Commons talk:Deletion policy
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Commons:Deletion policy.|
As I tried to describe the (current) real situation for redundant images more precise, this was reverted. In fact this policy is crap, it is a joke to tag an image as redundant. Apart from this, a reference to a historical discussion is a no-go for a readable official policy. People believe in this policy, but they are thoroughly disappointed, that leads to lasting resentment and annoyance. The first step would be to write the resulting points (arguments) from this huge discussion Commons_talk:Superseded images policy to an user-friendly readable policy/recommendation. It is a slap in the face for every halfway reasonable people, if someone give as reason only this huge old crap link. I do see more and more what other people outside from Commons say: "Commons (has no community it) is only an group of single admins to herself administer and lots of users who look neither right nor left." (from one of the most notable admins on De-Wiki)
- To be more concrete to illustrate the issue:
- There are single notable admins which generally no redundant images delete (for years), if the superseding image is a "newer" SVG (Unfortunately the discussion was not very fruitful...)
- On the other side there are admins which ask user personally why he don't tag the superseded (PNG) image with the duplicate-tag (with SVG)!!
So this is not intended to be an admin critic, this is a policy critic!! Thanks for attention (and sorry for google-translate) ↔ User: Perhelion 21:02, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
- I don't disagree that the current situation does not exactly appear to be perfect, I just think it's better to have a policy that leaves room for interpretation than one stating that things are done on a "random" basis.
21:51, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
- Too much room for interpretation can look arbitrary, and it can certainly frustrating to those subject to seemingly arbitrary actions. I don't Perhelion's edits were helpful, but we might consider removing a policy altogether if it lacks clarity/consensus. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:32, 31 March 2016 (UTC)