Given that several Commons admins had dropped out, and bearing in mind the clean-up campaign called for by the board and Jimbo, I put in an RFA at Commons, saying I would help clean up pornographic images *that are not in use by any project*. The result so far: 14 Opposes, 1 Support. You get the same result if you nominate a pornographic image for deletion. Andreas
--- On Sun, 9/5/10, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
From: Anthony wikimail@inbox.org Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Jimbo's Sexual Image Deletions To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Sunday, 9 May, 2010, 1:32
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 8:19 PM, David Levy lifeisunfair@gmail.com wrote:
Anthony wrote:
OMG. Red links would indicate to a human that there was a problem which needed to be solved. Then that human could go about solving the problem (which very well may involve more than just delinking the image).
What, other than delinking or uploading the missing image locally (thereby bypassing Commons), do you expect a wiki to do?
Replacing it with a different image, removing the text from the article which refers to the image, contacting someone at Commons to argue for reinstatement of the image...
And yeah, uploading the missing image locally (thereby bypassing Commons) would be another possibility.
All depends on the situation. But fortunately, the human brain (unlike the robot brain) is very flexible in dealing with a multitude of situations.
And how do you expect editors who cannot read English (particularly those whose native languages are among the less widespread) to even understand why in-use images are being deleted?
Maybe by finding a translator? Alternatively, they could employ one of the possibilities listed above which don't involve speaking English at all. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l