Please don't spam user-talk pages with generic warnings

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Please don't spam user-talk pages with generic warnings

Brianna Laugher
Please don't spam user-talk pages with generic warnings. (No source/no
license/copyvionote)
Why? Because it's counter-productive and therefore a waste of your time.

If you notice a user already has a dozen recent warnings, or if you've
got 10 more to add, instead of adding another one which they're just
as likely to ignore, take the time to write a short sharp warning
explaining
* specifically what they're doing wrong (not "violating copyright" -
"uploading logos" "uploading screenshots" "uploading random images
from the web")
* why it's wrong (like: source is require for all images - logos are
considered unfree - screenshots don't take any new copyright)
* relevant policy pages (usually Commons:Licensing)
* where they can ask for help (their talk page, if you watch it, your
talk page, Commons:Help desk / Village pump in their language)
* the principle of WHEN IN DOUBT, ASK BEFORE UPLOADING.
* that if they upload any more files and ignore what you've taken the
time to say, then they will be blocked.

And if they do that, then block them. If you're not an admin, ask one
to block them.

While they're blocked they can still edit their talk page. This is a
good chance to drill home source/licensing requirements and the like,
if they stick around.

The aim of the warnings is to try and make users understand the
importance of various copyright requirements. Spamming their talk page
is not further to that aim, so it should be avoided. "Notifying the
uploader" is not the real aim: making them understand is.

As a rough guide, I would say first block, 1 or 3 days. Second block,
3 days or a week. Third block, a week or a month. Fourth block, I'd
want to know a very good reason why it shouldn't be permanent. It all
depends on the specific circumstances of course, like exactly how many
images they're uploading, if they're giving false licenses, if they're
responding to messages and warnings, if there's a language barrier,
etc.

regards,
Brianna
user:pfctdayelise
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Please don't spam user-talk pages with generic warnings

Oldak
I agree. This tends to happen on Wikipedia a lot. Thousands of talk
pages are full of the same subst'ed templates. Over the years, I'm
sure this will add up to several gigabytes of wasted space (and years
of wasted time).

On 18/07/06, Brianna Laugher <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Please don't spam user-talk pages with generic warnings. (No source/no
> license/copyvionote)
> Why? Because it's counter-productive and therefore a waste of your time.
>
> If you notice a user already has a dozen recent warnings, or if you've
> got 10 more to add, instead of adding another one which they're just
> as likely to ignore, take the time to write a short sharp warning
> explaining
> * specifically what they're doing wrong (not "violating copyright" -
> "uploading logos" "uploading screenshots" "uploading random images
> from the web")
> * why it's wrong (like: source is require for all images - logos are
> considered unfree - screenshots don't take any new copyright)
> * relevant policy pages (usually Commons:Licensing)
> * where they can ask for help (their talk page, if you watch it, your
> talk page, Commons:Help desk / Village pump in their language)
> * the principle of WHEN IN DOUBT, ASK BEFORE UPLOADING.
> * that if they upload any more files and ignore what you've taken the
> time to say, then they will be blocked.
>
> And if they do that, then block them. If you're not an admin, ask one
> to block them.
>
> While they're blocked they can still edit their talk page. This is a
> good chance to drill home source/licensing requirements and the like,
> if they stick around.
>
> The aim of the warnings is to try and make users understand the
> importance of various copyright requirements. Spamming their talk page
> is not further to that aim, so it should be avoided. "Notifying the
> uploader" is not the real aim: making them understand is.
>
> As a rough guide, I would say first block, 1 or 3 days. Second block,
> 3 days or a week. Third block, a week or a month. Fourth block, I'd
> want to know a very good reason why it shouldn't be permanent. It all
> depends on the specific circumstances of course, like exactly how many
> images they're uploading, if they're giving false licenses, if they're
> responding to messages and warnings, if there's a language barrier,
> etc.
>
> regards,
> Brianna
> user:pfctdayelise
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>


--
Oldak Quill ([hidden email])
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Please don't spam user-talk pages with generic warnings

Tim 'avatar' Bartel
In reply to this post by Brianna Laugher
Hi Wikipedians,

Brianna Laugher wrote on 07/18/2006 05:04 PM:
> While they're blocked they can still edit their talk page.

Do they? I haven't tested it at the Commons, but in DE.
A blocked user (in DE) is not able to edit his talk page.
It's blocked like every other page.

Bye, Tim.

--
http://wikipedistik.de


_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

signature.asc (558 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Please don't spam user-talk pages with generic warnings

Essjay
Tim 'avatar' Bartel wrote:
Hi Wikipedians,

Brianna Laugher wrote on 07/18/2006 05:04 PM:
  
While they're blocked they can still edit their talk page.
    

Do they? I haven't tested it at the Commons, but in DE.
A blocked user (in DE) is not able to edit his talk page.
It's blocked like every other page.

Bye, Tim.

  

_______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list [hidden email] http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
That should be reported to wikitech-l; as far as I know, the "blocked users can edit their own talk pages" fix was enabled everywhere around this time last year.

Essjay

-- 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Essjay
Wikipedia:The Free Encyclopedia
http://www.wikipedia.org/

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Please don't spam user-talk pages withgeneric warnings

Platonides
No, it wasn't. At first it was only enabled on enwiki. On commons was activated on Brianna's request.
"Essjay" wrote:
Tim 'avatar' Bartel wrote:
Hi Wikipedians,

Brianna Laugher wrote on 07/18/2006 05:04 PM:
  
While they're blocked they can still edit their talk page.
    

Do they? I haven't tested it at the Commons, but in DE.
A blocked user (in DE) is not able to edit his talk page.
It's blocked like every other page.

Bye, Tim.

    
That should be reported to wikitech-l; as far as I know, the "blocked users can edit their own talk pages" fix was enabled everywhere around this time last year.

Essjay

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Please don't spam user-talk pages withgeneric warnings

Tim 'avatar' Bartel
Hi Wikipedians,

Platonides schrieb am 07/19/2006 10:32 PM:
> No, it wasn't. At first it was only enabled on enwiki. On commons was
> activated on Brianna's request.

I see.

I should have tested it on Commons before writing my mail.
On the other hand now I'm more informed than before :-)

Bye, Tim.

--
http://wikipedistik.de


_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

signature.asc (558 bytes) Download Attachment