Call of Duty Wiki
Register
Advertisement
Call of Duty Wiki
Archive This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page, other than for maintenance. If you wish to revisit this topic, please bring it up again in a new topic.
Forums: Index War Room Personal Images
Forum logo

Notice: I'm not for deleting the images that exist on the wikia but block the ones that comes because the wikia isn't a image hosting service.
Well like you see almost half of the wikia is just the "game" "pimpmygun", it's pretty much useless because the users can upload it to imageshack or else because it's personal images...
You're probably asking why?
It's taking up useless amount of Wikia space, which isn't much of a good things as you probably know.
So I'd say ban new Pimpmygun (They can keep the ones that are existing...)

Example: Dr. Feelgood uploaded tons of images of shitty (Why I say shitty is because it's pretty much useless) converts just to show (Srsly...).
We could have saved a lot of space by just uploading them to imageshack (A image hoster, a host meant to host images on isn't it obvious?), proof of the crap: http://i.imgur.com/h2Pkl.png so yea, like I said we should ban these stupid images because what is the wikia about?
Is it about helping the ones that needs help and providing information or it just a dump for all ideas? You decide.
--http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/8379/14085287.png 21:43, December 21, 2010 (UTC)




Talking about banning PMG pictures, basically means no personal images at all. So the images on your userpage would (sadly) have to go. Along with many other images people use to personalise there pages. -N7 (talk) 22:02, December 21, 2010 (UTC)
I want to call you a idiot for not reading what I wrote... --http://img541.imageshack.us/img541/6439/21275676.png 08:04, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Ikin, there's no limit to the amount of space we can use. If people want to have PMG pics I see no valid reason why not. If we just get rid of unused pics every now and again, like WHISKEY did yesterday and the day before, we will have no problem. M1911 smallYuri KaslovM1911 small right 22:03, December 21, 2010 (UTC)
No. Just no. Hell no. Fuck no. No, no, no, no, no, no, no... ... No. There is NO point in getting rid of them, maybe we want to show our pictures without having to say, "I made this awesome Barrett 2 million Cal rifle in Pimp My Gun, but i can't post it here, so I have to put a link." If wikia had a space limit, we would have run out of space a long time ago. And if it was on some stupid image website, it would waste precious time that could be spent doing something productive like eating a sandwich, pwning Qscopers on MW2, editing the wiki, or designing a nuke, or other innocent but cool actions like that. --Bumblebeeprime09(Talk) 22:13, December 21, 2010 (UTC)
Can you guys like read what I say before posting? Do like I do upload it to imageshack, look at me all my images are hosted on my Imageshack account. --http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/8379/14085287.png 22:16, December 21, 2010 (UTC)
Yes, we can read, and we did (At least, I did anyway.). Your argument is STILL invalid. --Bumblebeeprime09(Talk) 22:21, December 21, 2010 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support Support — First of all: this forum isn't to remove them completely, it's to remove them from the wiki, reupload them via imageshack, and replace them (unless I read this wrong).

Secondly, having all these images actually just does clutter up space and makes files harder to find. --CEBot 22:28, December 21, 2010 (UTC)

Well what I was saying is that all new personal images should be uploaded to imageshack, it would be a huge waste of time removing a lot of images. --http://img541.imageshack.us/img541/6439/21275676.png 07:56, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

No, it doesn't. I have found it hard to find images in the past, but it was more of the wiki's images of COD (ie. FP views of guns, stills from trailers, stuff like that) cluttering up the file search or whatever the hell it's called. --Bumblebeeprime09(Talk) 22:33, December 21, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it does. I estimate about 2000 of our images are PMGs - and most of them have names that make it hard to find the file you need. And I tried searching for a picture of the M4A1 when I was trying out Rich Text Editor again, about 30 files I saw were PMGs. --CEBot 22:37, December 21, 2010 (UTC)

Pictogram voting oppose Oppose — They put so much work into them that it would be a shame to delete them.Cpl.Bohater 22:35, December 21, 2010 (UTC)

It's not deleting them, it's replacing them with links to the same file on ImageShack or Photobucket. The PMGs would still appear. --CEBot 22:37, December 21, 2010 (UTC)

Pictogram voting oppose Oppose — The main problem I have with PMGs is that only a few people can be bothered to license them when they upload them. I'm all for deleting any unlicensed PMGs on sight. Otherwise, they are perfectly acceptable.  FANMADE_Animated_Derpy_Hooves_desktop_ponies_sprite.gif Sig1.png Sig2.png  22:50, December 21, 2010 (UTC)

What would be the proper licensing for an image like that, then? Shadowalkers ShadowEmblem Speak. 22:53, December 21, 2010 (UTC)
Public Domain.  FANMADE_Animated_Derpy_Hooves_desktop_ponies_sprite.gif Sig1.png Sig2.png  03:15, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

I think that if the uploading of PMGs are banned, then all other personal images should be as well. There are a myriads of other personal images that outnumber PMGs by a large margin, and by the definition given in the proposal, they do not contribute to the wiki either. Click for a list of other admins Bovell Talk | Contrib. 00:39, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

I'd support that. As the wiki is a site about Call of Duty (I suppose this should go along with the reason for there being no IRL info as well)., not a media hosting site. All these personal images can be uploaded via imageshack or photobucket and be embedded on the wiki - but having them uploaded to the wiki just makes it harder to navigate through images and takes up space (which I know we have an infinite amount of, but personal images are just a waste). --<choose><option>azuris_</option><option>22px-1888721.png Azuristalk</option> 01:03, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
I fail to see how personal images are a "waste" when we could have an infinite amount on our wiki. That seems to me like a contradiction. And I feel almost like this is the whole "ban blogging" thing all over again. M1911 smallYuri KaslovM1911 small right 01:06, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Encyclopedias could also be picture books, but alas, they are not. We are here to build a comprehensive database on the Call of Duty series, not to be a host (without licensing in most cases) to any image desired. Click for a list of other admins Bovell Talk | Contrib. 02:01, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

Pictogram voting oppose Strong Oppose — -pmgs go all images go!CoD1 Weapon PPShSignatureSpecialOpsGenralMinigunRay Gun 3rd person view WaW

You're missing the point, we're not banning PMGs, we're having them uploaded to non-wiki sites such as Imageshack or Photobucket. Sactage Give me a ping, Vasily. IRC War Room 02:50, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
The original title was "BAN PimpMyGun IMAGES" incase you missed that. M1911 smallYüri KaslovM1911 small right 03:00, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

Per SOGM; Poor Grammar but excellent point. --Bumblebeeprime09(Talk) 01:21, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

...The forum is to remove PMGs from the wiki and reupload them on imageshack, not to remove them completely - and i guess if most people decided to actually read the forum then skim through it, they might actually get that... --<choose><option>azuris_</option><option>22px-1888721.png Azuristalk</option> 02:24, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

Removing social images would be massively unpopular. Why would we remove something many editors enjoy just because you (somehow) have problems running through images?  FANMADE_Animated_Derpy_Hooves_desktop_ponies_sprite.gif Sig1.png Sig2.png  03:15, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

New proposal[]

Since my computer is lagging like an ütter fücking bitch, I'm starting a new section: How aboüt we limit the number of personal images per üser to 5 or 10, and they must be tagged with [[Category:User image]], as well as having the üser's name in the filename? M1911 smallYuri KaslovM1911 small right 02:05, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

I am still against it. Ikin shouldn't have made this in the first place, and his/her friend CEBot isn't helping out. Bumblebeeprime09(Talk) 02:07, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

Do I even know CEBot? --http://img541.imageshack.us/img541/6439/21275676.png 08:01, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
CEbot is Azuris I think. M1911 smallYüri KaslovM1911 small right 10:52, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Well, two of the most powerfül administrators are for it. We're oütnümbered and oütgünned. We have to consolidate in order to win even a slight compromize at this point. M1911 smallYüri KaslovM1911 small right 02:10, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
All editors are equal. Click for a list of other admins Bovell Talk | Contrib. 02:22, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
per bovellCoD1 Weapon PPShSignatureSpecialOpsGenralMinigunRay Gun 3rd person view WaW 02:24, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Way to COMPLETELY ignore everything I just said there, Bovell. M1911 smallYüri KaslovM1911 small right 02:38, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Completely ignore everything you said? Your point was that because two people who the community gave administrative rights to are not in agreement with what other people are saying in this topic, everyone should just give up. I could have just chuckled, and closed out of the tab. Instead, I reminded you that our power has no effect on how consensus is determined. So please, assume that my points in a discussion are out of good faith regardless of what my stance is on the proposal. Click for a list of other admins Bovell Talk | Contrib. 13:18, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Bovell, if you truly believe that, you're lying to yourself. M1911 smallYüri KaslovM1911 small right 16:27, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
No. It's completely correct what he said. My opinion doesn't matter more than yours, and yours does not matter more than mine. AEAE is closely linked to CONSENSUS and both of these are core policies when it comes to debating changes in any forum. It means that the wiki isn't ruled with an oligarchical system, and I think that is outlined in COD:NOT.  FANMADE_Animated_Derpy_Hooves_desktop_ponies_sprite.gif Sig1.png Sig2.png  16:35, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
If you wanted to block me, I doubt any of the other admins would even lift a finger to stop you if I didn't raise a fuss about it. M1911 smallYüri KaslovM1911 small right 16:50, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
They definitely would, if you didn't do anything wrong. Besides, we don't discuss blocks, and Bovell and I's point was about how much each user's opinion is weighed in a discussion - everyone's opinion is of equal weight on the consensus scale.  FANMADE_Animated_Derpy_Hooves_desktop_ponies_sprite.gif Sig1.png Sig2.png  18:38, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Bovell brought up AEAE. M1911 smallYüri KaslovM1911 small right 20:18, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
That's exactly what AEAE is... Click for a list of other admins Bovell Talk | Contrib. 20:26, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Per Bovell. Not only that, but that is way too many rules to be effectively enforced. We need to keep it simple. Personal Joe Copp sig 02:24, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Too many rules? It's actually a fairly simple system, akin to not allowing base categories on pages. Just slap the category in there and move the file if necessary. M1911 smallYüri KaslovM1911 small right 02:38, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
I know this is off-topic, but why is there two dots over every one of Yuri's U's? Now on topic, I have a ton of personal images and I am not willing to give them up. I will stand for my decision. /Plants feet firmly on ground/ --Bumblebeeprime09(Talk) 13:01, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
That's just me adding the umlaut to the u's. No biggie. M1911 smallYüri KaslovM1911 small right 16:26, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
READ THE FUCKING PAGE BEFORE POSTING. --http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/8379/14085287.png 13:05, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Take a chill pill Ikin. ← Bravo Five-Nine Talk 13:26, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Dude, these people can't even read the page, they think we are going to remove images... People need to learn how to read (I think cod4 thinks that way too) --http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/8379/14085287.png 13:52, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
No, Ikin, I read the damn thing three times. What you propose has no purpose whatsoever, because if I wanted to use an image I would just upload a new one to the wiki instead of wasting three hours looking for one image (or, I would click on the image where it is already posted and use the filename from that). Not everyone wants to do things the hard way, and those who do are obviously either taking the whole encyclopedia thing WAY too seriously, or they're strong proponents of the clusterfuck that is bureaucracy, and anybody who supports bureacuracy MUST be an employee for the MVA. I mean, why would I want an imageshack account, just to post a few images on wikia when wikia has an inset device for doing JUST THAT? Why waste my time and effort on something so small? If you're on multiple sites and want to upload the same image to all of them -- that would be a reason for a single person to get a third-party hosting site account. But not everyone here is on that many sites! By all means, go for it yourself, but don't force other people to do the same, just because you, in some utterly infathomable way, can't find an image. First and foremost, you COULD just upload a new image to the wiki if you can't find the one you're looking for. Secondly, not everyone wants to or needs to post pictures on different sites! Hell, in all of my 9 years on computers, I've NEVER uploaded a single goddamned image on any site apart from wikia-hosted sites and the WeGame homepage, because I don't want to, and I don't NEED to.

Damn, that got really dragged out. It was like two sentences to start with. M1911 smallYüri KaslovM1911 small right 16:26, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

I have to agree with Yuri on this point. Personal Joe Copp sig 16:40, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Poor you :(, RS.wikia is better then COD.wikia and it uses imageshack for personal images and the wikia images for the wikia and that goes great. --http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/8379/14085287.png 16:43, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Pardon me, but what the hell does the location of images have to do with how good a wiki is? Personal Joe Copp sig 16:47, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Per shotrocket. Ikin, you didn't even offer a good counterargument. M1911 smallYüri KaslovM1911 small right 16:51, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Also, the RS wiki may be bigger, but to say that it is better is very opinionated. Personal Joe Copp sig 16:55, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
In any case, she didn't even respond to my counterproposal. Actually, NOBODY did (apart from a dismissal by you, Shotrocket) . It's the very same system used on The Vault. And it works great there. M1911 smallYüri KaslovM1911 small right 16:58, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Not at all. The RuneScape wiki has great image policies. :S  FANMADE_Animated_Derpy_Hooves_desktop_ponies_sprite.gif Sig1.png Sig2.png  21:33, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Callofduty4, at this point I've completely lost track of what the fuck you're talking about. M1911 smallYüri KaslovM1911 small right 21:36, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Then shut the fuck up srsly. --http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/8379/14085287.png 21:53, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Oh, back the fuck off, Ikin. You've yet to either give me a valid counterargument OR present a valid reason for your desire to limit the uploading of images. I've had a few since I started this convo, get over it.
What the fuck do I care, it's my thread now fuck off and if you want to fight with me come to the irc and we see. --http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/8379/14085287.png 21:59, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Also, Don't be a dick. M1911 smallYüri KaslovM1911 small right 21:56, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

Pictogram voting neutral Neutral — I do see what she means about PMGs, I don't get them at all really. Still, there's not much point in blocking images, we have unlimited server space thanks to wikia. Smuff [The cake is a lie.] 18:31, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

Pictogram voting oppose Strong Oppose — For Ikins Pictogram voting support Strong Support — for Yuris. I mean stoping the images. Plain fucking stupid but a smaller limit would be fine.Sniperteam82308 22:06, December 22, 2010 (UTC) Comment - Personal images being uploaded onto the project burdens users from finding images that are actually of benefit to the project, and a lot of the images I've observed that are personal on this wiki are not used at all so they are not even being of use to anyone. ZamorakO_o (talk) 22:03, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment Comment — How hard is it to read this forum thoroughly? It's to remove personal images, re-upload them on ImageShack or PhotoBucket, and then replace the file on here with the file that's been uploaded there. I bet we only have 10,000 (out of 17,000, I think) images that are actually related to Call of Duty. I'm gonna show the faults in some of the opposes here:

  • "I like my PMGs and I want them to stay" - again, they'll still appear, they just won't be uploaded on the wiki. It'll make it a helluva lot easier to navigate through images if we were to remove personal images on the wiki, reupload them through a media hosting site, and then just embed them here.
  • "What you propose has no purpose whatsoever" - that is completely not true. The proposal was to remove personal images from the wiki and then place them on some other media hosting site - that would be very useful in finding images that we need and would make the wiki a lot more organized when it comes to files. We have so many unused and used personal images that just clog up our current files (yes I know we have unlimited server space, but having all these images completely unrelated to Call of Duty is just useless and not beneficial to anyone at all).
  • "I mean, why would I want an imageshack account, just to post a few images on wikia when wikia has an inset device for doing JUST THAT?" - you don't have to make an imageshack account, you could just upload them there and embed them on a userpage by posting the URL to the image. Also, Wikia has an upload option so an wiki, as an encyclopedia, can have images to show a reader more about what's going on/what something looks like/how something works in an article.
  • "First and foremost, you COULD just upload a new image to the wiki if you can't find the one you're looking for." - That just makes it a duplicate image, and that also just wastes space and time of the person trying to find an image in the first place.
  • "we have an infinite amount of space to put images" - that space is supposed to be used for the subject of a wiki, not for personal images.

I definitely agree we should ban personal images to be uploaded on the wiki, and that they can be uploaded somewhere else. The wiki is an encyclopedia about Call of Duty, therefore our images should be about Call of Duty. Also, the wiki is not a place to upload any image you want - we're here to give readers information about only Call of Duty, not to upload any image you want to on the wiki. --<choose><option>azuris_</option><option>22px-1888721.png Azuristalk</option> 22:19, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

If we're going to ban personal images because it clutters up the images and it's not our job to host images, then what's the point of keeping existing ones? Of course it's too late now to remove them all, there would be too much opposition. I don't see what stopping personal images being uploaded would fix, if there are still personal images present. It still makes us an "image hosting site" (which we aren't, most of the personal images are being used, so it's a bit more than just "hosting") if we don't delete all existing personal images. That's just not going to happen without major problems. I myself have had no problems whatsoever with personal images, the only problem I've had, as I said before, is the lack of appropriate licensing. This is why I'm all for deleting all unlicensed personal images as and when we see them.  FANMADE_Animated_Derpy_Hooves_desktop_ponies_sprite.gif Sig1.png Sig2.png  22:32, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
It's our job, as a wiki, to have images about the subject of the wiki. Also, I can easily delete images with AWB. --<choose><option>azuris_</option><option>22px-1888721.png Azuristalk</option> 22:36, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
That would only serve to upset many users. I don't give a damn about how hard it is to look through the Recent Files, or the ethos of the wiki, the editors should be happy. If we have happy users and a good database, it's as good as it's going to get.  FANMADE_Animated_Derpy_Hooves_desktop_ponies_sprite.gif Sig1.png Sig2.png  22:42, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Look at this forum, the users who are upset by it think this forum is to remove personal images completely. --<choose><option>azuris_</option><option>22px-1888721.png Azuristalk</option> 22:45, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
What does that show? You just offered to delete them all with your AWB bot! Which is pointless as it would only disappoint and upset so many users. Stop and think about the community, not just the users who have a problem with them, for some outlandish reason.  FANMADE_Animated_Derpy_Hooves_desktop_ponies_sprite.gif Sig1.png Sig2.png  22:52, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Just to clarify that, you're looking too much on the users who have a problem, and not enough on those who don't. I can bet those who don't outweigh those who do. Even if it's s 60-40 split in the proposition's favour, it is not enough for a consensus to be met.  FANMADE_Animated_Derpy_Hooves_desktop_ponies_sprite.gif Sig1.png Sig2.png  00:29, December 23, 2010 (UTC)
Pictogram voting neutral Neutral — I know this independent hosting thing sounds good, but can you explain why we shouldn't be capitalizing on all the server space wikia is giving us? I just don't know why it's so bad to begin with, hence this template. Smuff [The cake is a lie.] 22:26, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Because the unlimited server space given to us by Wikia is supposed to be used for things that are important: community, articles related to the topic, and files related to the topic of a wiki. We're a wiki about Call of Duty, not a media hosting site. --<choose><option>azuris_</option><option>22px-1888721.png Azuristalk</option> 22:31, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

Unused images are regularly deleted from the wiki. As far as over burdening the wiki, that point is mute. There are literally millions of images wikia wide. I can guarantee you there a a lot of other wikis out there that have WAY more unused images than our wiki. If images were a problem on the wiki, staff would have told us not to upload them. They haven't, so its not a problem. The servers are large enough to handle the perceived problem. (sorry there was an edit conflict with Azuris and I don't feel like retyping this) Personal WHISKEY35 signature Talk 22:28, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

Couldn't agree more. We've had no problems with personal images.  FANMADE_Animated_Derpy_Hooves_desktop_ponies_sprite.gif Sig1.png Sig2.png  22:52, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

Per Whiskey35Cpl.Bohater 23:02, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

I'm slightly concerned that it's too late to stop personal images now. If I remember correctly, we started to allow them in summer 2009, which is more than a year ago. Personal images have since become a fad and a mainstay, and on a wiki such as ours where you have a comparatively young community, and social aspects such as blogs, what more can you expect?  FANMADE_Animated_Derpy_Hooves_desktop_ponies_sprite.gif Sig1.png Sig2.png  00:29, December 23, 2010 (UTC)

I too don't have much problems with personal images, but there is one: PMGs. The issue isn't allowing them or not, but the amount of them coming in. If one were to visit Special:NewFiles or Special:Log/upload, they would see PMGs there most of the time. Though not that big of an issue as it may seem, a good chunk of those images end up unused or dumped by the uploader a few days later.   Hax 217    talk-page   18:19, December 23, 2010 (UTC)

Take File:MULTI_KILL!.jpg as an example. At the time of posting this comment, it's been two hours since the image was uploaded, and it still hasn't been used. As many have said, we do have unlimited storage space, but that's still no reason to upload an image and not use it.   Hax 217    talk-page   18:23, December 23, 2010 (UTC)

I told cod4 to delete it 1 hour after it was uploaded lol. --http://img541.imageshack.us/img541/6439/21275676.png 18:26, December 23, 2010 (UTC)
You know what? I give up. You want to delete personal images, Ikin/Megan92? Go ahead. Crush my hopes and dreams by deleting all of my greatest pictures. (Sarcasm ahead) You CLEARLY have a perfect argument that has no reasonable counter, so why should I bother trying to fight it? I am just wasting my time, aren't I? --Bumblebeeprime09(Talk) 21:50, December 23, 2010 (UTC)
Dude you didn't even read the fucking page before posting (twice). --http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/4370/97200082.png 23:28, December 23, 2010 (UTC) 23:17, December 23, 2010 (UTC)

Like many have said, one should read the original post before reading the comments and posting yourself. Remember, it's about uploading personal images (mainly PMGs) to an external host, not the wiki. She just wants your opinions, not pointless sarcastic comments.   Hax 217    talk-page   04:33, December 24, 2010 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support Strong Support — (VERY strong) Personal images MUST NOT be UPLOADED to wiki, and they MUST not be HOTLINKED on wiki. UPLOADED images wipe really useful images, and HOTLINKED images are being downloaded from third-party websites, which may be viral or be heavy for Internet connection. The solution is to put links to personal images into the pages (by using []s), or to replace them with text. >SiPlus -talk -contributions_ 14:11, December 24, 2010 (UTC)

Pictogram voting oppose Strong Oppose — The no. of images on a wiki does not affect anything. Per everyone opposing. Sgt. S.S. 22:58, December 24, 2010 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support Strong Support — It's not the number of images that presents problems. It's the mere fact that users are allowed to host them, and it does affect a lot of what happens (or does not happen) on a wiki. To keep things clear and simple, I'll list my arguments:

  1. Large amounts of personal images (especially those that aren't used) adds a lot of clutter to image categories, which makes maintenance difficult even with bots.
  2. Most personal images are beyond the scope of the wiki. As a wiki aptly titled "Call of Duty wiki", we should be focusing on content that relates to Call of Duty. Pimp My Gun has nothing to do with Call of Duty, and it contradicts our purpose as a wiki to openly allow users to upload large galleries of these automatically-generated images that serve no function in mainspace articles.
  3. I'm a bit surprised that Callofduty4 hasn't pulled out the "time-wasting" argument from the massive blogging debacle from months ago. If we're going to go with blogs being a waste of time that distracts people from the wiki; personal images are an even bigger waste of time, as they take a lot of time to create for no benefit to the wiki.
  4. Oh, and personal images clogs up recent edits.

In summary, it might take a bit of effort to delete personal images. However, personal images have absolutely no benefit to the wiki. It is of no concern to the wiki and there are other places that are more appropriate to host these images on. Unlimited storage space is not a legitimate reason to allow all sorts of images. Otherwise, we'll be the #1 site on the internet for "girls with guns". --Scottie theNerd 05:15, December 29, 2010 (UTC)

The reason I didn't pull out my "time-wasting" argument which I so commonly use is because removing personal images is something that would make a noticeable difference. Also, time-wasting isn't really a problem when we have a bot on standby which can probably mass-delete these images without a problem (though, even without the bot I still wouldn't regard this project as time-wasting). I agree with what you say here, but would you oppose even using URL-sourced personal images from image hosting sites?  FANMADE_Animated_Derpy_Hooves_desktop_ponies_sprite.gif Sig1.png Sig2.png  12:47, December 29, 2010 (UTC)
We are not an image hoster. If they want to upload their own images, that's fine, but they need to do it somewhere else. Click for a list of other admins Bovell Talk | Contrib. 13:38, December 29, 2010 (UTC)
Externally hosted images are not on the wiki and are therefore not our concern, apart from common-sense guidelines on appropriateness of use. --Scottie theNerd 15:59, December 29, 2010 (UTC)

For Reference[]

Just for reference, the original discussion to allow Personal Images can be found here.  FANMADE_Animated_Derpy_Hooves_desktop_ponies_sprite.gif Sig1.png Sig2.png  02:26, December 25, 2010 (UTC)

'Closed - due to inactivity. If you feel this topic must be discussed further, please revisit this forum in a new topic. Thanks, <choose><option>azuris_</option><option>22px-1888721.png Azuristalk</option> 20:20, January 29, 2011 (UTC)

Advertisement