Commons: why does it take so long to get anything done there?

[Beeblebrox]

Wikipedia gets backlogged in various places, and sometimes things take way longer than they should, but Commons seems to have it worse. I opened this discussion of a category link over two years ago. I'm betting this is not the oldest old business.

I don't think this can be fixed without adding a whole bunch of new admins, which seems unlikely. (Near as I can tell they have broken even so far this year, one added, one removed.)

[MadManz]

wtf they have CFDs from 2014 still open

[rhindle]

The WMF should have focused on cleaning house there rather than imposing their U-Coc on the project.

[watis]

The way I saw it called was "small wiki with big wiki problems". They have most of the images used on enwiki and all of the images used on many projects (including a few other big ones like eswiki), which means they have a high activity rate, but almost none of that is 'people who actually do things on Commons'. The actual invested community is tiny, and has to deal with way, way more than anything else of its size does.

[Poetlister]

If the atmosphere there were less unpleasant, maybe more people of good admin calibre would come forward to do the work. Ideally, the WMF should pay people to help sort things out, but presumably they'd be worried about Section 230 immunity.

[Giraffe Stapler]

Wikipedia gets backlogged in various places, and sometimes things take way longer than they should, but Commons seems to have it worse. I opened this discussion of a category link over two years ago. I'm betting this is not the oldest old business.

I don't think this can be fixed without adding a whole bunch of new admins, which seems unlikely. (Near as I can tell they have broken even so far this year, one added, one removed.)

They take the volunteer part more seriously over there. People do what they want to do. And how they feel like doing it. Only three votes on a deletion discussion that been open for a couple of days? That's fine, close it and delete the file. Many votes and a lot of discussion on a deletion discussion that's been open for months? Not my problem, man.

[ArmasRebane]

The way I saw it called was "small wiki with big wiki problems". They have most of the images used on enwiki and all of the images used on many projects (including a few other big ones like eswiki), which means they have a high activity rate, but almost none of that is 'people who actually do things on Commons'. The actual invested community is tiny, and has to deal with way, way more than anything else of its size does.

Yep. This perhaps explains some of the standoffishness of the community to other wikis, but it also just exacerbates the problem, especially since I don't think anyone's idea of a fun time is to help out more at the community where all the people who were rightfully banned from the X.wiki projects seem to end up.

Usually it's easy to pinpoint why Wiki projects are bad—either there aren't enough people, so they fall victim to serious biases (small language wikis), there aren't enough admins, so they fall victim to cliques (seems like that's Ja.wiki's major issue), or there's no interest (in which case they become functionally defunct like Wikivoyage and Wikinews, and a better organization would just prune them but instead they limp along because two or three people fuss whenever someone suggests otherwise.) Commons' problems are largely very different than any other project, and it's got an identity crisis where pragmatically it should just be an appendage that facilitates cross-wiki free media hosting and sharing, but instead some people treat it like it should be an indiscriminate Internet Archive.

[Vigilant]

The most serious problem is that commons is a dumping ground for people who couldn't make it at en.wp.

[The Garbage Scow]

The most serious problem is that commons is a dumping ground for people who couldn't make it at en.wp.

And the most active of those people are massively butthurt and immovably bitter. The rest are people who only care about keeping as much pr0n as possible.

[watis]

functionally defunct like Wikivoyage and Wikinews

Not comparable examples -- the former has about ten times the active userbase and far more day-to-day activity. It averages about as many editors a month as the Tamil or Estonian Wikipedias, which are both fairly respectable projects. Wikinews is one of the long-tail projects, like Old English or Romansh.

[Beeblebrox]

I like contributing to Wikivoyage once in a a while. It's mellow, original research is just fine, I've never run into any real drama there. I'm sure it exists but it's easy to avoid.

[Giraffe Stapler]

The reality is, the die hard Wikishits never wanted Commons to be an independent project. This is in large part because their racist white man's view of the world cannot really see a practical need for having one single media host which can serve images to different language Wikipedias, or indeed, SHOCK HORROR, have a nominally independent utility to the world that's completely separate from Wikipedia.

In their Amercian-Imperialist world view, bearing in mind Beeblewank is a US citizen residing in a territory no white man has any business even being in, if there needs to be a single host at all, it should be the original, the best, the most developed and sophisticated Wikipedia, the US-uk Wikipedia. All the other Wikipedias from the shtihole countries, should get their images from their colonial masters, and probably have to do their own translation work too, because people like Beeblebrox got better things to do than translating their content so it can be used globally.

Scum like Beeblebrox are very representative of the white Wikipedian attitude to their global media host sister project and the people who call it home. They have for years, maligned them and insulted them and even accused them of being child pornographers. All based on groundless myths and propaganda, often posted by Wikishits on Wikipediocracy, as if that place has any role to play in their civil wars. Jake has allowed it for years, firstly because he's an arse, but also because he's not all that informed about what goes on at any project except Wikipedia. Why? Consider his user base. Commons people are too busy doing their actual work, they don't have time to goof off like Beebledork and gossip about ther enemies or rant a out their pet peeves on Wikipediocracy .

Had I known he was a racist, I would not have given money for that gift basket we sent Beeblebrox.

[Beeblebrox]

Wow, I guess this is what I get for asking why simple content decisions take years to implement there. Obviously the answer is because I'm racist, and hate all other WP projects. It all so clear to me now.

[Hemiauchenia]

The reality is, the die hard Wikishits never wanted Commons to be an independent project. This is in large part because their racist white man's view of the world cannot really see a practical need for having one single media host which can serve images to different language Wikipedias, or indeed, SHOCK HORROR, have a nominally independent utility to the world that's completely separate from Wikipedia.

In their Amercian-Imperialist world view, bearing in mind Beeblewank is a US citizen residing in a territory no white man has any business even being in, if there needs to be a single host at all, it should be the original, the best, the most developed and sophisticated Wikipedia, the US-uk Wikipedia. All the other Wikipedias from the shtihole countries, should get their images from their colonial masters, and probably have to do their own translation work too, because people like Beeblebrox got better things to do than translating their content so it can be used globally.

Scum like Beeblebrox are very representative of the white Wikipedian attitude to their global media host sister project and the people who call it home. They have for years, maligned them and insulted them and even accused them of being child pornographers. All based on groundless myths and propaganda, often posted by Wikishits on Wikipediocracy, as if that place has any role to play in their civil wars. Jake has allowed it for years, firstly because he's an arse, but also because he's not all that informed about what goes on at any project except Wikipedia. Why? Consider his user base. Commons people are too busy doing their actual work, they don't have time to goof off like Beebledork and gossip about ther enemies or rant a out their pet peeves on Wikipediocracy .

Had I known he was a racist, I would not have given money for that gift basket we sent Beeblebrox.

Did someone actually write this unironically? The only person I know who writes this histerically is Crow's Nest.

[Bezdomni]

The only person I know who writes this historically is Crow's Nest.

What!? Graff is scraping Crow straight off the wire into ar BubbleClerk's basket? I thought there were rules about officeClip proxying, oaths of gilded fealty and such?

[Giraffe Stapler]

Did someone actually write this unironically? The only person I know who writes this histerically is Crow's Nest.

Correct. And that was only part of it. I think someone needs to check his home for gas leaks.

[Midsize Jake]

The thing is, it must be really frustrating for him over there. He starts a thread with a really long post about how Commons has been unfairly maligned and vilified for years, by the Wikipedians as well as us, and then Mr. Barbour follows that up with a post that unfairly maligns and vilifies Commons — because like everyone else, he stopped reading the really long post about four lines in.

I may be the only person on Earth who actually reads his posts in their entirety (if I read them at all), and again, he made a perfectly good point there by saying that Commons isn't as popular as Wikipedia because users there don't get the same instant gratification on Commons (in the form of instant top-rankings on Google) that they get on Wikipedia. But he couches that perfectly good point in so much unnecessary vitriol, childish insults, and intentional misspellings, it becomes practically unreadable. Who wants to subject themselves to that?

This is obviously putting aside the whole issue of whether or not we (or I specifically) "allow" unfair criticism of Commons to be posted on Wikipediocracy, as if our job as moderators is to selectively redact things we deem "unfair," or ban people who are in the habit of criticizing stuff we don't think should be criticized.

The fact is, this isn't an either-or, binary-type issue. Commons can be useful and its users can be hard-working and well-intentioned, and it can also be poorly-managed and intransigent about keeping crap images that it shouldn't, including borderline child-porn. That shouldn't be a controversial statement either, unless of course your real intention is to get revenge against some website somewhere that disagreed with you about something, and you're adjusting your positions specifically to be in opposition to whatever you see on that website.

[Poetlister]

Isn't calling Alaska "a territory no white man has any business even being in" just a touch - you know - racist? If someone described England as "a territory no black man has any business even being in", I think that it would be regarded as racist.

[Giraffe Stapler]

Isn't calling Alaska "a territory no white man has any business even being in" just a touch - you know - racist? If someone described England as "a territory no black man has any business even being in", I think that it would be regarded as racist.

That's some pretty lazy trolling. You should have gone with "a territory no Native American has any business even being in". See how much better that is? Not only have you flipped the Alaskan situation, but you're also setting up an argument about the use of the term "Native American".

[Jim]

...

That's some pretty lazy trolling.

Plus ça change...

[Poetlister]

Isn't calling Alaska "a territory no white man has any business even being in" just a touch - you know - racist? If someone described England as "a territory no black man has any business even being in", I think that it would be regarded as racist.

That's some pretty lazy trolling. You should have gone with "a territory no Native American has any business even being in". See how much better that is? Not only have you flipped the Alaskan situation, but you're also setting up an argument about the use of the term "Native American".

My point is that we have a substantial number of black people living in England who are perfectly entitled to be here. I could have said "no Yupik", but we hardly have any Yupik here so the point would have been lost.

[Ming]

The fact is, this isn't an either-or, binary-type issue. Commons can be useful and its users can be hard-working and well-intentioned, and it can also be poorly-managed and intransigent about keeping crap images that it shouldn't, including borderline child-porn.

Well, yes. Commons would be a sensible idea if it weren't run with such hostility.

[Jim]

Well, yes. Commons would be a sensible idea if it weren't run with such hostility.

And wikipedia would be great if it wasn't run by idiots.

Are we going somewhere here?

[Beeblebrox]

The whole point about Alaska is just stupid and lazy. I don't think it is any big secret that the entirety of the Americas was colonized by Europeans who horribly mistreated the people who were already living there. This gusuq isn't losing any sleep over living where I do. Nice to know someone is so intensely interested in my every word though. I must be really influential.

[Moral Hazard]

Did someone actually write this unironically? The only person I know who writes this histerically is Crow's Nest.

Correct.

May Crow's Nest make even more of an impact decolonizing the sum of all human knowledge than Crow did in liberating knowledge about women on Wikipedia!

[Moral Hazard]

Isn't calling Alaska "a territory no white man has any business even being in" just a touch - you know - racist? If someone described England as "a territory no black man has any business even being in", I think that it would be regarded as racist.

Good luck reasoning with hysteric ignoramuses who think that any living humans are not descended from killers, rapists, and slaveholders.

[Moral Hazard]

The whole point about Alaska is just stupid and lazy. I don't think it is any big secret that the entirety of the Americas was colonized by Europeans who horribly mistreated the people who were already living there. This gusuq isn't losing any sleep over living where I do. Nice to know someone is so intensely interested in my every word though. I must be really influential.

Which was more accurate:

Northern Exposure (T-H-L) or Christopher Nolan's Insomnia (2002 film) (T-H-L) on Alaska,
or Fargo (film) (T-H-L) on Minnesota?

Midnight in Alaska:

wp-content?

[Ada Sinn]

Isn't calling Alaska "a territory no white man has any business even being in" just a touch - you know - racist? If someone described England as "a territory no black man has any business even being in", I think that it would be regarded as racist.

Exactly. Good point.

[Beeblebrox]

Well, we're wandering here but if you get me started I could talk about Alaska all day. What I will say regarding Native Alaskans: they were certainly mistreated, first by the Russians and then by the Americans. And of course there is still racism today, but in the villages the tables are turned. It's their land, their rules, and if you don't like it you can get the fuck out.

I've sampled the village life, just a little bit and very much as an outsider, but I can see the appeal of it. They are living their own culture in the villages, not their ancient culture, it's a living thing like any other culture and has evolved. Kids might have to be pulled away from their game of Minecraft to help with cleaning a seal or a caribou. Traditional dancing is practiced almost daily, but so is basketball. Walrus is something they eat, but the first thing to sell out when the store isn't restocked on time is Pepsi. Everyone knows how to speak English, but they might not choose to speak it if they don't want to talk to white people that day.

It's a rough life in many regards, it's not unusual to find ten or more people living in a small four-room house. Indoor plumbing is rare. It gets really, really fucking cold, -45F with high winds is not unusual in places like the YK delta (T-H-L) in winter. There's often high unemployment. But they are living on their own land, by choice. (in most cases anyway, there have been a few relocations , Attu Island (T-H-L) being a notable example)

[Moral Hazard]

Thanks, Beebs.

[Bezdomni]

Looking here, it seems that both WikiData #1 & Commons #2 rank above #5 en.wp on some sort of WMF media-wiki "goodness" scale. #11 (@wikia) crashes completely and #17 (lyrics.wikia.com) has been closed down and is even now returning previously submitted manuscripts to their owners/writers. #24 on this "goodness" scale is Japanese wikipedia.

Wikistats is not a very intuitive tool, I don't recommend trying to sort anything too quickly on that list of the purportedly biggest mediawiki instances on the web... what you see is pretty much what you get... dates that conflict, dead links (e.g. click on, say, "wikidata"), but facts that check out, too... it's an interesting table. One highlight: the LSJ (Greek-English + lexicon).

Also noticed that mine own very instance hasn't updated from the sunflower to the BP grapefruit logo yet. I may have to take my site down if they manage to change it.

[el84]

Looking here, it seems that both WikiData #1 & Commons #2 rank above #5 en.wp on some sort of WMF media-wiki "goodness" scale. #11 (@wikia) crashes completely and #17 (lyrics.wikia.com) has been closed down and is even now returning previously submitted manuscripts to their owners/writers. #24 on this "goodness" scale is Japanese wikipedia.

Wikistats is not a very intuitive tool, I don't recommend trying to sort anything too quickly on that list of the purportedly biggest mediawiki instances on the web... what you see is pretty much what you get... dates that conflict, dead links (e.g. click on, say, "wikidata"), but facts that check out, too... it's an interesting table. One highlight: the LSJ (Greek-English + lexicon).

Also noticed that mine own very instance hasn't updated from the sunflower to the BP grapefruit logo yet. I may have to take my site down if they manage to change it.

I do like #11 is showing -1 active users. Says it all.

This list appears to be a list of wikis by the sheer amount of crap (bytes) on them?

Edit: Bezdomni damnit close your tags properly!

[tarantino]

I do like #11 is showing -1 active users. Says it all.

This list appears to be a list of wikis by the sheer amount of crap (bytes) on them?

The stats are crap. The first one I checked, #13 colors.wikia (which redirects to colors.fandom), says there are 2,245,234 edits and 16,580,738 users. There are actually just 30 users, and only 16 of those have made edits. The most edits by a non-staff person is 13.

[Bezdomni]

I do like #11 is showing -1 active users. Says it all.

This list appears to be a list of wikis by the sheer amount of crap (bytes) on them?

The stats are crap. The first one I checked, #13 colors.wikia (which redirects to colors.fandom), says there are 2,245,234 edits and 16,580,738 users. There are actually just 30 users, and only 16 of those have made edits. The most edits by a non-staff person is 13.

I noticed that one too. It does seem to get the number of admins right for Japanese wikipedia, though.

Colors.fandom is smaller than The Logic Museum (or than Creolista for that matter).

Perhaps there are better stats kept somewhere else? (wikiscan confirms that WD is higher volume than en.wp with 58% bot edits, and shows how much busier en.wp admins are blocking § than their commons counterparts §.)

Edit: Bezdomni damnit close your tags properly!

[/so sorry. ]