Commons talk:Welcome

This talk page is for discussing the contents of the page Commons:Welcome.

For help with licensing, see Commons:Village pump/Copyright.
For general help with Wikimedia Commons, see Commons:Help desk.
For general discussions, see Commons:Village pump.
For administrator assistance, see Commons:Administrators' noticeboard.

Please do not experiment with editing on this discussion page; go to Commons:Sandbox instead.

	SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved\|1=~~~~}} after 4 days.

Meet our photographers

Is there someplace that we can provide a link to this on the main page, welcome page, and maybe the community portal? Meet our photographers showcases a selection of the highly skilled photographers who choose to use open content licenses and donate their work to the Wikimedia Commons. Each photographer on this page has contributed at least 10 Featured Pictures, which is quite a feat. It is intended to impress journalists rather than Wikimedians. --Digon3 ^talk 20:03, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"anyone can edit it"

Let's discuss this instead of repeatedly removing it, shall we? Powers (talk) 14:30, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't realized there was a need to discuss the blatantly obvious. How about we consider the validity of a modification before we repeatedly revert it. ¦ Reisio (talk) 20:19, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like anyone can in fact edit it. -Nard the Bard 20:31, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For those playing catchup: Category:Protected images. ¦ Reisio (talk) 00:57, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Everyone can edit Commons" is not negated by the presence of a small number of images that are protected for technical reasons. Powers (talk) 19:22, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm, but I can't edit them. I can't edit Commons files. ¦ Reisio (talk) 06:05, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So do you say "I can't drive" because you can't drive up the side of a building? Do you say "I can't breathe" because you can't breathe water? "Anyone can edit Commons" is not intended to be a universally applicable statement; it's a generalization, yes (because we don't let blocked users edit at all) but this is not the place to be enumerating every possible exception to the rule. Powers (talk) 16:20, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Right. You also can't edit the global style sheets or list of tabs that everyone sees. You can't edit Commons at all if you don't have access to a computer with an Internet connection. That, however, does not negate the statement that anyone can edit Commons. It's a vernacular statement that concisely describes the purpose and ethos of Commons as a wiki-based media repository. It's not a legal charter of online civil rights or a technical specification of user group privileges. For what it's worth, Commons only has 225 protected images out of 5.5 million, whereas the English Wikipedia edition has 265 protected images out of 870k, and as noted, the same claim is made there. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:41, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm... It doesn't exist. Caketin the third (talk) 09:00, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, I can't drive up buildings or breathe underwater... or edit Commons. Show me the analogy that lets me edit those files, some of which I have edited in the past and might still be editing now if I could, and then you'll be saying something. ¦ Reisio (talk) 06:19, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you couldn't "edit Commons", you wouldn't be able to complain on Commons that you can't edit Commons. If you believe being unable to edit a small subset of the image files negates "anyone can edit", why not make the same assertion about the pages listed Special:AllMessages? Like LX says, its a general statement about the ethos of the wiki. The existence of a number of pages that are protected does not change that. Furthermore, this page is merely designed as a welcome to the project and not a statement of policy. For such a purpose the general description is far more important than the exceptions. If you actually want to make a change to any of those files use {{Editprotected}} (or ask on the AN for a temporary removal of the protection).--Nilfanion (talk) 12:07, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for weighing in (and LX too); I was beginning to think I was alone in disagreeing with Reisio. Powers (talk) 14:23, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:47, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Please add a link to our new JS-page

{{Editprotected}} at the bottom of "Contribute your skills", please add

Contribute with your script knowledge.

(or better wording)

Thank you -- RE rillke questions? 18:31, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Trijnstel (talk) 16:16, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good suggestion. Seems like it has been removed now which also seems fine: now there is a link to Commons:Tools. What do you think of integrating more info about scripts and how to help developing the subset of useful ones that need development into that page? Currently, Commons:User scripts is only linked at the bottom of that page. However, that page is not looking good anyway, those "tools" described on the page are mostly scripts too, and Category:User scripts may be more useful than that help page. Maybe it needs a new page that has better info on all the scripts available. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:55, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Translation

{{Editprotected}} If this page should be marked for translation, it needs to be unprotected so that translation admins can work on it. Are localised versions all similar to this one or should an high freedom of customisation be kept? If other languages are very different, it's better to keep few very big translation units, containing also the markup, so that translations can adjust more. --Nemo 07:56, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Before it should be marked for translation, it should be checked whether a redesign is required and whether it should be modernized (Commonsist is only one of 3 batch uploading tools now). It can be marked for translation by a real sysop and it should stay protected as it gets 3000 views a day =high traffic page. -- Rillke^(q?) 08:35, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

THe high visibility is why I assume it needs to be made translatable. --Nemo 22:23, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you promise that you care for migrating everything, I will unprotect it. -- Rillke^(q?) 21:10, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stale

feel free to {{Editprotected}} again. Thank you −ebraminio^talk 16:02, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:48, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Common sense tool

The link to the common sense tool, under the heading "Contribute your time" needs to be updated so that it points to labs, instead of the toolserver. Current url: http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daniel/WikiSense/CommonSense.php?u=en&p=_20&cl=&uncategorized=Random+Orphan&w=en&v=0 .--Snaevar (talk) 19:03, 20 September 2014 (UTC) ... when the common sense tool is fully migrated, of course.--Snaevar (talk) 19:41, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:49, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Link "What can I do for Wikimedia Commons?" browser dependent

In Firefox or Chrome, the last link in the tools section:

What can I do for Wikimedia Commons?

takes me to a broken survey in Polish. It seems to display correctly only in Microsoft Edge. The link should be removed or labeled as "Microsoft Edge only". --Worldbruce (talk) 16:23, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Worldbruce: I can't reproduce this using Firefox 60.0.1 on Linux, Chrome 66.0.3359.117 on Linux, Firefox 66.0.1 on Android, or Chrome 66.0.3359.158 on Android. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:34, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:49, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Definition, the bolding of

{{Editprotected}} Hi there! Currently the page says: "Wikimedia Commons is a media file repository making available public domain and freely-licensed educational media content (images, sound and video clips)..."

I would suggest instead this phrasing "Wikimedia Commons is a file repository making available public domain and freely-licensed educational media content (images, sound and video clips) t..."

Or perhaps in a shorter form "Wikimedia Commons is a repository for public domain and freely-licensed educational media content (images, sound and video clips) t..."

What do you think? After all it's not any old media dump but the licensing requirement is what makes it special. --Palosirkka (talk) 14:49, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Palosirkka, unfortunately this is a possible fundamental change of the meaning of this project, so we need somewhere at minimum a small consensus for this request. -- User: Perhelion 14:54, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Per Perhelion. More input on this change would be needed. If you wish to continue please post a thread at the village pump. --Majora (talk) 14:40, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:49, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Voting on FeaturePictures under Contribute Your Time

Hi. I'm thinking about contributing some of my time to Commons. In reading that section on this page the idea of voting on Featured Pictures seemed like something I would like, given my work on reviewed content on other projects. However in going there I see I am not actually eligible as a new person. I would suggest that this suggestion be removed. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:15, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Barkeep49: Hi, and welcome. That would be against the consensus documented in this edit 19:27, 3 January 2011 and this edit 19:30, 3 January 2011. You would have to establish a new consensus at Commons talk:Featured picture candidates. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 02:03, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Intro needs to mention that uploads need to be freely licensed

The introduction, which is pretty long, doesn't seem to mention clearly enough that Commons only allows freely licensed files.

Commons:First steps covers contributing and explains licensing in the tutorial, so a prominent link to that page is needed. But, calling it "First steps" may not be clear enough, perhaps "First steps for uploading" would be better.

These thoughts are based on the user experience and design research report which may see cross-wiki uploads disabled and drive more new uploaders directly to this page. Commander Keane (talk) 00:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Commander Keane: We need more of this sort of research. Commons does a really crappy job of explaining the rules to new users; I have said that before, and I will continue taking every opportunity to complain about that.

Having said that, I’m not sure what the exact problem is here. The fact that Commons media needs to be free culture is mentioned in the first sentence; there is also an entire paragraph on that issue. Brianjd (talk) 05:17, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ironically, my claim that Commons is bad at explanations was backed up by the section below this one. It was a self-promotion section (now removed); the author had received two specific deletion warnings but had not actually been warned that self-promotion was generally prohibited on Commons (I warned them with {{No advertising}}). Brianjd (talk) 05:49, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This page makes it clear that there are many different ways to contribute (most of which do not involve uploading files), but the ‘first steps’ tutorial seems to be basically about uploading files, so I agree that the name should be more specific. Brianjd (talk) 05:46, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]