On 11/12/06, Łukasz Garczewski <tor(a)oak.pl> wrote: N would be about 1000 for english. Currently less than 500 items are deleted from commons per day. To bost that to the level of some of our pedias would be a massive increase in workload. -- geni

Sorry for that, obviously I meant those that comply with our license. I'm from de:WP, you don't have to tell me that Fair Use is pure evil ;) Lennert B

On 12/11/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com> wrote: Possibly we should start a separate project ... a service project for other Wikimedia projects to use as an image repository, to avoid duplicated images between wikis. Since Commons thinks it's toooo haaaard to stoop to that any more. Does that sound like it might be a useful idea? - d.

On 12/11/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com> wrote: Well, uh, *yeah*. Commons was not started as a free-culture media repository of spectacular cultural potential. It was started as a shared image repository service project for the Wikimedia projects. Here we have Commons admins claiming it's toooo haaaard to do the job Commons was invented for, so they'll start behaving in an actively hostile manner to other Wikimedia projects. So when a new language starts using Commons for its images - the way all projects are supposed to with their free-content images - then Commons needs to add an admin or two from that project. If Commons can't do the job with the admins it has now, it needs to add a new procedure to allow admins from said projects to be trusted to do the same job on Commons. Else Commons fails in its original purpose, and will need replacing with a project that will work. - d.

On 11/12/06, Barcex <lv.cabc(a)gmail.com> wrote: ;) And some mexican editors are commons admins but not es admins ;)

Hmm... I am actually shocked. I was expecting the contrary since there are more Americans (Mexicans and USians) than Spanish.... On 11/13/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com> wrote:

2000 vs 31000? Doesn't compare well. :) I do not like working for Tr.wikiall that much at the moment. In all fairness however I am no native tr speaker. - Cool Cat On 11/17/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com> wrote:

On 12/11/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com> wrote: For the same reason anyone can edit. Our usual practice is to get the maximal contribution input then clean it up afterward, rather than try to limit it before the fact. - d.

On 11/12/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com> wrote: Your problem and solution don't seem to be properly coordinated. The problem is people who come to commons, create accounts, and then never check those accounts. It really has little to do with multilingualism. If English WP shut off uploads and sent people to commons it would be mostly the same problem. Commons isn't ready for a large influx of contributions by what I'll call "drive-by contributors from other projects". It probably will be some day. I hope we are all in agreement that that's what we want, even if we can't agree on whether or not to start working on it *now*. I wonder if it's time to take this to foundation-l, as it's a major issue which affects pretty much all of the projects. Anthony

On 11/12/06, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote: And as a result we still have a load of stuff in [[en:Category:Images used with permission]] and my talk page is filling up with people complaining that I keep deleting their images. We also have issues such as trying to dig figure out when a copyvio entered an article and according to certian message board posts people getting threatening letters for useing wikipedia images in good faith. For once it would be nice not to have to try and play catch up. -- geni

On 11/12/06, Artur Fijałkowski <wiki.warx(a)gmail.com> wrote: Don't. Hard drive space is cheaper than instilling common sense into people. :), but I'm essentially serious. Anthony

On 11/12/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com> wrote: At the worst backups should require twice as much space as the images themselves. If Wikimedia's backups require much more Brion is doing something really really wrong. Note that I didn't even say hard drive space was cheap. I just said it's cheaper than education. You contradict yourself. Being a disordered dumping ground doesn't require categorization, verification, or search. Anthony

On 11/12/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com> wrote: Rotating tapes offsite is a backup. Transferring everything to two other data centers is a backup (put those data centers on different continents and it's a local cache too). Backup isn't a complex thing. And unless you're doing something dumb the cost of backup is most certainly linear (compared to the cost of the initial storage). Put the image dumps in gigabyte chunks on a superseeding bittorrent server, and you could probably get backups nearly free (just the cost of transferring the images once if you can convince enough others to act as seeds, which you probably could). Of course, now I'm talking introducing a bit of design into things. Really stupid easy backups like the ones in my first message are still linear. I'd say that "explain[ing to] people that not every ''shitty image'' they produce is worth publishing on Wikimedia projects" doesn't scale either, and that an image repository with some parts which are organized and some parts which aren't has an equal or even higher value than an image repository without those disorganized parts. Of course, space *is* a consideration, and it wouldn't make sense to outright advertise "dump all your trash here". By all means rules should be in place that say that useless crap will be deleted. And sure, if space gets tight that rule might need to be enforced to a greater extent than when it isn't. But trying to explain to people what should be obvious, that I'd say is a waste of resources. Anthony

06-11-12, Diego Renato <diego.renato(a)gmail.com> napisał(a): No... I really don't like banning anyone (or I simple can't people I want :P) Main problem (hidden in the topic), is that: People uploading copyvio images are not BAD, they are simple not informed well !! I don't know Spanish, so I can't check it by myself, but I have bad feeling that closing upload on es.wiki was made in tihs way: OK - we have same politics of licenses as commons, so we can close upload on our wiki. And now people come to commons, they don't know anything about copyrights/licenses, they are unable to find anything in Spanish language about it, so they do what they think is good... This assumption is based on another observation: Lots of uploads are fair use images from en.wiki and images from 'random' webpages. On pl.wiki we have LARGE and clear instruction: If you don't know what you are doing, don't even think of moving images from en.wiki and web, and I think it works ... So as said TOR: closing upload is OK, but it must be made with care cause Commons is very very vulnerable project. AJF/WarX