Suggestion for improvement

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

Suggestion for improvement

Arne 'Timwi' Heizmann

A friend of mine ran into a series of really annoying/frustrating
problems today which ended up greatly discouraging him from contributing.

This is meant to be constructive criticism, please make of it what you will.

He downloaded an image file from Wikipedia without realising that it was
actually hosted on Commons. This is perfectly reasonable because
Wikipedia explicitly tries to cover up the distinction for normal users.

He then tried to upload his improved version of the image.

Problem #1: He couldn't because it was hosted on Commons. The error
message suggested to use a different filename.

   Short-term solution: The message should have mentioned that he can
   replace the image on Commons.

   Long-term solution: Replacing the image should be transparent. He
   should not have to care where it is hosted, it should just be replaced
   wherever it is.

Problem #2: He didn't have an account on Commons.

   Solution: Fix the single sign-on for good. No more single-site
   accounts.

Problem #3 (and this is the main reason I'm posting this): Commons
didn't let him replace the image because his account was "too new".

This is completely unacceptable. I am not convinced that this detracts
absolutely any vandals or other malicious users, and it only serves to
prevent honest/legitimate contributions. This restriction results in a
net loss, not gain, of useful contribution to Commons.

Thanks for listening!
Timwi


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

Re: Suggestion for improvement

Daniel Schwen-2
> He then tried to upload his improved version of the image.
[..]
>    Long-term solution: Replacing the image should be transparent. He
>    should not have to care where it is hosted, it should just be replaced
>    wherever it is.

Apart from the valid points, I believe this is a fringe case. The case in
which you should upload over existing images are few. The alternative of
uploading with a new filename doesn't seem so counterintuitive to me that it
should deterr a lot of contributors. But I could be wrong here.

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

Re: Suggestion for improvement

Platonides
In reply to this post by Arne 'Timwi' Heizmann
Timwi wrote:

> A friend of mine ran into a series of really annoying/frustrating
> problems today which ended up greatly discouraging him from contributing.
>
> This is meant to be constructive criticism, please make of it what you will.
>
> He downloaded an image file from Wikipedia without realising that it was
> actually hosted on Commons. This is perfectly reasonable because
> Wikipedia explicitly tries to cover up the distinction for normal users.
>
> He then tried to upload his improved version of the image.
>
> Problem #1: He couldn't because it was hosted on Commons. The error
> message suggested to use a different filename.
>
>    Short-term solution: The message should have mentioned that he can
>    replace the image on Commons.
>
>    Long-term solution: Replacing the image should be transparent. He
>    should not have to care where it is hosted, it should just be replaced
>    wherever it is.
>
> Problem #2: He didn't have an account on Commons.
>
>    Solution: Fix the single sign-on for good. No more single-site
>    accounts.

Now, that's a nice structured message. A pity i see it after the more
cryptic ones on wikitech :)
However, thetre's little to do at commons for your friend.
#1 Short-term is a message to be changed on the wikipedias or mediawiki
localisation.

#1 Long-term is a feature request for the devs, but i see it unlikely,
as the shared repository might not be a wiki, you may not have
credentials, etc.
Not that images on commons showed on local projects don't show the link
"Upload a new version of this file".


> Problem #3 (and this is the main reason I'm posting this): Commons
> didn't let him replace the image because his account was "too new".
>
> This is completely unacceptable. I am not convinced that this detracts
> absolutely any vandals or other malicious users, and it only serves to
> prevent honest/legitimate contributions. This restriction results in a
> net loss, not gain, of useful contribution to Commons.
>
> Thanks for listening!
> Timwi

New users often want to *upload new files*, not modify current images.
They are also often the most clueless, so not letting them change
existing images until autoconfirmed is a good idea.
Specially because that avoids vandals creating new accounts on commons
and replacing with penis images the ones on article X.

Moreover, the configuration on all WMF sites -not just commons- is to
only allow reuploading images to autoconfirmed users (unless you were
the original uploader).



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

Re: Suggestion for improvement

Andrew Gray
2008/7/26 Platonides <[hidden email]>:

> New users often want to *upload new files*, not modify current images.
> They are also often the most clueless, so not letting them change
> existing images until autoconfirmed is a good idea.
> Specially because that avoids vandals creating new accounts on commons
> and replacing with penis images the ones on article X.

It also helps discourage accidental overwriting, which used to be
reasonably common - someone would upload something with a fairly
generic filename, not realise they were overwriting an existing image,
and we'd realise a few days later that the Belgian prime minister's
article on several projects was displaying a large photograph of a
train.

--
- Andrew Gray
 [hidden email]

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

Re: Suggestion for improvement

Bryan Tong Minh
In reply to this post by Platonides
On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 1:43 AM, Platonides <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Timwi wrote:
[...]

>> Problem #3 (and this is the main reason I'm posting this): Commons
>> didn't let him replace the image because his account was "too new".
>>
>> This is completely unacceptable. I am not convinced that this detracts
>> absolutely any vandals or other malicious users, and it only serves to
>> prevent honest/legitimate contributions. This restriction results in a
>> net loss, not gain, of useful contribution to Commons.
>>
>> Thanks for listening!
>> Timwi
>
> New users often want to *upload new files*, not modify current images.
> They are also often the most clueless, so not letting them change
> existing images until autoconfirmed is a good idea.
> Specially because that avoids vandals creating new accounts on commons
> and replacing with penis images the ones on article X.
>
> Moreover, the configuration on all WMF sites -not just commons- is to
> only allow reuploading images to autoconfirmed users (unless you were
> the original uploader).
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>

<https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13521>

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

Re: Suggestion for improvement

Rama Neko
A generally efficient "emergency fix" would be to have a clearly displayed link to a way to contact experienced users of Commons interactively (IRC for instance). They would be able to answer questions and perform some technical actions. Wasn't here some sort of instant messaging system at some point?
 -- Rama

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

Re: Suggestion for improvement

Bryan Tong Minh
On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Rama Neko <[hidden email]> wrote:

> A generally efficient "emergency fix" would be to have a clearly displayed
> link to a way to contact experienced users of Commons interactively (IRC for
> instance). They would be able to answer questions and perform some technical
> actions. Wasn't here some sort of instant messaging system at some point?
>  -- Rama
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>
>
Maybe we should have some bot that notifies #wikimedia-commons once a
post to Commons:Help_desk is made. This way very quick responses could
be possible.

Bryan

_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l