of the word
> -- it is an error and an injustice.
>   -- Rama
>
>
>
> On 20 June 2014 23:45, David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I've noted before: If Commons doesn't want to be regarded as a problem
>> by other projects, it really needs to start behaving less like one.
>>
>>
>> - d.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Commons-l mailing list
>> Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l


_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l



_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l



_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l




--
GN.
Vice President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com