Not sure if anything as described below has ever been suggested, let alone
rejected. Wikimedia projects usually do not work in the same way as Pau.l
has indicated in the example for Flickr. "Ownership" is the main
difference, I think, but ways of using and embedding the resources are
also very different.
Still, each media upload on Commons has a media revision history, which
indicates which user has uploaded the media, and there is a direct link to
the user talk page of the uploader. From a page in a random Wikimedia
where the media is being used, it takes 4 clicks to comment to the
uploader, although this does not immediately provide a connection to the
media file:
1. Click media in Wikimedia project page.
2. Click link to commons from Image: resource page in local Wikimedia
project.
3. Click link to uploader talk page.
4. Click link to create new page section for commenting.
I agree; this is quite a journey, and many will probably fail to complete
this challenge. What user story would be fitting here? From there, a
solution could be designed.
Siebrand
Op 23-02-11 16:04 schreef Eusebius <wikipedia@eusebius.fr>:
>Now that's constructive.
>I would love to see something like that on Commons. But surely this is
>not the first time this is suggested, and this has been rejected for a
>reason?
>
>Guillaume
>
>Le 23/02/2011 15:58, Paul Houle a écrit :
>> As someone who develops media collections, I've been thinking a
>> lot about the role of community, and in my mind, Flickr is the site
>> that is the most successful at attracting photographers because Flickr
>> is all about the photographer. The way comments and favorites work is
>> particularly sticky because you know you're giving feedback directly to
>> the person who took the picture.
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l