Template talk:Misnamed user image

Interesting, but a normal deletion tag covers it. The norm for taggers is to use Poke's GWWT when tagging, which has links to the relevant policy, and also to leave a notice on that user's talk page -- I think that's more noticeable for new users, instead of having the information on the tagged image only. -- Brains12 \ talk 23:18, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, I could see this being useful. It would be easier to do it the other way around -- give the tag all the information and instructions necessary to name the image right, and a small message on the user's talk page directing the user to the image. --[[Image:User Brains12 Spiral.png|16px|]] Brains12 \ talk 23:38, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Hm I still think this is all be done by just using delete with Poke's GWWT already. Beside the actual Link to the correct Location tho but most Users Tagging Images leave a note on the Uploader's Talkpage giving them a Link / Explanation on where to upload the new Image. Beside that its still stated in the Policy which is linked from the delete Template. (If using GWWT of course, which is more or less Standard anyway.) Another way is to nudge Poke to add autoadd a Link to the new Location for GWWT. But I dont think that solution is the best. -- Silent Storm  [[Image: User SilentStorm MySig.png|19px]] 23:45, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I think this template would mean less "work" for tagger (i.e. won't have to go into as much detail on the user's talk page) and more help for the user (better instructions, an upload location etc). New users are unlikely to read a policy, so having a consistent and easy explanation may be better. Although the grey could probably change.. noone likes reading on grey. :P --[[Image:User Brains12 Spiral.png|16px|]] Brains12 \ talk 23:48, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * But again not every user have their images on watchlist tho... And if they dont have then it would still need a notice on the Users talk page. And when you write a Note on the user's talk page you can just as easy write a subst line to include a template does tell him exactly what to do aswell. The Advantage is that the User will have the New Messages Line. Also another "Problem" with this is that it is not a deletion template and Images wont get deleted and users could ignore it and / or forget to actually tag it for deletion. Either way it would mean that we end up with loads of orphaned / wrong named images. -- Silent Storm  [[Image: User SilentStorm MySig.png|19px]] 23:53, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm sure something can be inserted to automatically put the image up for deletion after a certain amount of time, similar to guild cleanup and inactive guild. Also, as I said, there should still be a message given to that user, but it will be shorter, clearer, and won't clutter up their talk pages (which perhaps might lead to ignoring the talk page itself). I'm sure Poke could insert the template and parameters on GWWT, so it should become an easier job for taggers -- less time spent on writing long messages explaining something that may or may not be clear, more time spent on actual tagging. --[[Image:User Brains12 Spiral.png|16px|]] Brains12 \ talk 23:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) hm yeah actually it could be added to show it on GWW:DEL tho... Even though its not a long line for most to add an Image naming Notice to the Talk Page it might be slightly easier... However this Template would need both optical and Code Cleanup from what I saw should it be decided that these Templates will actually become "official" Templates for tagging. It might be not _that_ bad at all but still it would mean two more templates and some changes to GWW:DEL plus I think delete looks nicer and is Multi Useable and thus useable for stuff like this too... ;)

-- Silent Storm   00:10, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I think this template allows for easier categorisation, maintenance, tagging, user notifications and clearer instructions for replacement. I've expended my arguments for this, so that's my summary :). --[[Image:User Brains12 Spiral.png|16px|]] Brains12 \ talk 00:15, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Hm did not thought about the easier Categorisation point yet. About the Clearer Instructions yeah ok. Might not be all that bad like I said above... I'll see if I can make sth from this. -- Silent Storm  [[Image: User SilentStorm MySig.png|19px]] 00:46, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Automatic deletion candidate
I'm not sure if Rezyk intended for this to be used as a move template only, but I think it would be more useful if it included something like "this image will be deleted after three days from tagging if not replaced accordingly", and the relevant categories be added to GWW:DEL (or add those images to Category:Candidates for deletion as well). It would mean that delete isn't needed and this would become the sole template for incorrect user image naming maintenance. -- Brains12 \ talk 01:10, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Automatically marking them for deletion is not the Main Problem but it is not up to the Template. It will be a pseudo delete like guild cleanup is currently. This however is done at GWW:DEL. Anyways I played around with this a little bit to make it one Template which is used for both User and Guild Image Tagging. Can be seen here -- Silent Storm  [[Image: User SilentStorm MySig.png|19px]] 01:25, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Adding the images that are tagged (in other words, changing the part inside the includeonly tags) to Category:Candidates for deletion would automatically add them to gww:del. Of course, the categories as they are now (Misnamed user/guild images) can be added to gww:del instead, so these tags can work effectively as deletion tags would. --[[Image:User Brains12 Spiral.png|16px|]] Brains12 \ talk 01:29, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I have to agree with SilentStorm, that this template (and its brother) is not very useful. It requires to put two parameters (which are not easily typed, as they are even named parameters) to display a simple new wanted location. Also it is - in its current state - confusing if the image will be deleted or not, whereas a delete template will clearly say that the image is going to be deleted. Additionally you can reupload it again under a correct name (so a additional move template would fit better). I'm going to object the idea of having this (and its brother) an additional deletion template, as it would require two additional sections on the deletion list and as SilentStorm already mentioned, users don't look at the image's page, so a note will still be required.

An easier way would to simply add a move template; that is what the move template is for, to say that something should be somewhere else but the fact that there is a move template doesn't change the fact that the image is going to be deleted. Additionally I can set up my bot next week so it regularily checks images to be moved and auto-moves them. poke | talk 17:54, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The parameters are not required to display a simple new wanted location. This may not be useful to everyone, but it's somewhat useful to users like me who feel that having the appropriate-name link on the image page is very worthwhile. Perhaps that means I should just keep/use this from User:Rezyk/Misnamed_user_image instead, which is fine by me. --Rezyk 15:59, 15 June 2008 (UTC)