Paine Ellsworth (talk | contribs) →Move request: add PS |
→Move request: cm |
||
Line 83: | Line 83: | ||
:I did sense early last year when I became involved with this issue that it would be an uphill climb. I never realized that it would be like fitting a spaceship to go to the star Sirius. — <font color="darkblue" face="Ariel">[[User:Paine Ellsworth|Paine<span style="white-space:nowrap;">{{loop15|1| }}</span>Ellsworth]]</font> ( <font color="blue" face="Ariel">[[User talk:Paine Ellsworth|C<small>LIMAX</small>]]</font> ) 00:17, 16 February 2011 (UTC) |
:I did sense early last year when I became involved with this issue that it would be an uphill climb. I never realized that it would be like fitting a spaceship to go to the star Sirius. — <font color="darkblue" face="Ariel">[[User:Paine Ellsworth|Paine<span style="white-space:nowrap;">{{loop15|1| }}</span>Ellsworth]]</font> ( <font color="blue" face="Ariel">[[User talk:Paine Ellsworth|C<small>LIMAX</small>]]</font> ) 00:17, 16 February 2011 (UTC) |
||
:*'''PS.''' Thank ''heavens'' I take [[Lisinopril]]!>) |
:*'''PS.''' Thank ''heavens'' I take [[Lisinopril]]!>) |
||
::In regards to how much work it would be to change. Changing the name involves changing one line of includes/ImageFunctions.php (2 if you count a comment), ~2 lines in some of the i18n maintenance scripts, and a bunch of lines in the i18n files (which is trivial with a script). The amount of work is insignificant. It really is a [[Bikeshed]] issue. It would cause a minor amount of disruption though since [[mediawiki:Bad image list]] would stop working in favour of the new name [On all mediawiki installs, not just enwikipedia, not even just wikimedia wikis]. The reason you're probably not getting very much response to this is that the reasons presented (that the current name is politically incorrect) aren't very convincing. A very mildly politically incorrect message name (which is only politically incorrect on a subset of sites using mediawiki), that is not advertised to normal readers, is really not something to get worked up about. Heck arguing that it should be changed to be consistent with the convention of using dashes instead of spaces in message names would probably be slightly more convincing (although not much more). [Just to clarify, the preceding is just my personal opinion. Others who commented on the bug might have different opinions on the issue]. [[User:Bawolff|Bawolff]] ([[User talk:Bawolff|talk]]) 01:44, 16 February 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 01:44, 16 February 2011
Template:Archive box collapsible
Usage of Gabe_Newell_GDC_2010.jpg
Could we have an exception to use Gabe_Newell_GDC_2010.jpg on no:Gabe Newell? Working on improving all of the Valve related articles on the norwegian Wiki Thor erik (talk|contrib) 01:27, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
- I believe that the bad image list only works on this project and doesn't affect other wikis. Nakon 01:32, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
- "Image added to page - not blocked there. Skier Dude (talk 03:20, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Article split.
Due to splitting. The image File:Labelled flaccid penis.jpg has been moved to Human Penis. It should be now be allowed there. − Jhenderson 777 01:10, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
File:Wiki-pegging.png
Hello. Could an admin please approve this image for use in the Anal sex article? Thanks very much.--TyrS (talk) 09:57, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
File:Fellatio gay.jpg
Hello. Could an admin please approve the use of a small version of this image at Fellatio. Thanks very much.--TyrS (talk) 10:11, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
File:Female buttock.jpg
This probably should be added in (NSFW!). Vandals have transcluded it onto my user pages in the past, and I have seen it also used as the "unblock reason" in the unblock template. Reaper Eternal (talk) 03:37, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
- Here is one diff [1]. I cannot find the diff for the one used in the unblock template right now. Reaper Eternal (talk) 03:43, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Bad > Shock?
Suggesting a renaming from "Bad image list" to "Shock image list", The images are not bad. Many are educational, some are less then attractive. All have a stronger then normal potential to be abused by vandals for their shock value. Jeepday (talk) 11:23, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
- Renaming this page requires a developer as it would require changes in the code. See https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14281 for an open request that has garnered very little attention. Thryduulf (talk) 12:51, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, Any of the suggested renames there would be appropriate. Withdrawing my name suggestion and supporting community consensus for anything that does not include "Bad". Jeepday (talk) 14:04, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
- I don't think it makes much difference what we call this page as long as its desired effect (to prevent the images being sed for vandalism) is achieved, which it is. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:34, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
- I concur, like it says on the bugzilla page, the current name is poor from a WP:NPOV perspective. From a technical perspective it does not matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeepday (talk • contribs) at 22:28, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
- I wonder why this isn't named MediaWiki:Image blacklist, similar to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist and MediaWiki:Titleblacklist. Wouldn't that be better? Cheers, theFace 20:29, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
- I guess the title predates those pages, but I don't know that for certain. Also, this isn't a blacklist in the sense used by those pages as it doesn't prevent the use of the images. It merely restricts the use of the images on it to explicitly listed pages. So I don't think "MediaWiki:Image blacklist would be a good title. Thryduulf (talk) 13:29, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- I think "Image greylist" (by analogy with Greylisting) would be a reasonable alternative. Feezo (Talk) 23:54, 29 January 2011 (UTC) Addendum — it could also be called "Restricted images", since that's what the category is called. Feezo (Talk) 10:12, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- Good ideas, Feezo! How about renaming this to MediaWiki:Restricted files, and renaming Category:Restricted images to Category:Restricted files? See also Template talk:Restricted use. Cheers, theFace 15:02, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- I think "Image greylist" (by analogy with Greylisting) would be a reasonable alternative. Feezo (Talk) 23:54, 29 January 2011 (UTC) Addendum — it could also be called "Restricted images", since that's what the category is called. Feezo (Talk) 10:12, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- I guess the title predates those pages, but I don't know that for certain. Also, this isn't a blacklist in the sense used by those pages as it doesn't prevent the use of the images. It merely restricts the use of the images on it to explicitly listed pages. So I don't think "MediaWiki:Image blacklist would be a good title. Thryduulf (talk) 13:29, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- I wonder why this isn't named MediaWiki:Image blacklist, similar to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist and MediaWiki:Titleblacklist. Wouldn't that be better? Cheers, theFace 20:29, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
- I concur, like it says on the bugzilla page, the current name is poor from a WP:NPOV perspective. From a technical perspective it does not matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeepday (talk • contribs) at 22:28, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
- I don't think it makes much difference what we call this page as long as its desired effect (to prevent the images being sed for vandalism) is achieved, which it is. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:34, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, Any of the suggested renames there would be appropriate. Withdrawing my name suggestion and supporting community consensus for anything that does not include "Bad". Jeepday (talk) 14:04, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
File:Urinate.jpg
{{editprotected}} This file was deleted last week because the uploader failed to prove where it came from. It was added to Urination on 25 October 2006 by the uploader, and removed from it on 2 December 2006. It never seems to have been put on commons. Cheers, theFace 15:32, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
File:Creampie drawing 1.svg
Please add this, with an exception for Creampie (sexual act) (warning: NSFW). Thanks. --Dylan620 (t • c) 01:21, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Hirsuties papillaris coronae glandis.jpg
This image appears to blocked from the article that describes it since the page was moved.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:47, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Exception added. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:52, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- It doesn't appear to be working just yet.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:05, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Could be the database lag. Give it an hour or two and maybe try a dummy edit to the article. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:09, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- It doesn't appear to be working just yet.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:05, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Move request
{{editprotected}} Following discussion, I would like to propose, {{movenotice|MediaWiki:Restricted files}}, that this page be moved to MediaWiki:Restricted files. I think this is the most logical title, since it includes video content as well as images. Feezo (Talk) 04:32, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
- meh. I don't think that the upheaval required to move the page is worth it. It needs a developer to make changes to the MediaWiki code to implement it, so that the functionality is not lost (including during the time between the change being implemented and all the caches updating. Depending how hardcoded the current name is (I have no idea) this could be as simple as changing one line of code, or in the worst case scenario possibly hundreds of lines of code. Also the likelihood of a developer actually making the effort to make the change is low, given how long more significant bugs have been outstanding is very low. While I don't object to the new name, I just don't think changing it will happen tbh. I'm not going to put the move notice on the interface page as I don't know if it will break anything (And I don't particularly want to find out!). Thryduulf (talk) 05:31, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, I understand. It seems unlikely that just using a template would break the page — looking at the history, it seems the header text has been modified a number of times — I don't think it has to be in a strict format. You're right, though, a developer would need to modify the Bad Image List extension, and since it's a fairly trivial issue I will withdraw the edit request for now. Feezo (Talk) 05:55, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. Once again, I will voice my support of a page move. As noted at Bugzilla, ID#14281, the most correct name would probably be MediaWiki:Restricted-use media list, since there may be more than just image files involved. In looking through all the discussions/arguments about this issue, there does appear to be a consensus against the present name. From the viewpoint of the developers, the problem is that there is no evident consensus for any certain new name for the list. As they've noted, there have been several suggestions, so no one particular name has risen to the "height" of consensus.
- Also, again as noted at Bug #14281...
As a note, the name is used on all mediawiki installs, it is not something that is going to be made a config option, so consensus at wikipedia (on the off chance you actually get it) does not necessarily imply it will be changed.
— Bawolff 2011-02-13 05:49:20 UTC– Comment 21
- I have been fighting this battle for nearly a year, and there are others who've been fighting it even longer. It is hard for me to conceive why such a change as this should be so very difficult to implement. The challenges include, but not in any specific order nor necessarily limited to:
- Coming to consensus on one particular name,
- Convincing the "powers that be" that enough of us care about the need for a name change,
- Defining the actual amount of work from the developer's POV (If it involves changing one line of code and 30 seconds of time, then what's the holdup? On the other hand, if this change will involve subtle and intricate code modifications that will take an hour or more to implement, then that is a significant consideration when prioritizing this change. Nobody seems to know the answer to this.), and
- Securing a target date for completion.
- I did sense early last year when I became involved with this issue that it would be an uphill climb. I never realized that it would be like fitting a spaceship to go to the star Sirius. — Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX ) 00:17, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- PS. Thank heavens I take Lisinopril!>)
- In regards to how much work it would be to change. Changing the name involves changing one line of includes/ImageFunctions.php (2 if you count a comment), ~2 lines in some of the i18n maintenance scripts, and a bunch of lines in the i18n files (which is trivial with a script). The amount of work is insignificant. It really is a Bikeshed issue. It would cause a minor amount of disruption though since mediawiki:Bad image list would stop working in favour of the new name [On all mediawiki installs, not just enwikipedia, not even just wikimedia wikis]. The reason you're probably not getting very much response to this is that the reasons presented (that the current name is politically incorrect) aren't very convincing. A very mildly politically incorrect message name (which is only politically incorrect on a subset of sites using mediawiki), that is not advertised to normal readers, is really not something to get worked up about. Heck arguing that it should be changed to be consistent with the convention of using dashes instead of spaces in message names would probably be slightly more convincing (although not much more). [Just to clarify, the preceding is just my personal opinion. Others who commented on the bug might have different opinions on the issue]. Bawolff (talk) 01:44, 16 February 2011 (UTC)