Wikipedia talk:Files for discussion/Archive 2

message: Ok, I thought I'd be smart and click on the [edit] link at the End section at the bottom, and put my entry there, so I did not see this html comment at all in the edit box:
:
The result was of course my entry went below that very line. How about putting right at the top something like Please do not click the edit link at the End, or, maybe move and change the comments to just below the End section like this:
== End ==
  
 
 
 
-Wikibob | Talk 01:41, 2005 Mar 31 (UTC)
: I moved the comments below the == End == header.  dbenbenn | talk 14:56, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The invisible don't edit below this line line! 

message: For some reason all the instances of "Autofellatio.jpg" have become "################" in the March 30 section. I can't find the specific edit that changed this, and it seems very odd. Anyone know what's up? TIMBO (T A L K) 08:09, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevermind, I seem to be going crazy or it was fixed. That was weird. TIMBO (T A L K) 08:09, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  March 30 

message: I am unfortunately not sufficiently involved in this project to know exactly how to proceed with my idea as outlined below, but I hope someone who is might agree with me and follow up on the idea.
I think this page should be cleared of disputes.
They could be handled on subpages, in a similar way as the WP:RfA, and in my opinion better be separately listed on a page Wikipedia:Disputed proposals for deletion of images and media.
/Tuomas 09:37, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New layout needed 

message: This page needs an administrator or two to process old deletion nominations.  Quadell stopped doing it recently (come back!).  Since then, I've been doing it, but I'll be away for six weeks.  To whoever takes over: just be very careful not to incorrectly delete an image, since deleting can't be undone.  If you delete an image that's been pushed to the Commons, make sure all relevant versions have been pushed, not just the latest one.  And avoid processing your own nominations. dbenbenn | talk 22:17, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Admin attention needed 

message: Is there a listing of deleted images somewhere?  I don't want to have to slog through the general deletion log. JamesMLane 09:40, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion log

message: Could someone clarify what is meant with "by permission only" images no longer being accepted? Does that mean all images have to be either fair use or some free licence, or is it enough that other entities apart from wikipedia (commercial or non-) are allowed to use them under the same licence as wikipedia? --W(t) 17:00, 2005 Jun 21 (UTC)
:Jimbo's email specified only "by permission only".  If the image is available to all reusers under the same license, it shouldn't be deleted immediately, even if the license isn't free.  dbenbenn | talk 22:35, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  by permission only 

message: OK, I notice the pictures have the option of deleting previous versions. If so, I request this string of previous versions for an image, :Image:Zscout370 ribbar.png:
*(del) (rev) 08:54, 12 July 2005 . . Seeaxid (936 bytes) (Reverted to earlier revision) 
*(del) (rev) 08:53, 12 July 2005 . . Seeaxid (1099 bytes) (Reverted to earlier revision) 
*(del) (rev) 03:57, 12 July 2005 . . JacksonBrown (50927 bytes) (Reverted to earlier revision) 
*(del) (rev) 03:56, 12 July 2005 . . JacksonBrown (50927 bytes) (Trying again) 
*(del) (rev) 03:55, 12 July 2005 . . JacksonBrown (1099 bytes) (Reverted to earlier revision) 
*(del) (rev) 03:51, 12 July 2005 . . JacksonBrown (50927 bytes) (Even more awards) 
If any admins wants to do it, thanks, and if there is a better way to ask for this, let me know please. Thanks. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 16:06, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleting previous versions of images 

message: Are images that are used solely in userspace considered orphans? I'm not talking about someone's photo of themselves, I'm talking about a subpage with a gallery of unused images – User:Evil Monkey/Nudity. I don't object to the images that are being rightfully used to illustrate articles, but those that aren't are just taking up space as vandalism bait. android79 00:03, July 29, 2005 (UTC)
*By analogy with TfD yes, they'd be considered orphans (see the Holding Cell at the bottom). But I don't get into images much, so my analogy might not be accurate. -Splash 00:19, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphan pages and userspace 

message: Do images created by banned users is a reason for deletion or no? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 20:35, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If the image was part of the reason for the ban, yes. Otherwise probably not. Whether a user has been banned does not really say much about that user's images and contributions. Ashmodai 20:54, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Banned users 

message: Do you think it is a good idea to tell users not to blank images that are up for IFD? My reasoning is that, just like with VFD, people have to see what they are voting on before they cast their vote. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 17:36, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion 

message: I'd like to help out with the janitorial tasks related to this page. However, it seems a bit daunting at first. What's the established procedure? Any pointers to write-ups would be most welcome. Thanks, --MarkSweep 22:10, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I would also like to help too once I get the adminship mop. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 23:16, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

text: The instructions at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion#Instructions for administrators say it all, as far as I can tell.  Help is appreciated!  dbenbenn | talk 23:36, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion procedure 

message: I have no problem with the odd sexual image. No one was hurt in the making of those images. But I find the various images on the lynching pages horrific. In my mind there is a huge difference between voluntarily demonstrating a sexual act (which the discussion above was about), and brazenly displaying someone's murder. It seems like a overwhelming breach of someone's human rights to show photos of their execution on our encyclopedia.
Most people would agree that to be killed is worse than to be raped. So would those who argue for the appropriateness of the photo on the lynching page (a 16-year-old being lynched) be equally happy if the image was of their 16-year-old family member being raped?
I don't think I'm arguing for censorship — I'm not saying the images should be illegal — I'm just saying that it's extremely bad taste to display those images in our encyclopedia.
Ben Arnold 08:41, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree entirely.  It is a service to noone to censor images of human rights abuses, and to hide the horror of horrific acts.  Those who lynch or massacre should not have their crimes censored as unpleasant, but exposed for what they are.--Pharos 08:45, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lynching