http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-December/035512.html
In the rabid frenzy to cleanse the image database, mistakes are made. How are we going on some way to recover from them?
- d.
On 12/19/05, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-December/035512.html
In the rabid frenzy to cleanse the image database, mistakes are made. How are we going on some way to recover from them?
At this point, the best solution is for people to tag things or delete things to save the darn images. This requires no modification to the mediawiki software, nor does it carry with it the naming or storage implications of a full undeletion system... plus, it is available right *now*.
Your language shows the sort of disrespect common from those who are unconcerned about the legal status of our project. There is no rabid frenzy to delete the image, rather, the deletions are going unacceptably slowly.
There have been multiple responsible users, who ensured the images they deleted or tagged were unrecoverable, who have been chased away from the image cleanup process by user overwhelmed with anger, distrust, and disrespect.
As such I have no hesitation in saying that the unrecoverability of the few incorrectly deleted images is entirely the fault of the people who attack people for cleaning up images. Good job.
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
On 12/19/05, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-December/035512.html
In the rabid frenzy to cleanse the image database, mistakes are made. How are we going on some way to recover from them?
Your language shows the sort of disrespect common from those who are unconcerned about the legal status of our project. There is no rabid frenzy to delete the image, rather, the deletions are going unacceptably slowly.
That's nice, dear. Now, as for the actual question ...
- d.
On 12/19/05, David Gerard fun@thingy.apana.org.au wrote:
That's nice, dear. Now, as for the actual question ...
I gave you a perfectly good solution, which doesn't require new development on old code which just needs to be replaced and whos replacement is a lower priority than the thousand and one other features which are awaiting attention and can't be just worked around.
Again, quit being a jerk and perhaps people will be willing to work on it.
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
On 12/19/05, David Gerard fun@thingy.apana.org.au wrote:
That's nice, dear. Now, as for the actual question ...
Again, quit being a jerk and perhaps people will be willing to work on it.
Who bit whose head off for asking if a planned feature was in progress?
Is there anyone here who knows how image undeletion is going? If images are undeletable then the explosive touchiness exhibited by Gregory in this thread will be greatly defused.
- d.
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org