User talk:Vanished user 09a18a8c3ed303b15ad9aa4fe245c66c
Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump. |
|
-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 13:08, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
When you change a photo by another contributor substantially, please upload it under a new filename
[edit]Dear Betterkeks,
I stumbled over your edits on this photo, originally uploaded by Raycer in 2015. In 2022, you overwrote it with a drastically changed version and the comment: “Cropped to golden ratio, adjusted levels slightly, and selectively sharpened a little. Please revert if unwelcome”; and then with another edited version and the comment “Try again.” I belive that you had the best intentions when doing that, but please do not do that.
First, these are substantial, IMHO even drastic changes and the photo was taken not by yourself, but by another user. Especially your changes of highlights, shadows and contrast give the photo a completely different appearance. As the official policy explains, you are free to edit a photo by another user up to your taste, but then please upload it under a new filename, in this case e.g. “File:Neues Rathaus Hannover, Innenansicht (cropped, edited).jpg” or similar. Do not overwrite the original file.
Second, in this case this is even more severe because the original version won local and global prizes in Wiki Loves Monuments 2015 and was also promoted to FP status in 2016. Please never ever overwrite any photo which such assessments by a new version with any substantial changes. All these assessments apply only to the original version.
Therefore I had to revert the file to the original version and ask you for your understanding. If you want, you are welcome to upload your edited version again, but please under a new filename and with a reference to the original file; you may use the template {{Derived from}} for that purpose.
If you have overwritten any other photos by other people with such substantially changes, please revert them to the original versions and upload (if you want) your derivative versions under new filenames. Thank you very much!
Best, --Aristeas (talk) 09:58, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Aristeas: I made minor improvements, which are OK as per policy. You’re welcome to revert. Betterkeks (talk) 11:48, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Betterkeks, no they are not. The photo is a featured one. RodRabelo7 (talk) 04:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @RodRabelo7: first, the changes have been reverted. I am totally fine with that. I said I would be in my comment when I made the change, again in my comment above, I am still fine with it right now, and I’m pretty sure I’ll be fine with it tomorrow and every day after that.
- Second, in my opinion these were minor changes and at the time I verified they are by finding comparable changes elsewhere assessed likewise. I suggest you make the guidelines/policy clearer so that it may be applied consistently and objectively saving us all from this waste of time, rather than the “you said, I said” thing that is going on here.
- Third, some change X does not become non-minor because of the choice of image to which it is applied. To make it non-minor, you would need to change X into something else, say Y that is non-minor, but then it is non-minor no matter to what image it is applied.
- Fourth, if all changes are disallowed, then say that by marking the image as immutable, or getting it marked thus. Betterkeks (talk) 05:25, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Please read this. RodRabelo7 (talk) 14:15, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Betterkeks, no they are not. The photo is a featured one. RodRabelo7 (talk) 04:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)