Duplicate Images sectionEdit

I would recommend a permanent section in the Images for deletion page: a section for only duplicate images. There are a fair amount of duplicate images on here, and I think it would be simple to have a special section. Since these duplicate images really require a different type of discussion than regular images, I think this could be a good idea. We could also do a duplicate image template if you people think that's a good idea. Input? -Platypus Man | Talk 04:56, 2 Oct 2005 (UTC)

You could always either upload one over the other, by renaming one image the same as the second and you could alternatively just revert between previous versions of the image to whichever is the best and request the now "copied" duplicate image for immediate deletion. --Alan del Beccio 06:23, 2 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, that's great when one image is clearly better than the other. However, when two people may prefer two different versions, they require a discussion. -Platypus Man | Talk 19:23, 2 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Duplicate Image Section (archive, Ten Forward)Edit

OK. All of us who watch the Images for deletion know how many duplicate images we seem to get. I came up with an idea for a special section of the page specially for duplicate images. I put my proposal on its talk page, but it didn't get much response, even after my pimping of it on the deletion page. I'm putting this here so that more people will see my idea. Please, don't reply here, go to the images for deletion talk page, where the proposal already is. Thanks. -Platypus Man | Talk 23:17, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC)

It would just be easier to upload one over the other and post the former for immediate deletion (if they are indeed duplicate images). That is, essentially, what I, we (the admins), do when we merge images and pages anyway. The difference here is that you do not have the ability to delete, so posting it for immediate deletion fulfulls that aspect. For that matter, that this is more or less (indirectly) approved in the guidelines for immediate deletions. --Alan del Beccio 18:22, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Overhaul and rename Edit

I suggest we overhaul the system for deleting images to include all file types and work the same way the Pages for deletion does, using subpages for each discussion. Multiple file deletion discussions would happen the same way multiple page deletion discussions do. For example, a deletion discussion about unused images this month could be located at Memory Alpha:Files for deletion/Unused files (Sept 2013) and list every file tagged. Adopting this system would mean both of our deletion systems work the same way, and make finding old deletion discussions easier to find. - Archduk3 18:31, September 8, 2013 (UTC)

Makes sense, support. --Cid Highwind (talk) 19:03, September 8, 2013 (UTC)
((borderline irrelevant) comment) Not that I'm against it per se, but I can't help but find this an weird proposal; the system for deleting pages doesn't seem to work as well as it used to these days; pages suggested for deletion barely attract comments, and often linger for months due to lack of imput. Meanwhile, the more primitive system for deleting images is humming along just fine. (well, archiving discussions would actually be nice, but there's a other ways of doing that) It seems that if one of the two systems needs to change, this ain't the one. -- Capricorn (talk) 00:31, September 15, 2013 (UTC)
Oh crap, I've this came up in my watchlist due to a linkfix, not the discussion itself, and the discussion is already over. well, disregard all that then. :) -- Capricorn (talk) 00:37, September 15, 2013 (UTC)

Actually the "stalled" deletion discussions are a symptom of the lack of input across the board, not just there. This page only seems to work better because there are less contested image deletions, generally because the reasoning for deleting images is pretty straight forward compared to articles. One part of the reasoning for the change is because the deletion of other file types may not be so straight forward, and the archive is about to become much more important. - Archduk3 00:50, September 15, 2013 (UTC)

I support this as a matter of simplification- having one type of process. I assume we would still have some sort of speedy deletion for obviously inappropriate images(as we do with pages). 31dot (talk) 00:55, September 15, 2013 (UTC)

This page and the recent changes will list pages and files in the speedy deletion category. Actually 31dot, I think most of the system articles in there right now have to do with an old unsaid system deletion discussion you were working on, if I remember correctly. - Archduk3 01:20, September 15, 2013 (UTC)

That's kind of my fault, actually: I added a list of articles which were probably non-canon based on a search of online scripts and transcripts, but then I realised I wasn't comfortable concretely arguing for their deletion without checking with the real episodes, most of which I don't even have on dvd. -- Capricorn (talk) 12:01, September 15, 2013 (UTC)

Not listing discussions Edit

I just nominated a file for deletion, with the discussion found here, but it is not listing in the active discussions. The current system for listing these discussions did not exist when I was last very active. What have I done wrong, and is there a way to make the instructions more clear? --OuroborosCobra talk 03:22, April 6, 2016 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+