15 Mar

Commons:Requests for comment/scope

‎Eye of the beholder: +
← Older revision
Revision as of 12:18, 15 March 2013
Line 18:
Line 18:

::::As a collateral benefit, this might also deter the upload of attack images, as they cannot immediately be posted into articles/pages.

::::As a collateral benefit, this might also deter the upload of attack images, as they cannot immediately be posted into articles/pages.

::::--[[User:Túrelio|Túrelio]] ([[User talk:Túrelio|talk]]) 09:07, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

::::--[[User:Túrelio|Túrelio]] ([[User talk:Túrelio|talk]]) 09:07, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
−
::::::That's a fascinating idea! I rather like it in principle, despite the obvious workload issues. I would say that, as with Wikipedia, the bigger Commons' collection gets, the less likely that any new contribution is really necessary. Therefore, over time we should become less focussed on quantity of new contributions, and more on quality of new contributions. At some point in the crossover from quantity to quality, the approach you suggest becomes rather logical. [[User:Rd232|Rd232]] ([[User talk:Rd232|talk]]) 12:17, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
+
::::::That's a fascinating idea! I rather like it in principle, despite the obvious workload issues. I would say that, as with Wikipedia, the bigger Commons' collection gets, the less likely that any new contribution is really necessary. Therefore, over time we should become less focussed on quantity of new contributions, and more on quality of new contributions. At some point in the crossover from quantity to quality, the approach you suggest becomes rather logical. Whether we've already reached that point is of course a matter of opinion. [[User:Rd232|Rd232]] ([[User talk:Rd232|talk]]) 12:17, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

:::::No, it is not completely meaningless: just because a remedy is not 100% effective does not mean that it is useless. There are already conspicuous warnings and instructions on our upload page, and I would wager that were they to be removed completely the percentage of copyright violations and other problems would be a lot higher than 20%. —[[User:Psychonaut|Psychonaut]] ([[User talk:Psychonaut|talk]]) 10:02, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

:::::No, it is not completely meaningless: just because a remedy is not 100% effective does not mean that it is useless. There are already conspicuous warnings and instructions on our upload page, and I would wager that were they to be removed completely the percentage of copyright violations and other problems would be a lot higher than 20%. —[[User:Psychonaut|Psychonaut]] ([[User talk:Psychonaut|talk]]) 10:02, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Requests_for_comment/scope&diff=92618630&oldid=92618614