Commons:Village pump/Proposals/Archive/2011/10

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

vote conversion to svg

in the category category:Top 200 images which have a vector version available by usage i propose that we(experienced vector graphic editors) vote for and against changing(replace) a particular image(to svg) and replace it "en masse"(on specific wikis that allow this in their policy) with a bot upon getting a special majority FOR replacing it.
i know that commonsdelinker dosent do this "to avoid WWIII" but still its a proposal

Gauravjuvekar (talk) 12:25, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Commons community should not make such decision for local projects, I guess? --Ben.MQ (talk) 13:53, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Might be feasible if Commons users get each local project to agree in principle to allow Commons to do this, i.e. agree to the general principle of conversion decided on Commons (whilst explicitly allowing the local project to revert any specific cases they have issues with). Doing it without such prior consent is not a good idea. Rd232 (talk) 14:07, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Shouldn't we base it on more recent data than more than 2½ years ago? -- AnonMoos (talk) 14:52, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
inkwina is giving the code to generate the list at the category so making a list based on recent data might not be that big a problem. That category is just as an example. Any category can be created and used.

Gauravjuvekar (talk) 16:18, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

It's not technically a category... AnonMoos (talk) 16:41, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Upload credits of files transferred by bot

Up this page someone suggested uploads via bots such as flickr2commons could be creditd to the actual uploader. This makes sense, but I think is not currently possible. I'm thinking to make it possible, there'd have to be a new MediaWiki userright "assign-credit" which would allow bots to declare uploads to be made by a specified user (with a credit to the bot in the edit summary). Or else to somehow change MediaWiki so that an upload can have both the bot and the original uploader as authors. Thoughts, anyone? (NB Obviously this is potentially very dangerous; the ability to do this would have to be very carefully restricted to trusted users, and transparency assured, perhaps by being logged somehow.) Rd232 (talk) 22:52, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

It would be nice if the one who requested the upload would be saved in the upload-table, yes. -- RE rillke questions? 15:17, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Not the person who requested the upload, the above refers to the actual uploader in the sense of the photographer, if that is who originally uploaded the photo. In my opinion, the photo-upload-requester doesn't need an attribution at all. Jane023 (talk) 15:33, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Yes, that's true but this works only for original uploaders who are registered in WMF and have a global account. There would be many cases where it does not work. (Flickr, ...) -- RE rillke questions? 15:51, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure I understand - surely the Flickr account name may be used in lieu of a real author name? When I first read this, I was thinking of Bot uploads from archives, where the author is often named in one of the fields from the archive itself. During the past few years, I have corrected attributions of old paintings or engravings brought over from the Dutch or English Wikipedia that may or may not have referenced the uploader, but which had little other info, with broken source links. I have removed the original uploader info and relinked the files to working links to museums or online archives (I couldn't see where the original files were from). Since these are all public domain files anyway, I figure the original source and the meta data is more valuable info than what the original uploader did on a sister project. I think I have done a few dozen of these, so let me know if I am breaking any rules! Jane023 (talk) 07:48, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Storing all the things which are in template information in separate database-table fields, could also ease this and a lot more (scripts and bots, searching, sorting, selecting). I am sure Flickr is using different fields to distinguish between GeoData, Description, License, ...
I would suggest creating a new database-table on MW which can handle file-information correctly otherwise it will be always a mess. This could also avoid such a dangerous and evil "assign-credit". Just save the author in the author field, which can -of course- be edited by everyone.
For Articles, MW is the best but not for files, communication or votings, not yet. -- RE rillke questions? 20:39, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


This is strongly related to the discussion about how to credit files whose uploaders have not specified an attribution method. I didn't think about the issue of bot-uploaded images, but of course I agree the credits definitely belong with the actual uploader. I am also curious about the number of photos which are now licensed with a double tag (GDFL and CC-by-SA) from the period before the new uploader (my recent uploads are all CC-by-SA tagged). How do reusers attribute the double-tagged items? Do I need to update all of my files to remove the GDFL tags? Jane023 (talk) 14:09, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
No, Jane023! Do not remove old license tags. Double licensed images can be used under one of the available licenses. This provides more freedom for re-users. You can add a new license if you want but removing is not permitted.
Hmm, OK, but are you saying that it is up to the reuser to choose which license option to follow? Because it would be very unpleasant to follow both license requirements, in my opinion. Jane023 (talk) 15:33, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Rather impossible than only unpleasant. {{Self}} says: You may choose one of the available licenses. -- RE rillke questions? 15:51, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
The original template that I was using through the default uploader in 2007 was PD-Self, and in 2009 I was using self|GFDL|FAL (which then became self|GFDL|Cc-by-sa-3.0-migrated|FAL by bot license migration)), so I don't believe I have any {{Self}} files at all, since today my files are self|cc-by-sa-3.0-nl. I find it very strange that I am confronted by a "license du jour" result in my own "Special:ListFiles/Jane023" archive, without having consciously chosen this! How am I to communicate my desired attribution to reusers of my files if I don't understand this myself? Isn't there a "How to reuse Commons images in printed publications" page anywhere? Shouldn't there be? Jane023 (talk) 07:48, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
There is Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia. Rd232 (talk) 19:29, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Bilateral relations categories

A discussion is now underway as to the proper naming format for categories pertaining to bilateral relations between two countries (e.g. Category:Australia - United States relations). The discussion is at Commons:Categories for discussion/2011/10/Category:Bilateral relations by country. Cheers, --Skeezix1000 (talk) 14:47, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Special:MyUploads Part 2

It is proposed to add a link to Special:MyUploads at the top right, next to "My contributions". Special:MyUploads is a new function, which redirects to Special:ListFiles/username. Earlier discussion above (Commons:Village_pump/Proposals#Adding_Special:MyUploads_.22my_uploads.22_link_next_to_.22my_contributions.22) led to the development of various elements of what's needed for this, namely the Javascript and a Gadget for users to turn the new link off in their preferences. To see the script in action, add importScript('User:Rd232/myuploads.js'); to your custom Javascript page, at Special:MyPage/common.js.

Notes
  1. The new link is aimed primarily at newcomers. As the blog entry which reported the creation of the Special:MyUploads function said [1], "During our interviews & testing, most people were wondering where their uploads had gone once the upload was completed." The link is currently available as a tiny link at the top of "my contributions" (I only noticed that after re-reading the blog entry! it's tiny, and mixed in with other tiny links!) which might be OK for other wikis, but uploading being so core to Commons it really should be more prominent than that.
  2. There is a Toolserver Gallery tool, but for many users MyUploads is enough, and sending them to the Gallery is confusing and wasteful of scarce toolserver resources. Also the Gallery tool is not always available.
  3. The Toolserver Gallery link can be added at MediaWiki:Listfiles-summary (shown at the top of Special:ListFiles). That way it's accessible (and allows for some description of how it differs from ListFiles, in a relevant context), whilst users get initially pointed at ListFiles.
  4. There will be an easy way to turn off the new link (via a Gadget in their preferences), for those who don't want it.
  5. Bugzilla: 30522 has been filed asking for improvements to Special:ListFiles. Those improvements will be nice to have, but MyUploads is already useful enough without those improvements.

Rd232 (talk) 22:38, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Comment: I wonder if uploads via bots such as flickr2commons could be creditd to the actual uploader -- rather than to the bot, which IB is now the case? TIA, Tillman (talk) 21:20, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Support

Support - much easier

  1. As proposer. Rd232 (talk) 22:38, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
  2. Sure thing. I do not think it is necessary to provide a gadget to remove the future link, such a change is consensual enough I think. Jean-Fred (talk) 22:48, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
    Thanks, but I think it best to provide a gadget; for example for people with small screens the extra text may be an issue. If the gadget isn't much used, it could (like any underused gadget) be removed at some point, and those using it use the gadget's CSS in their Special:MyPage/skin.css to hide the link instead. I expect the gadget would be used enough for that not to happen though. Rd232 (talk) 23:04, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
  3. Support, I think it's a great idea. Kelly (talk) 23:18, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
  4. Yes please, integrate that feature right into the UI. Can it have a field for categories as well? Ingolfson (talk) 23:23, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
  5.  Support Support, with or without gadget. Good idea.--Jebulon (talk) 23:25, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
  6.  Support InverseHypercube (talk) 23:25, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
  7.  Support I only discovered that galleries and lists existed after some months and uploading tens of images, so I agree that link should be as easy-to-find as possible.--Pere prlpz (talk) 23:28, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
  8.  Support Great idea for newbies Rastrojo (D•ES) 00:59, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  9.  Support I very much love this feature; I often find myself needing to find files I've uploaded (among hundreds of edits) and this would be very useful to have up top. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:12, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  10.  Support Good and useful idea.   ■ MMXX  talk  01:26, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  11.  Support --Forwhomthebelltolls (talk) 14:33, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
  12.  Support useful link with good visibility. --Jovian Eye storm 01:58, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  13.  Support Fantastic idea. Would make things a lot easier. Swarm (talk) 01:59, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  14.  Support Awesome idea that will be very useful. King Curtis Gooden (talk) 02:24, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  15.  Support Themfromspace (talk) 02:55, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  16.  Support Definitely a good idea. Michael Barera (talk) 03:09, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  17.  Support With this feature all categories "Uploads by User XXX" become unnecessary! -- Simisa (talk) 06:19, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  18.  Support -- penubag  (talk) 06:24, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  19.  Support A great idea. Novice7 (talk) 07:26, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  20.  Support Petritap (talk) 08:08, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  21.  Support Looks useful and easy to use for newbies. Better than sending people to the tool server. --Enric Naval (talk) 08:18, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  22.  Support --Marco dimmi! 09:05, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  23.  Support It is necessary for commons. --Vssun (talk) 09:10, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  24.  Support Support -- Raghith 09:20, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  25.  Support So useful --Elitre (talk) 09:22, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  26.  Support It's very useful to be able to see your uploads without going through your contributions one-by-one; and the Toolserver Gallery is down or malfunctioning half of the time. --Kimsə (talk) 09:26, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  27.  Support This would be a very useful tool not only for beginners! --OhWeh (talk) 10:05, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  28.  Support Very usefull --Haneburger (talk) 10:14, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  29.  Support--Great idea. Vibhijain (talk) 10:50, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  30.  Support --Stryn (talk) 13:01, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  31.  Support--Mike1979 Russia (talk) 13:07, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  32.  Support--Gareth (talk) 13:15, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  33.  Support Would be very useful for me. Léna (talk) 14:03, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  34.  Support Great idea! AnaJur (talk) 14:17, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  35.  Support It's very good idea. Electroguv (talk) 14:50, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  36.  Support Great idea! --Dtarazona (talk) 15:01, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  37.  Support especially as the toolserver gallery fails often. Shyamal (talk) 15:07, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  38.  Support why not? -- ianusius ✆ Disk. 15:12, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  39.  Support What a great idea! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jay8g (talk • contribs) 15:14 (UTC)
  40.  Support useful tool. Should get an easy access --High Contrast (talk) 15:17, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  41.  Support Good Estratocastro (talk) 15:18, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  42.  Support, Though I'm not sure if I am qualified to vote. --YusuF 15:44, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  43.  Support That makes sense. Bouchecl (talk) 15:45, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  44.  Support--Jusjih (talk) 16:16, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  45.  Support This is a great idea. I wholeheartedly support it. SSG Cornelius Seon (US Army, Retired) (talk) 16:39, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  46.  Support Love it! --Ebyabe (talk) 17:13, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  47.  Support, I find this even more useful than "My contributions". --Pierre Rudloff (talk) 17:41, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  48.  Support yes --IIVeaa (talk) 17:42, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  49.  Support Great idea --Beaucouplusneutre (talk) 17:57, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  50.  Support Good idea! Georgez (talk) 18:08, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  51.  Support --Losch (talk) 18:10, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  52.  Support Telperion (talk) 20:25, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  53. Pile-on  Support --Philosopher Let us reason together. 21:18, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  54.  Support Yeaph, why not! --Jwh (talk) 21:21, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  55.  Support For the reasons above. Editor5807speak 21:22, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  56.  Support strongly. I hadn't even realised it was there myself and I've uploaded hundreds of images to the Commons. — OwenBlacker | Discussion 22:43, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  57.  Support, but expecting that this integrates watchlist-features would be technically obscure. –Be..anyone (talk) 23:20, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  58.  Support strongly. Excellent idea. By the way, it would be great to have a column showing how many wikipedia pages are using each specific photo. This way I will sort my uploaded photos, to see the more popular ones.--Jordiferrer (talk) 23:23, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  59.  Support idem... Vitor Mazuco Msg 23:25, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  60.  Support Great idea! - PKM (talk) 23:53, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  61.  Support only if a gadget to disable is provided. ←fetchcomms 00:30, 26 August 2011
  62.  Support I didn't even know this page existed. Very useful, thanks! Ephemeronium (talk) 01:16, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  63.  Support Agree, it's a fantastic idea! Would be very useful not to layaway through all these sites! Smartcom5 (Any thoughts ?) 02:09, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  64.  Support Intresting stuff to add to Wikipedia Commons. Dhe Zerohander (talk) 02:11, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  65.  Support} Clearly an improvement. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:10, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  66.  Aye. Makes sense for Commons. — [ Tanvir | Talk ] 03:43, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  67.  Support Very useful tool, and not just for newbies. Tabercil (talk) 03:45, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  68.  Support Usefull. Palamède (talk) 08:27, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  69.  Support Sure --Hoangquan hientrang (talk) 09:43, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  70.  Support Sounds like a useful addition. ZanderZ (talk) 10:10, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  71.  Support Support, sounds good. --kuvaly|t|c| 11:07, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  72.  Support Sounds really great and encouraging to regular uploaders like me. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 11:44, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  73.  Support --Purodha Blissenbach (talk) 12:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  74.  Support--Vassil (talk) 13:14, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  75.  Support Is much more useful and also faster find it at the top. With or without a gadget for me is irrelevant. Is a very-good-idea :) --raul (talk) 13:36, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  76.  Support Fantastic idea ! Trizek here or on fr:wp 13:54, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  77.  Support Jirka Daněk (talk) 14:26, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  78.  Support A time-saving and useful improvement. JuventiniFan (talk) 14:39, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  79.  Support --Wmeinhart (talk) 15:15, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  80.  Support Would make finding your own uploads much easier! Jacsam2 (talk) 15:46, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  81.  Support Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 15:56, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  82.  Support This would be a very useful addition. Harrison49 (talk) 16:34, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  83.  Support Good idea. --LinuxCLP (talk) 16:55, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  84. --Antemister (talk) 17:29, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  85.  Support Nice idea, would definitely be useful. Fallschirmjäger ✉ 18:18, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  86. -- Hardcoreraveman (talk) 18:21, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  87.  Support Prima. Very good.--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 19:25, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  88.  Support It would be very useful. --Boukeas
  89.  Support Musthave feature. B7elijah (talk) 20:58, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  90.  Support Would be useful. Haaninjo (talk) 21:20, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  91.  Support Much more convenient than the current system. Delaywaves talk • contribs 22:31, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
  92.  Support fully support.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 04:17, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  93.  Support It's a good idea. --Leiem (talk) 05:02, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  94.  Support Yes. I can't find stuff either! Agong1 27 August 2011(UTC)
  95.  Support--Citron (talk) 10:08, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  96.  Support Finally. Regards, PETER WEIS TALK 10:33, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  97.  Support Nice and helpful. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 10:53, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  98.  Support This has been long overdue. Branko Radovanović (talk) 11:08, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  99.  Support Yann (talk) 12:17, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  100.  Support Jmalo (talk) 14:16, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  101.  Support --Winiar✉ 14:49, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  102.  Support Dcoetzee (talk) 15:34, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  103.  Support B25es (talk) 15:43, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  104.  Support --LasseG (talk) 16:08, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  105.  Support Nice.--Morphypnos (talk) 16:16, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  106.  Support Good feature! CZmarlin (talk) 18:39, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  107.  Support Do it! Williamborg (talk) 19:04, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  108.  Support Kennyannydenny (talk) 19:07, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  109.  Support - very good idea! Romaine (talk) 20:10, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  110.  Support -- M 93 (talk) 21:16, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  111.  Support - A very concise way to show just the uploads Benrr101 (talk)
  112.  Support Logan Talk Contributions 22:12, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  113.  Support It's a nice idea --Sammy pompon (talk) 22:27, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  114.  Support Great idea! --Yetisyny (talk) 23:45, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
  115.  Support Seems very sensible Nick-D (talk) 00:28, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  116.  Support Nice idea, and it seems not to change "contributions" special page then it would be perfect then. Jeriby (talk) 01:04, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  117.  Support As opposed to other projects, uploading is a major part of what almost everyone does here. Being able to quickly look back at what we've uploaded helps us do our tasks better. Daniel Case (talk) 01:44, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  118.  Support —stay (sic)! 01:59, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  119.  Support Bring it on. That said... I wish it looked more like the currently broken tool from daniel ( http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSense/Gallery.php ). Nephron  T|C 02:34, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  120.  Support Would save time. --Thompson.matthew (talk) 04:08, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  121. GfoleyFour 04:25, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  122.  Support Good and useful idea. --Thomy3k (talk) 06:47, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  123.  Support --Karelj (talk) 07:18, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  124.  Support --ST ○ 08:07, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  125.  Support Lymantria (talk) 08:50, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  126.  Support - Good move..--...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 09:51, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  127.  Support as proposed. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 10:43, 28 August 2011 (UTC).
  128.  Support Excellent idea. --Captain-tucker (talk) 10:57, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  129.  Support Seems like a great idea. -Joltex (talk) 11:03, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  130.  Support This can replace the "gallery" Richardprins (talk) 11:34, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  131.  Support I'm surprised it took so long for someone to think of this ;) . It'd be very useful. MikeLynch (talk) 12:28, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  132.  Support Good idea! Cindamuse (talk) 12:29, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  133.  Support Good Idea! Subin.a.mathew (talk) 15:42, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  134.  Support Long awaited. --Ainali (talk) 15:49, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  135.  Support It would be helpful and its a great idea! --Vaishak Kallore | വൈശാഖ്‌ കല്ലൂര്‍ (talk) 16:38, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  136.  Support +1 --Kippelboy (talk) 18:15, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  137.  Support A very good idea indeed. - Presidentman (talk · contribs) Wikipedia Random Picture of the Day 18:28, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  138.  Support Spares me from having this essentially replicated on my user page. -- Mcstrother (talk) 19:17, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  139.  Support The most important contributions to commons are usually uploaded images, hence they should be easily accessible. Puchiko (talk) 20:38, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  140.  Support -- πϵρήλιο ℗ 21:07, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  141.  Support Gzzz (talk) 21:13, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  142.  Support Good idea! Biólogo32 21:36, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  143.  Support --Davidpar (disc.) 21:49, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  144.  Support Starus (talk) 22:08, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  145.  Support Addresses core activity of Commons. Steven Walling • talk 23:53, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  146.  Support - Quite similar to Upload log by user, with a larger picture. Yuval Y § Chat § 09:29, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  147.  Support Good and useful idea! --Dirk Van Esbroeck (talk) 10:19, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  148. Very strong support. It's a good feature. Scrawler (talk) 10:37, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  149.  Support, I'm always looking for this link when I need it, I think it is of very different use than the contributions, even if the first one include the second.Indeed, if someone can tell me how to filter out the imports from the contributions, when I'm looking for comment maintenance, I would be glad. --Cqui (talk) 10:54, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  150.  Support It's a very good idea. --Rave (talk) 11:02, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  151.  Support Handy! Smile4ever (talk) 12:29, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  152.  Support Useful -- Kakashi-Madara (talk) 13:39, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  153.  Support I litke it --The Photographer (talk) 17:53, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  154.  Support. Yes. Maybe even add it to the toolbox on user pages next to "User contributions". Drilnoth (talk) 18:54, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  155.  Support Cool idea. --Anoopan (talk) 20:22, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  156.  Support A handy link. --George2001hi (Discussion) 20:56, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  157.  Support --RanZag (talk) 22:13, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  158.  Support -- Neithsabes (talk) 23:07, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  159.  Support. And I like Drilnoths idea. --ᛏᛟᚱᚨᚾᚨ (talk) 23:45, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  160.  Support — Excellent idea, given the purpose of the wiki.  Hazard-SJ  ±  00:02, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
  161.  Support – Excellent idea, especially since the main purpose of this wiki is to host images. —mc10 (t/c) 03:08, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
  162.  Support The Commons is all about uploads, so it makes sense to split those out and make them easier to find. Will Beback (talk) 04:04, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
  163.  Support --MaryankoD (talk) 10:42, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
  164.  Support Obvious good idea S a g a C i t y (talk) 10:56, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
  165.  Support Ziga (talk) 11:07, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
  166.  Support --Anatoliy (talk) 12:07, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
  167.  Support Useful tool. --Shibo77 13:46, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
  168.  Support It's nice.--Jan Polák (talk) 14:29, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
  169.  Support Super! mr. Анатолий (talk) 17:25, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
  170.  Support Angelus (talk) 18:07, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
  171.  Support Dorieo (talk) 18:10, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
  172.  Support das Beste seit Langem, Danke --Böhringer (talk) 19:19, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
  173.  Support --Keithonearth (talk) 19:25, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
  174.  Support--ReijiYamashina (talk) 02:06, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  175.  Support This is an important feature, should be done as a one click option. Beta M (talk) 02:27, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  176.  Support A great shortcut. Jsayre64 (talk) 02:37, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  177.  Support yes very good suggestion --Olli (talk) 06:09, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  178.  Support Une super bonne idée, je vais déjà rajouter ce lien Special:MyUploads sur ma page perso Wikisoft* @@@-fr 07:11, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  179.  Support Very good idea--Trex2001 (talk) 08:23, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  180.  Support It would be nice to have it handle files where we uploaded new versions as well. Right now I handle that with my watchlist. But yes, support. --Quintucket (talk) 08:50, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  181.  Support Simple and obvious improvement. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:48, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  182.  Support Great idea!--ChristianSW (talk) 12:30, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  183.  Support --Paolo77 ru (talk) 12:48, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  184.  Support It would be good if it could help newbies come back to their uploads and become aware of speedy or requested deletions when that happens. Teofilo (talk) 13:09, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  185.  Support Very good idea. I'm waiting for this tool for a long time. - Bzh-99 (talk) 13:23, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  186.  Support --Nevit Dilmen (talk) 13:31, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  187.  Support It would be a very useful tool. Sealle (talk) 15:20, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  188.  Support Makes a great deal of sense to me... it would be a useful and visible tool. — Gbms86—talk 17:06, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  189.  Support --CristianNX 17:29, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  190.  Support --Geoff Who, me? 17:46, 31 August 2011
  191.  Support --Nick Michael (talk) 20:19, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  192.  Support Very good idea! --— Habib M'HENNI [¿tell me?] 20:29, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  193.  Support Yes FrankyLeRoutier (talk) 23:05, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
  194.  Support Useful for multiple purposes.   — C M B J   04:30, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
  195.  Support I would like it.--Salino01 (talk) 04:46, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
  196.  Support -- Ariadacapo (talk) 07:13, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
  197.  Support. Can't see why not. Jafeluv (talk) 07:17, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
  198.  Support Good idea! PAULOGARCIA2005 (talk) 07:21, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
  199.  Support Yes, please. Wiki-uk (talk) 10:15, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
  200.  Support --Avenue (talk) 14:23, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
  201.  Support --Lucien (es·m·com) 15:54, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
  202.  Support Useful addition. --Geraki TLG 17:54, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
  203.  Support Galandil (talk) 19:07, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
  204.  Support Great idea.--Pesare amol (talk) 19:22, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
  205.  Support Exellent idea! Achird (talk) 21:13, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
  206.  Support — putnik? 23:02, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
  207.  Support useful Ggia (talk) 06:12, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
  208.  Support It would be very useful. Fandecaisses (talk) 10:21, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
  209.  Support I would appreciate that. Saulus (talk) 10:28, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
  210.  Support Very useful addition. Owain.davies (talk) 10:58, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
  211.  Support Useful addition.--Josef Moser (talk) 13:26, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
  212.  Support Nice! ...Kenrick95 14:35, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
  213.  Support --Pethrus (talk) 16:25, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
  214.  Support —kallerna™ 18:26, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
  215.  Support Gamaliel (talk) 18:48, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
  216. --Aschmidt (talk) 21:48, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
  217.  Support It would be much useful, easier and quicker to reach, specially for newbies -- Massic80 Contattami 23:35, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
  218.  Support Good idea. Saves a step. Nonenmac (talk) 00:53, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
  219.  Support - snow? Bulwersator (talk) 09:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
  220.  Support - very helpful! --KuK (talk) 09:23, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
  221.  Support --Jakubhal (talk) 11:42, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
  222.  SupportJerzystrzelecki (talk) 12:58, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
  223.  Support strongly For some people, their main contribution to Wikimedia projects is uploading new pictures or creating needed graphics. Their support is appreciated and this way it can be better noticed. Ldorfman (talk) 15:22, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
  224.  Support It's a good a idea, and I think it will have a some kind of benefit for easier use. So, I agree with this. --MrEskola (talk) 16:14, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
  225.  Support Very helpfull.-- Bertrand GRONDIN  → (Talk) 17:45, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
  226.  Support That's genius! --Honza chodec (talk) 20:31, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
  227.  Support Froztbyte (talk) 21:07, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
  228.  Support Anything that makes it easier to *get to* information/data is a good thing, in my book. —Safety Cap (talk) 00:35, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
  229.  Support Very useful, as the majority don't upload as-much-as editing... ~ AdvertAdam talk 03:20, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
  230.  Support --Metalhead ✉ 08:19, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
  231.  Support --Ex13 (talk) 10:11, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
  232.  Support STRONG Support - It would help me review my own contributions, for updating info, data, etc. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 12:47, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
  233.  Support Good idea! "The new link is aimed primarily at newcomers." - badly needed for them indeed. {Reo On (talk) 14:22, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
  234.  Support --MartinThoma (talk) 14:52, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
  235.  Support Definitely. I didn't even realize that Special:MyUploads exists! Rdrozd (talk) 15:06, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
  236.  Support Yes. Saves me the detour. Manxruler (talk) 16:35, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
  237.  Support --Aushulz (talk) 23:09, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
  238.  Support That's a great idea! --Mlorer (talk) 23:23, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
  239.  Support This is great idea, and may encourage people to make more contributions. ···日本穣Talk to Nihonjoe 04:06, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
  240.  Support That's a great idea! lonio17 (talk) 07:22, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
  241.  Support Not very important, but useful--Packa (talk) 08:26, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
  242.  Support Good idea, it will be helpful. Prioryman (talk) 08:54, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
  243.  Support C'est tout de même bienpratique ce lien direct. Je suis totalement pour ! --Ctruongngoc (talk) 08:58, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
  244.  Support Good idea, it's what I do with my user page at the moment! Miyagawa (talk) 10:54, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
  245.  Support Good idea, I would like to use it in the future. --Midi7 (talk) 11:22, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
  246.  Support Excellent idea ---Peterdownunder (talk) 12:36, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
  247.  Support Makes sense Jebus989 (talk) 12:46, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
  248.  Support Of course!? -- Michael F. Schönitzer 17:44, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
  249.  Support Yes please. Lionel Allorge (talk) 19:24, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
  250.  Support Alwayse wondered why it's not there. Lysy (talk) 19:58, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
  251.  Support YES, it is easy to see the images instead of finding them through your watchlist. -- Spesh531 (talk) 22:19, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
  252.  Support Make it so! --Mav (talk) 23:54, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
  253.  Support YES ! --MadriCR (talk) 00:23, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
  254.  Support Yanguas (talk) 02:12, 6 September 2011 (UTC) Excellent idea, but better with gadget. There is a lot of users who don't have any upload.
  255.  Support --Helios13 (talk) 06:08, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
  256.  Support Support, I have often wished for something similar and could not find it. Phil Konstantin Philkon (talk) 06:54, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
  257.  Support Kiltpin (talk) 13:46, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
  258.  Support Seems very useful. -- sarang사랑 08:58, 6 September 2011 (UTC) But:
    • The column "User" has no use and is redundant
    • The suffix "(file)" in column "Name" is redundant
    • More helpful seems something like "File 151 to 200", or "Page 3", at the top of each page
  259.  Support Great idea.--Edgars2007 (talk) 14:01, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
  260.  Support strongly. Very good idea! Eduarda7 (talk) 14:04, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
  261.  Support A very good idea, it seems useful. Surt Fafnir (talk) 14:42, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
  262.  Support Good Idea. Usefull. --Willi Wallroth (talk) 18:23, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
  263.  Support Great idea. --S nova (talk) 20:04, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
  264.  Support Looks to be a good feature. Matthewrbowker (talk) 23:03, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
  265.  Support SarahStierch (talk) 23:48, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
  266.  Support Banfield - Amenazas aquí 02:04, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
  267.  Support Useful link. --Petrus Adamus (talk) 05:48, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
  268.  Support Please! --Schorle (talk) 05:52, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
  269.  Support Seems like a very good, usefull idea. Inks.LWC (talk) 06:12, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
  270.  Support, could be useful. Cdlt, Pymouss Let’s talk - 11:42, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
  271.  Support OK/--Torin (talk) 11:46, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
  272.  Support --патриот8790Say whatever you want 15:23, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
  273.  Support. Good idea. Marcos talk 18:20, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
  274.  Support Fantastic! This makes it so much easier to see my media content. Indispensable! Thanks BDS2006 (talk)
  275.  Support Patrick Edwin Moran (talk) 06:09, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
  276.  Support Madeline 7 (talk) 07:46, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
  277.  Support Sure! (for Commons) AndreyA (talk) 11:06, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
  278.  Support Very good idea. Please with the indication of the category. Dinkum (talk) 11:11, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
  279.  Support --Lucas Nunes 14:27, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
  280.  Support --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 14:28, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
  281.  Support a×pdeHello! 19:51, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
  282.  Support Tacci2023 Great Idea 19:52, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
  283.  Support Sounds like a great idea EdwinHJ (talk) 19:52, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
  284.  Support Definitely helpful! Samar (Talk . Contributions) 20:16, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
  285.  Support Rainer Halama That is what I am looking for when I want to see my contributions to Commons 23:39, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
  286.  Support Lauro Chieza de Carvalho (talk) 00:42, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
  287.  Support Freebiekr (talk) 03:53, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
  288.  Support Amol.Gaitonde (talk) 11:08, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
  289.  Support Sounds very convenient. --Soppakanuuna (talk) 12:43, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
  290.  Support Olsi (talk) 14:38, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
  291.  Support Ruben JC (Zeorymer) (talk) 16:00, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
  292.  Support It sounds like a very good idea. -- Marek69 (talk) 17:18, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
  293.  Support Bonaber (talk) Great idea! 18:12, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
  294.  Support Yes kekistar (Discusión) 15:58, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
  295.  Support -- OperRu32TALK -- 21:22, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
  296.  Support -- I think it would be helpful. Warfieldian (talk) 22:10, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
  297.  Support. Good idea. Rehman 03:25, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
  298.  Support -- CristianCantoro (talk) 07:41, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
  299.  Support Already on the English Wikipedia, it would be very useful here. Hurricanefan25 (talk) 18:00, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
  300.  Support Chuck Carroll (talk) 20:15, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
  301.  Support --Gelpgim - disc 20:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
  302.  Support Excellent idea. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:30, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
  303.  Support. Good idea. --Dezidor (talk) 10:38, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
  304.  Support Very usefull. --Claude villetaneuse (talk) 13:54, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
  305.  Support This could be of some use to some people, hey? WHY NOT!!! (can't others just not check the gadget box if they no like?) — --Benzband (talk) 15:02, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
  306.  Support Let's do this already, we seem to have a consensus. Feedback (talk) 17:37, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
  307.  Support GerFes (talk) 19:21, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
  308.  Support Might as well pile on; it's sensible enough and should save a little clicking around. Not like adding it's apt to hurt anything, either. Isarra (talk) 20:29, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
  309.  Support Bravo, bravo! Excellent! --WhiteWriter speaks 21:11, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
  310.  Support Sounds like a good idea to me, I'd also like to see it on all Wikis. --Hibernian (talk) 01:39, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
  311.  Support Bonne idée Mat.webmiss
  312.  Support It will be very useful. PRENN (talk) 04:56, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
  313.  Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:29, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
  314.  Support Since I'm one of those people who had to go through hell tracing the uploaded files, I'm all for it. Great for newbies, or even those who've been around a while, but are yet to master wikipedia's dynamics. --Compendium wmc
  315.  Support jep! --RoB (talk) 11:42, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
  316.  Support Been through it, so not much bothered any more, but I too have suffered, so I support it.JonRichfield (talk) 12:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
  317.  Support Ease of use. Nuff said. Maikel (talk) 13:38, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
  318.  Support (didn't we already vote for that ?). VIGNERON (talk) 19:18, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. No, no, no! This would be equivalent to splitting the "My Contributions" page on all the other Wikimedia projects (Wikipedia, Wikibooks, etc.) into a "Contributions" one and a "My New Pages" (or "My Pages Created") one. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 22:35, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
    Well I can't speak to the other projects but I reckon that idea would find some supporters on Wikipedia :) But basically, it's a false analogy, because "my new pages" are textual contributions (which is what Special:Contributions is designed for) and "my uploads" are (largely) images. Whilst Special:Contributions could in theory be merged with Special:ListFiles (which, crucially, shows previews of the files), that wouldn't happen for years even if it was thought a good idea. Even merging Special:NewFiles with Special:ListFiles, which seems pretty obvious, would probably not happen in much less than a year. And, bottom line, if it's useful here (particularly for newcomers, as some WMF research shows them having trouble finding their uploads), who cares what use analogous things might be elsewhere? Rd232 (talk) 00:27, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
  2. Oppose: Increasing the prominence of Special:ListFiles sounds like a good idea, but I don't think a link to 'My uploads' (Special:ListFiles) should be put next to the 'My contributions' link. There are already two easily-accessible links to the feature, available in two clicks from any page. Both links are in 'My contributions' -- 1) right at the top of the page, labeled 'uploads', and 2) at the bottom of the page, labeled 'User uploads'. Link (1) in 'My contributions' could probably be better placed, i.e. immediately to the right of the 'talk' link, instead of having the 'block log' link there. 'My uploads' are a subset of 'My contributions', so it makes sense to put a link to Special:ListFiles within the 'My contributions' page -- and not next to the 'My contributions' link. Emw (talk) 21:11, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Discussion

Does this really have to be a script? Of course it's easier to activate, but a native mediawiki implementation wouldn't be that difficult to develop. The opt-out gadget works with css (I had expected a js variable, but Ok), so that wouldn't be a problem. But internationalisation would be easier in translatewiki, and not using js would make the page more accessible (and also a bit faster). -- ✓ Bergi 11:10, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
We would appreciate if you develop this extension. A simple link, that sounds really easy. Upload wizard without heavy js would better, too because it could be used by more people. ;-) Unfortunately, I never worked with php. -- RE rillke questions? 11:54, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Is it possible to make the page tell you how many uploads you have made? --Årvasbåo (talk) 14:14, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
No, I asked the devs but they said the number is stored nowhere. It's a pity. -- RE rillke questions? 18:42, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Could try filing a bug to ask for it to be stored somewhere... Rd232 (talk) 22:11, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
This would be nice. a) total uploads count (log) b) number of images created by user x and alive c) live count of a) -- RE rillke questions? 18:21, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
MediaWiki implementation (development of Special:ListFiles, probably) would be great, but (a) MediaWiki development is an even more specialised skill and (b) Javascript development allows much easier and quicker feedback from users into improvements. Bugzilla: 30522 requested improvements to ListFiles; if we get those, that'll be a start. Maybe one day all of Rillke's script will make it into MediaWiki, but it's more likely to be 5 years away than 5 months. And having the Javascript also gives a basis for that possible MediaWiki development, because it's much easier to copy/adapt an existing structure (design/code) than start completely from scratch. Rd232 (talk) 22:11, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Bergi's comment is just about adding the link, not creating a gallery-tool. Replacing the target of the link to a JavaScript-tool is easily possible. -- RE rillke questions? 23:55, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
I don't think Bergi's comment was about that (?) but I was actually going to suggest that it might be worth filing a bug to have a new MediaWiki option to display the "my uploads" link, pointed at Special:ListFiles, and then your script would divert that link to your script page, for those with Javascript. This would help those users with Javascript turned off. My concern was that the Javascript diverting of the link away from Special:ListFiles might be slightly delayed, and people might often click on it before it happens, and end up not seeing the script. A note/link at the top of ListFiles would help with that though, and also tell people with Javascript off what they're missing out on. This would be a pretty simple bug to implement, so there's some chance it might happen soonish, especially if we can bend the ear of a developer. Rd232 (talk) 07:34, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
File a bug, to display this link, target file-list. If a user is too fast, we can even display a note on the file-list if JavaScript is active. -- RE rillke questions? 18:21, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
There is clearly an overwhelming support for this. Can we just close it and get it out of the sitenotice? :) Personally I don't see why this was so important to put it up for a vote in the first place - even more why it had to be advertized in the sitenotice. But maybe I'm missing something. Effeietsanders (talk) 05:45, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Agree, this has been running for two weeks and a half, with landslide support. The proposal clearly has support for the community. I thus removed the enquiry from the SiteNotice. Jean-Fred (talk) 14:08, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Not sure if it is related to this section here.. but the "Gallery" link (tab) is wrong (on my contribs page). It points to http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Special:ListFiles/Saibo which has a "Special:" duplicate. --Saibo (Δ) 22:23, 3 October 2011 (UTC) 04:13, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

thanks for fixing, Adrignola! --Saibo (Δ) 04:28, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Implementation

  1. Add more localizations in User:Rd232/myuploads.js.
  2. Localizations of the disabling Gadget, in the format MediaWiki:Gadget-NoMyUploadsLink/de, MediaWiki:Gadget-NoMyUploadsLink/fr etc
  3. Add a clarification to MediaWiki:Listfiles-summary (possibly in MediaWiki's default for this message, via Translatewiki) When filtered by user (Special:ListFiles/username), only files where that user uploaded the most recent version of the file are shown. ✓ Done
  4. Add a link to the Toolserver Gallery in Commons' copy of MediaWiki:Listfiles-summary
  5. Put the contents of User:Rd232/myuploads.js somewhere in MediaWiki:Common.js
  6. Move User:Rd232/Gadget-NoMyUploadsLink.css to MediaWiki:Gadget-NoMyUploadsLink.css
  7. Move User:Rd232/Gadget-NoMyUploadsLink to MediaWiki:Gadget-NoMyUploadsLink
  8. Add to MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition, under Interface, NoMyUploadsLink|NoMyUploadsLink.css Rd232 (talk) 22:38, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
Other

Improvements to Special:ListFiles itself are covered by Bugzilla: 30522 (though it may be possible to do some things in Javascript, this is not easy)

  1. Please also have it show all categories the image is sorted under. Thanks! Ingolfson (talk) 23:23, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
  2. It does not show when someone else uploaded a new version (like for example Rotatebot). /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:42, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
  3. Option to show all files that were originally uploaded by user xyz. Hi there, you made these suggestions to help new contributors. I experienced a problem yesterday (before knowing about this discussion) with a new user. He had uploaded several files, some of them not rotated. I helped him and set the rotatebot to heal the pictures. Afterwards this new contributor would not see those files anymore, since this list only shows those files of which he is the latest version contributor (sorry for my English). You are thinking of an extra possibility to sort the list for those files which the user has uploaded. More experienced users may understand about cropped/rotated versions and may choose the option to show only originally uploaded files, but newbies will just try to find “their” files. So I believe the standard option must be “list all files that have been uploaded by user xyz, even if somebody else overwrote that file with a newer version”. --Schwäbin (talk) 08:52, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
    Agree, by default the list should show all files a user has uploaded, regardless of what happened to the files later (with maybe some extra annotation where a file has been overwritten by someone else). That's the behaviour most users will expect, and I'm surprised it doesn't do that. Hopefully this will be done soon under Bug 30522 (but "soon" in bug terms is months...). Rd232 (talk) 01:29, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
I tend to agree. The old gallery tab (running on toolserver) showed ever image you'd uploaded, I believe. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:17, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
I, too, have always found it strange that the currently generated list doesn't show files that were later overwritten by another user. It would be a welcome improvement to show all files uploaded by a given user, but I agree with Rd232's suggestion that (ideally) it ought to include a notation to indicate when a given file is no longer the current version. Steve Morgan (talk) 13:19, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

The feature is very good, but I have found faults:

  • When a file has originally been uploaded at e.g. the german wikipedia and is transferred from there by a bot, the file is missing in the list. An example would be Funktionsprinzip akustisches Mikroskop.svg. Such images have to be added in the future.--Salino01 (Salino01) 05:02, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
  • There is a small bug in the program: If you have e.g. about 220 images in your list and you are displaying 50 images per side, one can switch to the next image side by clicking on the button 'next side'. If the last 20 images are displayed, the button is still highlited and switches to the first list again.--Salino01 (talk) 05:02, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Implementation II

Behind the scenes, User:Rillke has been developing a Javascript version of ListFiles which is absolutely brilliant. This script will be used in the new top-right "my uploads" link instead of ListFiles. It's still a work in progress but already amazing. To use it now, add 

if (-1 != mw.config.get("wgPageName").indexOf(mw.user.name())) importScript("User:Rillke/JSONListUploads.js");

into Special:MyPage/common.js - it gives you a link to "my uploads" in the toolbox. Comments welcome (bearing in mind it's not finished). Rd232 (talk) 10:44, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

JSONListUploads.js Discussion

Currently there is a link to JSONListUploads.js at Special:MyUploads (in the English interface only). To get this great tool to all languages translations of MediaWiki:Listfiles-summary would be needed. But this needs a translation for every language → The Link should be in the default translation. And if we include the link in the translation directly we should templateify the Tool's URL. Otherwise we have to change masses of translations if the link changes in the future.

Another option would be: We inject (directly below the headline) a link via JavaScript if the page's "wgCanonicalSpecialPageName" = "Listfiles" and delete the link from the interface message (doesn't need to be localized locally as this is done via translatewiki). Users without JS are no worse off since they cannot use the JSONListUploads.js anyway. The only question is: how to internationalize the link-accompanying text ("More options are available in the Gallery tool")? Probably in the .js directly (with fallback to English). Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 22:56, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Clarifying attribution requirements

A recent VP discussion prompted some thoughts on making it clearer how reusers should attribute credit.

Currently we have

  1. Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia, which isn't really clear on this
  2. Commons:Credit line which does the job, but isn't easy to find.
  3. a small "use this file" link at the top of the file description page, which is easily overlooked. (It's bigger for logged-out users though.)
  4. {{Credit line}} which works with the {{Information}} and {{Artwork}} templates; it is added into the "other_fields" parameter of {{Information}} and {{Artwork}}. Note that {{Artwork}} has a "credit line" parameter which is used for attributing credit to donors of artworks, and has nothing to do with the image license.
  5. User attribution templates, most of which are not listed in Category:Attribution templates.

We can talk about other licenses too, but I think the biggest problem is with CC-BY-SA (as it's the most common requiring attribution). The license template states You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). But typically the author doesn't specify anything, which can easily be confusing.

There are several things we can do:

  1. Merge Commons:Credit line into Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia. I think that would help a lot, since the latter is linked from the Information/Artwork templates under "reusing this file".
  2. Make the "use this file" link much more prominent. Put it next to the "reusing this file" link to Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia. (Some way of explaining the difference is needed then.) And/or make the link part of every license template, so that it appears at the bottom of the Licensing section.
  3. Have each license template display the standard way of attributing credit for that license (with a parameter to optionally suppress it, though it should anyway be made clear that any specific author wishes override the standard). Commons:Credit line provides guidance on the standard ways, and the relevant templates can incorporate these.
  4. Create a {{User standard attribution}} template which, given the uploader's user name, displays the contents of the page Username/attribution, if it exists (which is a page in the user's userspace using the {{Credit line}} field. This would reduce the proliferation of template-space templates used for this purpose.
  5. Add an "image attribution" field to the {{Information}} and {{Artwork}} templates, so that it's clearer how to add a custom attribution.

Well, those are some thoughts, let's have some discussion. Comments please! Rd232 (talk) 13:12, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

In order to address the problem I made my own permission template. User:Nevit/Not-PD I tried to address the major problem I encounter: Usage without attribution outside commons. I added how to attribute paragraph above license template and a couple of extra words below. --Nevit Dilmen (talk) 16:55, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Very nice overview ; but you did miss the attribution parameter of the CC templates. See for example File:GLAM WIKI UK 2010 - Tom Morgan - National Portrait Gallery - 3.JPG. I think this is the simplest way to specify a custom attribution. Jean-Fred (talk) 17:13, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
(Which does not address your proposal entirely, only 4 & 5. I should not read too fast.) Jean-Fred (talk) 17:18, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
I created Commons:Credit line and {{Credit line}} after some discussions on VP without any knowledge of Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia existence. I agree that they could be merged; however, what I was aiming in Commons:Credit line was to provide look-up tables of examples of minimal attribution for each license without much talk. May be we can copy some examples from it to Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia, but keep the Commons:Credit line as page of examples.
I am not sure about adding "image attribution" field to the {{Information}} and {{Artwork}} templates. That was my original proposal but as many other proposals there was no interest in it. That is why I created {{Credit line}} and why others added attribution fields to many license templates. So now we have two competing standards, I am not sure if we need a third one. I actually like attribution parameter in license template; however, I am rather unhappy that requested attributions are usually not valid. For example attribution in File:GLAM WIKI UK 2010 - Tom Morgan - National Portrait Gallery - 3.JPG asks for "© Benjamin Smith / Wikimedia Commons" omitting "GFDL / CC-BY-SA-3.0-2.5-2.0-1.0" part required by the license. That is providing wrong information.
Also lets not forget about "use this file" icon which creates attribute line based on the image data using some gadget (not sure which one). That is the 3rd way to get attribution line, but I do not know where is the documentation of that gadget. I also do not know if it follows author's wishes by reading the other 2 ways. --Jarekt (talk) 18:38, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
This is MediaWiki:Stockphoto.js. It does leverage on {{Credit line}} & attribution parameter.
I think the way the attribution parameter is asked in CC templates is fine and logical : in our example, the author wishes to be attributed as "© Benjamin Smith / Wikimedia Commons". Indeed, this is only one part of the credit line, so maybe the template should render the full credit line. Which is given by the "Use this file" button.
If there is consensus to do so, I think we should consider retiring {{Credit line}} in favor of attribution parameter. I think it makes more sense. Jean-Fred (talk) 19:25, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for those initial comments - I'm glad there is some interest in discussing this. However I'm not sure I've kicked off the discussion in the clearest possible way, because several related but separable issues are mixed up. I was trying to survey how things are done (and missed the attribution parameter in some licenses - thanks Jean Fred), but we really need to think about what problems we're trying to address.

  1. Standard attributions. Making it very clear to reusers on a file page (a) that a standard attribution is required (for some licenses). Jarekt pointed out some 2009 discussions on VP where this was raised. (b) make it clear what the nature of that standard attribution is. The information in the "use this file" link (MediaWiki:Stockphoto.js) and in Commons:Credit line needs to be more prominent. On a file page at least the minimum attribution needs to be visible without needing to click (Stockphoto.js can provide more attribution options, and the link to it needs to be more prominent - not necessarily bigger, but more closely linked with attribution requirement).
  2. Custom attributions. Making it easier for uploaders to specify custom attributions, including custom attributions that are reusable across files via a template. It makes sense to store this in the user's userspace in a standard location/format, rather than (as now) use templates in template space. Templates and tools can then access this data more easily. It also makes it easier to develop and display contextual guidance on creating such custom attributions (via editnotice perhaps), so that they make sense and don't conflict with license or other requirements.
  3. Attributions overview. Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia needs to contain this information as well; and looking at it again, I think merging Commons:Credit line into makes a lot of sense (eg Credit line is currently in only 2 languages), putting everything reusers need in one place.

The issue of having two competing ways for displaying custom attribution data ({{Credit line}} and the attribution parameter in license templates) for me maps the overlap between the {{Information}} template and the license templates. I don't really see that it's helpful to do it this way. It would make more sense to me if {{Information}} did everything on a typical file page: tell it what licenses apply (none of this "permission: see below" unhelpful confusion) and it displays the relevant license template(s), together with any standard or custom attribution data. It can put the license templates below the summary box, so the aesthetics don't change much (apart from losing the Licensing header). Rd232 (talk) 23:47, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

It seems to me that stockphoto ("use this file") does a fairly good job in showing that there is some attribution to be made and it is very visible for non logged in users (who I guess are the most likely to commit this kind of copyvio). But I think that hurried users will not want to go into the details of help page or even license tags just for using an image. (after all the site advertises itself as "freely resusable" so one might not car about the details). I think that a small license tag near the license would be a good compelement to a lengthy license tag one screen away that many people do not care to read. I would suggest either add another icon on the "use this file"
I would imagine something like this.
   Attribution: John Doe
Some rights reserved // linking to the license tag
use this
use this
email
download
I would even suggest to replace the remove the "informations" link from this bar because it links to a lengthy -so scary- page while all info should already be in the license. We could have a link to Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia in a "learn more" section", for instance at the end of the license tag. I think people we need primarily deal with are those that are unwilling to read long text for the license.--Zolo (talk) 09:23, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Adding CatDown link for categories

I think will be good idea to add link to CatDown to categories tool box or to tabs. If it'll be implemented as gadget, this gadget could be default one. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:49, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm cautious about adding prominent links to Toolserver tools, because the Toolserver is always having capacity issues. Adding as a gadget would be an option, but not on by default. Such a gadget could add a link to CatDown into the Toolbox on category pages (so that clicking the link would prepopulate CatDown's category field with the relevant category). User:Rillke is one who could knock up such a gadget. Alternatively, it could be added to MediaWiki:Gadget-ExtraTabs2.js. Rd232 (talk) 16:18, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump/Proposals/Archive/2011/10&oldid=148475311"