WikiImages.org/Archive

The Problem

A user, contributing an image to Wikipedia, and working in 4 Wikipedias, has to give the one image 4 names and upload it 4 times and describe it 4 times. All the other Wikipedias have then to download the image, translate it, and upload it again. This is:

• A waste of time
• A waste of diskspace
• Updating an image is a lot of work
• ...

Itemized Solution

We create something like

• www.WikiImage.org
  • Every image is stored only one time
  • Wikipedias Image: command takes the image from www.WikiImage.org automatically
  • A Image can get different names to be used in the differen Wikipedias (=translations)

alternative solutions

• inter-wiki image display

Just an Idea :-) Fantasy 07:36, 28 Oct 2003 (UTC)

PS: Why this problem? I have 500 Images, I would like to contribute to Wikipedia. I work in 3 Languages, that means 1500 Uploads...

Discuss Solutions at talk:WikiImages.org/Archive

Evaluation Criteria

It might also be useful to spend some time thinking about what we really want the end result to look like. This way we can more easily weigh the advantages and disadvantages of each proposal. -- Kowey 14:39, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Transparent

It should for example be possible for the average wikipedian to upload images the old way and some other wikipedian to migrate the image if he sees fit.

Note: having the old way and the new way coexist could simplify some problems, for example, language-specific images (maps) would simply remain unshared.

Saves Time

It should be easier to share an image using the new way than it was using the old way. The hassle/overhead involved should not exceed that of uploading the image seperately.

---

Brainstorming

I don't know what the best one is. Let's write down some advantages and disadvantages. Please edit -- consider this brainstorming. -- Tim Starling 04:50, 29 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Tim's proposal

Advantages

• Allows a localised image name, and image description

Disadvantages

• Requires extra time to set up the image for each language
• Difficult to make a centralised categorisation/search system
• Discussion on image deletion is difficult.
• Hard to tell what links to a page.

Fantasy/Mav proposal

Advantages

• Easy for uploading large numbers of images for use in large numbers of wikis
• Not too hard to make an image categorisation/search system

Disadvantages

• Multilingual image names make it hard to work out what an image is by looking at its title. This could be a problem both at the centralised repository, and in the local wikitext.
• Need multiple languages on the image description page, hard to find your own
• Need to log in to meta/files manually, so it's annoying for people who only occasionally upload a file. Technological fix for this is possible but difficult.
• Hard to tell what links to a page.
• Higher conversion costs

Fantasy's proposal (w.r.t. Mav's)

Advantages

• Possibility for a customised user interface centred around image upload, in the indefinite future.

Disadvantages

• Another subdomain or domain to administer

Jimbo's proposal (with LDan's modification)

Advantages

• New project altogether with new goal in addition to providing Wikipedia with pictures.
• Seperation of GFDL from non-GFDL pictures (all GFDL would be moved to the new site)

Disadvantages

• Another subdomain to administer
• Limited amount of pictures that are shared
• Some think that non-GFDL pictures should be shared too.

---