Hello,
It is the second time in two weeks I have to restore a deleted image that appears on the [[Wikimedia logo mosaic]]: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete... http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete...
It may be because of our brand new CommonsDelinker (great tool btw), some admins may feel they can delete images without checking the usage of all photos. This is not the case. Please always checkusage before deleting. If you are about to delete an image appearing in the mosaic, find another one to replace it *before* deleting the bad one.
And please, do not turn this thread into an endless argument about « why haven't all these images been verified before », I am sure they have been.
On 3/13/07, Guillaume Paumier guillom.pom@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
It is the second time in two weeks I have to restore a deleted image that appears on the [[Wikimedia logo mosaic]]: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete... http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete...
It may be because of our brand new CommonsDelinker (great tool btw), some admins may feel they can delete images without checking the usage of all photos. This is not the case. Please always checkusage before deleting. If you are about to delete an image appearing in the mosaic, find another one to replace it *before* deleting the bad one.
I fail to see any reason to hesitate when it come to deleteing likely copyvios.
On 3/13/07, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/13/07, Guillaume Paumier guillom.pom@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
It is the second time in two weeks I have to restore a deleted image
that
appears on the [[Wikimedia logo mosaic]]:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete...
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete...
It may be because of our brand new CommonsDelinker (great tool btw),
some
admins may feel they can delete images without checking the usage of all photos. This is not the case. Please always checkusage before deleting.
If
you are about to delete an image appearing in the mosaic, find another
one
to replace it *before* deleting the bad one.
I fail to see any reason to hesitate when it come to deleteing likely copyvios.
I fail to see any reason to not take some minutes to find a similar image to replace it before the deletion.
On 3/13/07, Guillaume Paumier guillom.pom@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/13/07, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/13/07, Guillaume Paumier guillom.pom@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
It is the second time in two weeks I have to restore a deleted image
that
appears on the [[Wikimedia logo mosaic]]:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete...
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete...
It may be because of our brand new CommonsDelinker (great tool btw),
some
admins may feel they can delete images without checking the usage of all photos. This is not the case. Please always checkusage before deleting.
If
you are about to delete an image appearing in the mosaic, find another
one
to replace it *before* deleting the bad one.
I fail to see any reason to hesitate when it come to deleteing likely
copyvios.
I fail to see any reason to not take some minutes to find a similar image to replace it before the deletion.
-- Guillaume Paumier [[m:User:guillom]] http://www.wikimedia.org _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
AS pretty as mosaic is, it's not a top priority. That's why.
On 3/13/07, Pedro Sanchez pdsanchez@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/13/07, Guillaume Paumier guillom.pom@gmail.com wrote:
I fail to see any reason to not take some minutes to find a similar
image to
replace it before the deletion.
AS pretty as mosaic is, it's not a top priority. That's why.
If deleting images were so easy, we would let bots deal with it. You (meaning you human commons admins) are supposed to have a brain and use it. Of course it is easier to click the delete button without bothering replacing it.
On 3/13/07, Guillaume Paumier guillom.pom@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/13/07, Pedro Sanchez pdsanchez@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/13/07, Guillaume Paumier guillom.pom@gmail.com wrote:
I fail to see any reason to not take some minutes to find a similar
image to
replace it before the deletion.
AS pretty as mosaic is, it's not a top priority. That's why.
If deleting images were so easy, we would let bots deal with it. You (meaning you human commons admins) are supposed to have a brain and use it. Of course it is easier to click the delete button without bothering replacing it.
--
Guillaume Paumier [[m:User:guillom]] http://www.wikimedia.org _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
If it's a copyvio, it should be deleted on sight, it being on the mosaic is no excuse for waiting (I was commenting on above's comment above copyvios).
On 3/13/07, Pedro Sanchez pdsanchez@gmail.com wrote:
If it's a copyvio, it should be deleted on sight, it being on the mosaic is no excuse for waiting (I was commenting on above's comment above copyvios).
Hey, I hate copyvios as much as everybody, I have deleted thousands of them, I am clearly not saying we should keep copyvios with the excuse of them being on the mosaic or any other much-viewed page. I am asking admins to think a little and take 1 minute to find another image to replace it with an image from the colours gallery [1].
[1] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_logo_mosaic/Colours_gallery
On 3/13/07, Guillaume Paumier guillom.pom@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/13/07, Pedro Sanchez pdsanchez@gmail.com wrote:
If it's a copyvio, it should be deleted on sight, it being on the mosaic is no excuse for waiting (I was commenting on above's comment above copyvios).
Hey, I hate copyvios as much as everybody, I have deleted thousands of them, I am clearly not saying we should keep copyvios with the excuse of them being on the mosaic or any other much-viewed page. I am asking admins to think a little and take 1 minute to find another image to replace it with an image from the colours gallery [1].
[1] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_logo_mosaic/Colours_gallery
--
Guillaume Paumier [[m:User:guillom]] http://www.wikimedia.org _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
I'm saying, once the pressing matter is done (deleting the copyvio), there are other more pressing matters than looking for a image that fits in the mosaic. Yes, mosaic pretty. Finding replacements for it nice thing to do. But again, it's not a top priority, we shouldn't stop doing what we're doing just to attend the mosaic. Onc eagain, doing so it's a nice thing however.
On 3/13/07, Pedro Sanchez pdsanchez@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, mosaic pretty. Finding replacements for it nice thing to do. But again, it's not a top priority, we shouldn't stop doing what we're doing just to attend the mosaic. Onc eagain, doing so it's a nice thing however.
This page is linked from an official press release from the foundation. It is linked from the first frame of [[Commons:Welcome]] which is the first link on Commons Main page. So yes, I think keeping it without red links is important. It is sad if I am the only one.
If the mosaic is going to get in the way of our fundimental mission then we might need to reconsider if we should be keeping it at all. ... Although I agree with Erik's view that a few broken images in the mosaic are not a bad thing.
In any case, a copy vio image should never be undeleted simbly because it has not yet been replaced.
On 3/13/07, Guillaume Paumier guillom.pom@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/13/07, Pedro Sanchez pdsanchez@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, mosaic pretty. Finding replacements for it nice thing to do. But again, it's not a top priority, we shouldn't stop doing what we're doing just to attend the mosaic. Onc eagain, doing so it's a nice thing however.
This page is linked from an official press release from the foundation. It is linked from the first frame of [[Commons:Welcome]] which is the first link on Commons Main page. So yes, I think keeping it without red links is important. It is sad if I am the only one.
-- Guillaume Paumier [[m:User:guillom]] http://www.wikimedia.org
On 13/03/07, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:
If the mosaic is going to get in the way of our fundimental mission then we might need to reconsider if we should be keeping it at all. ... Although I agree with Erik's view that a few broken images in the mosaic are not a bad thing. In any case, a copy vio image should never be undeleted simbly because it has not yet been replaced.
Well, how was the mosaic constructed? How did we go through the images finding ones of the right average colour? Presumably someone could do a checking run again looking for verified-status images of the right average colour for use as copyvio replacements on an ongoing basis. The mosaic can cope with temporary holes while a violation is being replaced if there's a pile of known-good replacements to hand.
- d.
"David Gerard" dgerard@gmail.com wrote on Tue, 13 Mar 2007:
On 13/03/07, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:
If the mosaic is going to get in the way of our fundimental mission then we might need to reconsider if we should be keeping it at all. ... Although I agree with Erik's view that a few broken images in the mosaic are not a bad thing. In any case, a copy vio image should never be undeleted simbly because it has not yet been replaced.
Well, how was the mosaic constructed? How did we go through the images finding ones of the right average colour? Presumably someone could do a checking run again looking for verified-status images of the right average colour for use as copyvio replacements on an ongoing basis. The mosaic can cope with temporary holes while a violation is being replaced if there's a pile of known-good replacements to hand.
What about getting a CommonsTicker for Commons .... --~~~~
On 14/03/07, Guillaume Paumier guillom.pom@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/13/07, Pedro Sanchez pdsanchez@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, mosaic pretty. Finding replacements for it nice thing to do. But again, it's not a top priority, we shouldn't stop doing what we're doing just to attend the mosaic. Onc eagain, doing so it's a nice thing however.
This page is linked from an official press release from the foundation. It is linked from the first frame of [[Commons:Welcome]] which is the first link on Commons Main page. So yes, I think keeping it without red links is important. It is sad if I am the only one.
Hear hear. Look, Guillom is not forcing you to replace the images. But there already exists a gallery you can use to replace images ( http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_logo_mosaic/Colours_gallery ) so it's not an onerous amount of work. How about everyone just keeps it in mind and takes a little bit more care with deletion.
cheers, Brianna user:pfctdayelise
-----Original Message----- From: commons-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:commons-l- bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Pedro Sanchez Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 11:28 AM To: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List Subject: Re: [Commons-l] Please do not delete images used on [[Wikimedialogo mosaic]]
On 3/13/07, Guillaume Paumier guillom.pom@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/13/07, Pedro Sanchez pdsanchez@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/13/07, Guillaume Paumier guillom.pom@gmail.com wrote:
I fail to see any reason to not take some minutes to find a similar
image to
replace it before the deletion.
AS pretty as mosaic is, it's not a top priority. That's why.
If deleting images were so easy, we would let bots deal with it. You (meaning you human commons admins) are supposed to have a brain and use
it.
Of course it is easier to click the delete button without bothering replacing it.
--
Guillaume Paumier [[m:User:guillom]] http://www.wikimedia.org _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
If it's a copyvio, it should be deleted on sight, it being on the mosaic is no excuse for waiting (I was commenting on above's comment above copyvios).
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.10/720 - Release Date: 3/12/2007 7:19 PM
Are these all copyvios? Or something less severe, like No Source, or Replaced.
It's fairly easy to determine if anything is being used on Commons without even going into checkusage. The pages they're being used on are listed right on the image page.
Cary
On 3/13/07, Guillaume Paumier guillom.pom@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
It is the second time in two weeks I have to restore a deleted image that appears on the [[Wikimedia logo mosaic]]:
In some way, the torn apart mosaic would be a nice visual indication of the rate of content loss we suffer from copyvios. ;-)
I agree with you that it's good manners to check usage before deleting, but I still prefer deleting a copyvio to leaving it alone. Redundant and "low quality" images are another matter, though.