← Older revision
Revision as of 20:41, April 30, 2013
Line 321:
Line 321:
==Unused files==
==Unused files==
Depends on what you mean with "tackle" :) Anybody can add unused files to articles or tag duplicates (etc) for deletion. I'm sure you already knew that though, so what do you want to do? -- [[User:Porter21|Porter21]] ([[User_talk:Porter21|talk]]) 13:15, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
Depends on what you mean with "tackle" :) Anybody can add unused files to articles or tag duplicates (etc) for deletion. I'm sure you already knew that though, so what do you want to do? -- [[User:Porter21|Porter21]] ([[User_talk:Porter21|talk]]) 13:15, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
−
:If you mean deleting or moving the files to new names, that's indeed restricted to admins. You could make a [[VA:RFA|adminship request]] though if you like - you meet the requirements and I think you'd make a good sysop :) -- [[User:Porter21|Porter21]] ([[User_talk:Porter21|talk]]) 16:00, May 6, 2010 (UTC)
+
:If you mean deleting or moving the files to new names, that's indeed restricted to admins. You could make a [[FW:URR|adminship request]] though if you like - you meet the requirements and I think you'd make a good sysop :) -- [[User:Porter21|Porter21]] ([[User_talk:Porter21|talk]]) 16:00, May 6, 2010 (UTC)
::On a somewhat related note, I think it'd be better to integrate the file maintenance categories with the existing ones (rather than making them a separate branch of the category tree). I think I can see why you set it up that way (because the main maintenance category is called "''Articles'' requiring attention", right?), but we could simply rename the category to "Attention required" or "Pages requiring attention" and then make the file categories sub-categories of it. I think it's handy to have one category which contains all pages with pending maintenance tasks, and there's also a bit of overlap between {{tl|badimage}} and
{{tl|image quality}}
which could be resolved more easily if both respective categories belonged to one master category. What do you think? -- [[User:Porter21|Porter21]] ([[User_talk:Porter21|talk]]) 21:32, May 6, 2010 (UTC)
::On a somewhat related note, I think it'd be better to integrate the file maintenance categories with the existing ones (rather than making them a separate branch of the category tree). I think I can see why you set it up that way (because the main maintenance category is called "''Articles'' requiring attention", right?), but we could simply rename the category to "Attention required" or "Pages requiring attention" and then make the file categories sub-categories of it. I think it's handy to have one category which contains all pages with pending maintenance tasks, and there's also a bit of overlap between {{tl|badimage}} and
{{tl|image quality}}
which could be resolved more easily if both respective categories belonged to one master category. What do you think? -- [[User:Porter21|Porter21]] ([[User_talk:Porter21|talk]]) 21:32, May 6, 2010 (UTC)
:::{{tl|badimage}} adding to the same category as {{tl|image needed}} is mainly my fault; back in the day I figured that both templates require the same editor action (upload new image), hence I made them use the same category. No other suggestions on my behalf, except for maybe making the display of {{tl|unused}} use the {{tl|mbox}} meta template for consistency and to make it draw more attention. Unlike {{tl|verify}}, this one doesn't need to be inserted in article text after all :)
:::{{tl|badimage}} adding to the same category as {{tl|image needed}} is mainly my fault; back in the day I figured that both templates require the same editor action (upload new image), hence I made them use the same category. No other suggestions on my behalf, except for maybe making the display of {{tl|unused}} use the {{tl|mbox}} meta template for consistency and to make it draw more attention. Unlike {{tl|verify}}, this one doesn't need to be inserted in article text after all :)