Wikipedia talk:Graphics Lab/Maintenance/Images for cleanup

Article merged: See old talk-page here

The example for number 4, "Pictures that need to be retouched, trimmed and scaled." seems to be out of date, since the change has since been reverted. Any better examples out there? --falsifian 17:14, 2005 Mar 11 (UTC)

Inappropriate use of JPEG
Hi. I created badJPEG and associated Category: Category:Images with inappropriate JPEG compression. Please use as you see appropriate. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 17:45, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Image review

 * Coppied from User talk:White Cat

Hi, I was told to perhaps give the idea a second chance.
 * WikiProject Media Inspection Team

What do you think? -- Cat chi? 17:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I think what you're proposing is redundant to Category:Wikipedia cleanup. What Wikipedia needs is less process, not more; therefore what we need is some admins and bots with decent judgment that simply remove the invalid images - not an Official Team to Investigate.  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  12:26, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I am not proposing a process. I merely am proposing a convenient way to tag good/bad images. There is too much bureaucracy at the moment, this is intended to cut back on it.
 * If I wanted to delete a potentially unfree image I have to nominate it for deletion rather than a tag and run. Any free image tagged like this can be salvaged under fair-use if applicable. But all this is overwhelming number of bureaucracy for a single user. Anyone can further review potentially bad images and either relicense them or delete them in a fast and efficient manner.
 * Moving a good image to commons itself is a lot of work. First you need to find a good image. You then have to save it to your drive, then copy the contents of the image description page (and its other contents such as image history) and upload the image to commons with all that. Later you need to categorize the image on commons. All of these steps can be handled by a bot aside from the first one (finding). A good free image category would do just that.
 * Some images are being repetitively reviewed. I have no way of knowing if you or someone else had already reviewed it. It would be wiser to review images that have never been reviewed rather than reviewing the same image repetitively. That is the other reason why tagging images is a good idea.
 * The idea is that no free image should be left on English wikipedia. That is the ideal situation. Right now the situation of the free images is terrible therefore Category:Wikipedia cleanup isn't working well. You are right though we do need more admins, good users and bots that check image copyrights. What I merely suggest is that they do this in an organized manner.
 * -- Cat chi? 13:23, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Coppied from User talk:White Cat

Broken links
The two example images for JPEG/PNG have been deleted due to IFD and orphan. Replacements will be needed I suspect... SGGH speak! 21:38, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

How about a section for images / maps ready to be made more interactive?
1. Is this not the right article for this? E.g. this map: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Visa_policy_of_the_Schengen_Area.svg in the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_policy_of_the_Schengen_Area#Visa_exemptions it would be great if users could move their cursor over the map and the names of the countries would show, e.g. the little islands, it's hard to see which one they are. 2. I'm surprised the map is not generated by some wikipedia maps generator engine where it would suffice to enter a list of the countries and they'd just be colored on the map and all that interactivity is there automatically. I remember I've once done that on this image: Source (SVG with JavaScript) : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cognitive_bias_codex_en.svg Thy, SvenAERTS (talk) 13:26, 1 January 2022 (UTC)