Category talk:Candidates for speedy deletion

Some problems!

• I don't think {{Category scheme Commons maintenance}} is appropriate here.
• At the moment the category itself looks like a giant red warning. Not sure if we really want that.
• This category should never contain sub categories but media files and articles subject to speedy deletion only. Well, people tag categories for speedy deletion (eg misspelling), so they end up appearing here. What exactly is wrong with that?
• This useful message is now gone: Don't delete Commons:Template messages or Commons:Image copyright tags visual
• and I don't think the "Purge" link was hurting anyone.

It's not all just instruction cruft, you know!

Anyway I'm leaving these in case there's a good reason for things to be this way now, but I kinda doubt it. --pfctdayelise (translate?) 14:42, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

The problem ist that we urgently need a clear structure and people did add images hand crafted to localised deletion categories. This causes big trouble maintaining the whole stuff. So my aim was that people don't split deletion maintenance "containers", copyvio cleanup efforts and deletion guidelines in several places (that need to be translated and this was the main reason for the localised categories AFAIK) so that we can work up the huge task all together in a more efficient manner (and i suspcet many people don't touch deletion pages as it looks to complicated for them). So I reduced the information in the header and made this big red warning so that people directly read the deletion guidelines in their favourite language before they go ahead. Naturally I did not delete the information that was there previous. I moved it into Commons:Deletion guidelines, where it can be translated without problems. With these sub categories subject to deletion you are right... I meant that we should not create to many detailed sub categories (there were two I deleted after they were orphaned). Hm the purge link, do we really need it? AFAIK purging the category does not help in case of a system lag (that's why I removed it). You'd need to purge all image pages in order to refect changes with category lags. But if it is not the case it should be readded. Arnomane 15:29, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure you use purge when you've deleted a bunch of images and want to refresh the category without them showing up. pfctdayelise (translate?) 04:02, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I hate stating the obvious

... but the deletion instruction page brought me straight to the cat page, which contains no instructions on how to implement said desired speedy deletion. (A minor matter of a misnamed template imported interwiki from en.wikipedia. This, note the preceding 'Commons:' before 'Template:' (A problem with my writing of template commonstmp. (Just fixed using the previous wikilink while in preview! Call it three minutes flat.)

• But seriously, why no similar templates to en.wikipedia? I'm working my butt off over here and there (to equalize cats mainly) and we've put some tools in place (( commonstmp and Template:W2c, or {{WikiPtmpM}}, imported some 'tools' categories (Keeping consistency between sister projects where possible) Category:Navigational templates, Category:Navigation templates (Diff! in 'al'), Category:Uncategorized templates, for such tools management. So equalizing methodology has never been easier. Consider db-author as a strong suggestion... for these inadvertent 'goofs' like this.

Wikipedia

Wikipedia has the same or the similar Template listed below.

Link: Second Argument

If I put 'that tag' on something on wikipedia, it's usually gone inside half an hour (See: Category:Candidates_for_speedy_deletion). Same for the rest of their extensive Speedy Category tools on their menu of deletion tools (see how easy that is to connect now!). So now you too can edit that page and add commonstmp inside an noinclude block. Copy the contents, and follow the link back to here at the commons, Edit, modify, and save, and Voilà, instant new template in a few minutes. Oh, don't forget to change {commonstmp} to {{WikiPtmp}}... now, you're done... save for all the redlinks.

Oops! Well, follow those and repeat as needed! <g>

The interwiki category differences are being ironed out anyway, so you can help that effort if the odd category creates a redlink here and there. As tools migrate, they'll fill up here. Just add {{WikiPcat}} and after saving, follow that link and Add Commonscat4 or one of it's sister's to the wikipedia cat, and things will gell out quickly.

Wikipedia

Wikipedia (WIP) has sorted data in a matching Category name.

Link: WikiPcat1 Dummy Name as Example

Article: WikiPcat1 Second Arguement

The same tagging strategy goes for any category here that is shared with en.wikipedia... most of which are copied to other languages. One caveat! If the Categories here and there have differing parents or sub-categories, the proper tools to use are {{WikiPcat1}} and commonscat1Ra (or Commonscat1R on and in Wikipedia, which place things into a slightly different category. Not the 'Done' list: Wikipedia categories equalized with Wikimedia Commons categories but the To-Do list Wikipedia categories matching with Wikimedia Commons categories. (This system all started with maps categories, but necessarily interacts with parents and diverse 'periodization' categories, so when the shoe fits... lend a hand!. Best regards // FrankB 05:44, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, if a few admins can get me on my talk, I'd appreciate knowing who you are! There are a couple of other things that need speedy deleted that I'll look up or remember soon. Thanks! // FrankB 05:44, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I made some presentation improvements and clarifications to the boxed text instructions on the page. There don't seem to be any speedy delete criteria listed under the English deletion instruction page that apply to speedy deleting here on the commons. I marked those items with a '???', in case I am missing something or other. At least this way, one know when one is looking at a category, they were ill-advisedly pipetricked. Sometimes 'neatness' counts against you. <g> // FrankB 07:00, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

You hate stating the obvious... perhaps you should back up and try again then, because I have no idea what on earth most of this is about. :)

Why no similar templates to en.wp... because the current image deletion method on en.wp is crazy-ridiculous-hard-to-follow and we have a totally different set-up here constrained almost solely to media? 'Cause we have literally thousands of files waiting to be deleted so dumping them all in a single "speedy deletion" category is no longer appropriate?

Anyway I filled in the template names on the front of this category, I guess you're not keen on the instruction "See subcategories"? :) --pfctdayelise (translate?) 12:18, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

@Fabartus: I have answered as well on Template talk:Deletebecause. I basically suggest reading Commons:Deletion guidelines which now hopefully are way more clear what deletion template how to use when. Arnomane 00:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Slowly "speedy" deletions

It seems, that there are no admins who look for speedy deletion requests. E.g., Image:Gefahrensymbol_X.png and Image:Gefahrensymbol_F.png have a request since several days and there are no links on it. Is there any user with the right for deletions, who wants to look about the speedy deletion requests ? Augiasstallputzer 08:02, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

blabla bla. Arnomane 08:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

There is a significant deletion backlog (order of thousands of images), and non-essential deletion (only copyright violations and harmful files are essential) is not a priority. As it happens I removed the speedy tags from these two images because PNG->SVG conversion is explicitly not a reason for speedy deletion. If you really feel it is necessary you can nominate them on COM:DEL. But please, I would ask you to just leave them be... they're tagged as {{Vva}}... that's enough. --pfctdayelise (translate?) 08:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

After a PNG->SVG conversion, there are two identical images, where the png-image is an oldfashion duplicate of the svg-image. Duplicates are legal candidates for speedy deletion. Therefore, please re-insert the request. Its also better, to force the use of svg instead of png. Augiasstallputzer 08:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Sheesh. Even I can see that they're not identical (black borders, different dimensions of the line at the bottom for Image:Gefahrensymbol F.png, plus the SVG has no little orange triangle in its flame). But whatever. Commons is not in the business of forcing format preferences on the projects (except for the 'free' format requirement), and that is the reason PNG->SVG conversions are not speedy delete cases. I ask again: what is wrong with just leaving them tagged as {{Vva}}? What is the huge necessity of deletion? There is none at all. Just leave them be! --pfctdayelise (translate?) 09:58, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Admins do look at speedy deletion requests :/ The problem is, Augiasstallputzer, that the category is just a file dump with no internal sorting mechanisms — yet.... (sorry, pfctdayelise...) and currently, deletions are either judged by the thumbnail (e.g. obvious logos, celebrity photos, suspiciously good angles), or by some other arbitrary mechanism, so some whereas one file might be gone a day after it's nominated, some are stuck there for weeks.

However, as pfctdayelise has stated, we don't want to force anyone to use vector formats over bitmap formats in any case, but especially if the vector version is not actually superior to the bitmap version... and since that very measure of superiority is highly subjective, it is even more discouraged. We're not running out of disk space, so leave them alone: they don't hurt, and in some cases, they might even be just the ones we need (e.g. IE transparency troubles, MediaWiki SVG rendering bugs). —UED77 18:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey UED77, don't you use the Bad Old Ones tool? You can limit it to only show entries that haven't been edited for X days. So if you're really concerned about old entries, I suggest you use it. :) --pfctdayelise (translate?) 04:29, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

"Speedy deletion guidelines" link

I've edited the category explanatory box to point "speedy deletion guidelines" from Commons:Deletion guidelines to Commons:Deletion guidelines#Speedy deletion; although it's an altogether insignificant change, I note it here because I can surely appreciate that one might object to our linking to a specific section inasmuch as editors following the link may neglect to read/follow the broader directions supra on the guidelines page—one should obviously feel free, then, to revert. Jahiegel 19:08, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Relatedly, I replaced {{Lang-DG}} with {{Lang-SDG}} in order that the change should be promulgated to all templated languages; this change should be reverted upon the reversion of the former edit.  :) Jahiegel 19:41, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Is it the right way?

I done the buttom [speedydelete] in [File:FranziskaÖ-GeorgWaldburg.jpg.]. Is this ok and enough for speedydelete? Please a short answer, my English is not so good. Thanks --Adelfrank (talk) 20:54, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

commons delinker?

why is "universally replaced by commons delinker", by iteself, given as a reason to speedy?

shouldn't there be a REASON given for the delinking-deletion?

or is this still a leftover from the "superceded files" question?

Lx 121 (talk) 06:32, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Vladislav Shoot 04 Dartington ©Meladina.jpg

I took and uploaded this photo of Russian composer w:Vladislav Shoot long time ago. He didn't like the photo and replaced it with another one. Now he asked me to delete my old photo from the commons. So, please help and delete it. Thanks! Dmitrismirnov (talk) 20:15, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Dmitrismirnov (talk) 17:27, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Why so slow?

Why "speedy" deletions are much slower than other deletions? This kinda promotes miscategotization of deletion requests ("Want it deleted today? Call it copyright violation, even if it's not!") -- Wesha (talk) 14:33, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Why so extreme slow in Category:Copyright violations?

All people knows: U.S.A. First! - In "Uncategorizied files" are ca. 60% from the USA, 30% from the United Kingdom, 9 % from India and 1% from all other countries of the world. USA First!, we know. And ca. the same percents are in "Copyright violations". USA First! - But in cleaning the Category:Copyright violations are U.S.A. The Last! - Here are working people from Germany, France, China, Spain, and other countries, and only some times 1 ore 2 from the english-native speaker-countries USA and UK. And the Americans and Britishs play only a guest role. They clean only ONE or TWO files and than is finish with the hard work. Here are waiting files 10 days and longer and the desaster on the other deletions sites is the same. The nations with the most dirt do the least for cleaning. Adelfrank (talk) 07:49, 10 August 2020 (UTC)