Wikipedia talk:Requested pictures

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] free photo site list

a lot of creative common sites, pictures, search engines @ http://www.graphicsngraphicdesign.com/freestockphotos-graphicdesigners/

[edit] Haus-Wittgenstein

I will be in Vienna starting this week and i'll definitely be taking a few high-res pics of Haus-Wittgenstein for submission here.

[edit] Human

I removed from the request for "human" the phrase "preferably an aborigen in traditional garb." Maybe just excessive PC, but i don't think it was very flattering to aborigens anywhere.

Why wouldn't it be? And who cares if it isn't? We are not here to flatter any one. Besides, being overly PC is POV and really doesn't have a place here. The request was specific because a specific image is needed. --maveric149

So, humans. Just anybody? Zanimum

[edit] Photographer list

As posted to wikipedia-l, I think it would also be nice if photographers who are willing to take on smaller tasks could list themselves on the page (with wiki names or real names, but preferably with their location), so that they can be more spontaneously contacted if necessary. Also, it would be nice if people who are planning to shoot a certain location/place/thing/event could add their name below the request ("working on it") so that the effort isn't duplicated.

It would be great to turn this into more of a team effort with real humans interacting with each other instead of just a list with the results trickling in more or less anonymously. Also, instead of just removing completed requests, how about moving them to a separate page? "Finished tasks" or something like that. This kind of stuff is important for motivation. --Eloquence 21:02 Oct 30, 2002 (UTC)

On Wikipedia:Image recreation requests there was an "Individuals" section, that people listed themselves on if they would fulfill certain types of requests. (Electrical schematics for me, for instance.) Someone took it down for some reason. - Omegatron 18:12, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use of "captcha"?

I would like to post an image of an actual "captcha" from the yahoo email registration, since it would serve well as an example. I believe that such use would be considered "fair use" under copyright law. However, I cannot truthfully say that "I affirm that the copyright holder of this file agrees to license it under the terms of the Wikipedia copyright." and am thus prevented from uploading it.

Thank you for your restraint. While it probably would be fine to use under general "fair use", it's not at all clear that it could be distributed under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows further redistribution and modification for any purpose, including commercial use, so long as the same license is followed. Until the project has received a real legal opinion on the matter from professionals in the field of IP and who are familiar with the GFDL, it's only prudent to not insert other people's intellectual property into Wikipedia without licensing it appropriately. --Brion 16:42 22 May 2003 (UTC)
IANAL. But I would see no legal problem in using it, as it lacks any form of "creativity" that would give it copyright. Additionally the software to generate the Yahoo Captcha is publically available if you want to generate your own captcha. --Imran 17:02 22 May 2003 (UTC)
Problem solved by obtaining permission from member of team at www.captcha.net to use captcha image from their site.--Iseeaboar 23:34 22 May 2003 (UTC)

[edit] PD documentation

QUestion -- when images are uplaoded, is there any documentation required to show that they are PD? JHK

The uploading user is required to check a box saying that they have the permission of the copyright owner (which would be a falsehood in the case of "fair use" works), and is supposed to cite the source in the description box and/or fill it in in more detail on the description page. (See Wikipedia:Image use policy) Images without documentation are fair game for Wikipedia:Votes for deletion.
Some very old uploads may not have descriptions filled out along with them due to the way things were transferred, though the upload comments ought to be in a log page somewhere. --Brion 20:32 26 May 2003 (UTC)
DO we have access to the documentation?
Older archives of the Wikipedia:Upload log can be gotten at through that page's history[1], though it shouldn't have any more information than you can already see in the image description page. (I checked, there's no comment on DW's '843-870 Europe' upload there either.) I have the vague impression that I saved a copy of the pre-July 2002 upload log page (from the older software), but I can't find it just now. --Brion 21:07 26 May 2003 (UTC)

[edit] Jolly Roger

Fixed the Jolly Roger. Going to transfer my rat picture from the Swedish Wikipedia. // Liftarn

[edit] Google Images

Probably many of you know this, but let me just tell the others about it: If you go to Google [2], then click on Images, you'll be able to search for everything - from a simple screwdriver to an image of the White House! --webkid 23:19, 12 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Fine. Unfortunately probably 99.999999% of the images found will be covered by some copyright, which will probably effectively prohibit its use here. -- RTC 23:36, 12 Aug 2003 (UTC)

[edit] XBOX

I would be happy to take a picture of my XBOX, but I don't have a digital camera. Would this pose a problem in terms of quality? (I have a good-quality scanner and a normal camera) -Frazzydee 20:12, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

UPDATE: I can also take a picture of my Super Nintendo.

[edit] The weakest link

The number of articles is going up fast, but the number of images is not. There are many images about cities, persons, maps; but too few for mathematical objects and "simple things" like screws, windows, chairs,... I would count that as the weakest link for Wikipedia.

I put the comment here as a reminder to Wikipedians. Upload more useful pictures! (I will later, after I get a digicam :P) wshun 01:25, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Oh, it is possible to list the recent updated images seperately from "Recent changes", it usually takes up the whole page. Also, could we upload images in a more efficient way? Uploading one by one is awful. wshun 01:31, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I'd agree; it seems that the images of mundane stuff are often overlooked. This is partly the reason I started an attempt at Wikipedia:WikiProject Illustration, to kind of bring together the various attempts at illustrating Wikipedia. Please feel free to offer your suggestions there! -- Wapcaplet 01:52, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I'm always trying to take pictures for Wikipedia. I've done Winchester Cathedral, just because I was walking past one day on my way to college. I do try to do some mundane stuff too, like mirror, but screws and things aren't very interesting to photograph. CGS 08:55, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC).

I've done scissors and a few other "boring" ones. :) -- Tarquin 13:18, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Add stuff you want to wikipedia:requested images. Martin

[edit] Fulfilled requests

It seems like quite a few of these requests have been fulfilled. Or at least it seems that way to me, but I have no idea if the images on the pages are what the person who requested them had in mind. It'd be nice if whomever requested them, removed the request once they were satisfied, but lacking that, should we start to remove some of the entries (maybe move them to Wikipedia:Fulfilled picture requests)? That way, those that are most needed will stand out. Dori 03:35, Nov 15, 2003 (UTC)

Someone requested: *A picture for Crushing by elephant.

Um, I don't think anyone in their right mind would want to see an actual picture of someone being crushed by an elephant, but then what? Gawping spectators? I'm really not sure what would apply here. Lee M 01:12, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Too bad! :) - snoyes 21:41, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I am a newcommer and am very impressed with this fantastic collective Free Encyclopedia. I would be honnored to make contributions to it, graphics wise, but first I need to now if the format I use and specialize in is suitable for your programm scince I have not seen it in the list of requested formats.

I work with SWF format, wich is a open format. My original technical illustrations and animations uses vectors wich produces very light weight files for fast downloads.

Here is an example showing the innerworkings of a Manual Transmission. It is fully interactive and make only 37K. A single picture (still) would be at around only 2K. http://www3.lino.sympatico.ca/geebee/custom/transmis.htm

I also produce JPGs and PNGs , but mostly I do in SWF because of vectors been so light.

If you find the format acceptable, then I would be happy to contribute as much as I can. I have many already done and some of the requests I see here I can produce quite easily and to top quality.

Best regards, and bravo for this wonderfull project that is, in my opinion, totally in tune with the real nature and purpose of the Internet.

-Geebee

  • Thanks for your contributions, hopefully you will make many more as Wikipedia always needs images! I removed your email address from this post as it can be picked up by spambots which is very unpleasant. Regarding the preferred image format, SWF is not an open format - I believe the preferred format for vector images on Wikipedia is SVG (Scalable Vector Graphics). -- Canley 02:29, 31 October 2005 (UTC)


I have added a lot of pictures for featuring but i think it would be better to add my gallery page User:Chmouel/Images instead of bunch of pictures. WDYT ? --Chmouel Boudjnah 20:35, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Cleaning up

Wouldn't it be easier to archive the entire thing and start afresh with new requests? Dori | Talk 05:49, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)

It would be even better to get most of the requests fulfilled so they can be removed :-) -- Wapcaplet 22:16, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I have done a major clean up, including the guidelines at the beginning. I also expanded blanket requests for photos of all cats etc, checking which pages actually (a) have articles and (b) have no pictures yet. I also checked all entries if they have a picture already. Looks better now, I think -- Chris 73 | Talk 04:12, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Map Project ?

There seem to be heaps of Wiki pages that describe geographic locations or would benefit greatly from geographic maps. Someone with a copyright-free atlas could really improve many pages. Is there such a project anyone is working on? I couldn't find any reference to any.

Zuytdorp Survivor 01:39, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Knots

A very small (starting) collection of knots (all either Puplic Domain or GNU FDL) can be found here. If you have special not fullfilled wishes for knot drawings, please tell me which you wish first on my german discussion page and I'll do my best ;-). Since I'm German I won't know all knot names if they are not in "Bedford: The Knot Book" - in that case a link to some properitary web illustration might be a help for me (of course I'll draw my own illustration and won't use that).

For the German Wikipedia most of your illustrations are unluckily not usable, since it is often not clear which licence state the illustration has. (There is an agreement, that we don't use "fair use" and similar.) So if your knot pictures *are* in truth PD or GNU FDL, it would be nice to recognise that more easily.... --Hella 23:08, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Fufilled requests

With as long as this page is getting, I think it best to stick to a policy of removing requests when they are fulfilled. If someone simply posts a note saying "OK, I fulfilled this request" then there's not much reason for the request to remain here. Fulfilled requests can, of course, go to Wikipedia:Fulfilled picture requests. -- Wapcaplet 03:09, 9 May 2004 (UTC)

I kind of like them to stay on the page for a few days before the fulfilled requests are removed. I think it makes the contributors feel good about contributing - at least it does with me ;-) Chris 73 | Talk 14:27, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
From what I can tell by a few checks, there are numerous fulfilled requests that have been left on here for quite a while. Is there anyone with more time than I who can do a cleanup? Kickstart70 05:20, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Guide for photographers?

I think it might be useful to make a page specifically about the details of contributing pictures as a photographer, with specific examples. The information on this seems scattered right now, and I think it would be helpful to have it all in one place so photographers know exactly what to do and how to do it.

For example, I was wondering:

  • As a photographer, is there anyway I can take a picture for wikipedia and restrict commercial use (under a Creative Commons license) which is compatible with the free doc license?

Information that would be combed together for this section:

  • Licensing options, not just listed as "GNU FDL" or "Creative Commons", but as explicit examples (e.g. I want anyone to use this photo however they want, appropriate license:public domain; I want to allow noncommercial use of this photo with attribution, appropriate license:*; etc)
  • Step-by-step instructions from uploading the image, to adding the license text, to adding to an article; right now this info seems to be spread accross several articles

Jeff 06:48, 30 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Drugs

What are the objections to the Wikipedia:Requested_pictures#Drugs sections? The notice on WP:RP only says avoid blanket requests. Wikipedia:WikiProject Drugs is going to need images pretty much indefinitely. At the moment there are only a few specific requests; more are likely to be added later. It's most useful to leave the request in a place where it will be seen by the rest of Wikipedia. --Eequor 00:15, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The request Anything related to drugs at all... is a blanket request. The project page Wikipedia:WikiProject Drugs/Structural diagrams/Requested has no requested pictures, but instead shows pictures. I changed the image to a link (which has since then been reverted). The requests from Wikipedia:WikiProject Drugs/Photographs/Requested have been added to Wikipedia:Requested pictures. I also added the links to Wikipedia:Requested pictures to the project pages (which have since then been removed). Also, on my system, it messed up the numbering of the headlines. -- Chris 73 | Talk 03:35, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Yes, I'm aware it's a blanket request. The page doesn't say no blanket requests, it says avoid blanket requests. A blanket request is unavoidable here. If no additional requests were intended, I would agree that the blanket request would be inappropriate. However, this project is likely to have specific requests indefinitely. There are too many pages on Wikipedia to keep track of; if somebody finds a page that was overlooked, their help is appreciated.
Wikipedia:WikiProject Drugs/Structural diagrams/Requested requests two new pictures and provides an example so those making submissions can see exactly what is desired. There has been considerable variation in quality and legibility in chemical structure diagrams used in articles.
The ==See also== sections were moved to their parent pages to avoid self-linking Wikipedia:Requested pictures.
Wikipedia:WikiProject Drugs/Structural diagrams/Requested and Wikipedia:WikiProject Drugs/Photographs/Requested should only be used as templates; it's silly to duplicate their content.
What exactly does "messed up" mean?
I'm aware that the templatized headings aren't included in the table of contents. That's a MediaWiki bug, but a very minor bug, which I was ignoring because there are more important things to do. Please note internal links to the templates' sections still work.[3] Do the templates break any part of the page?
Thank you for the photos! How extensive is the DOJ photo library? --Eequor 06:47, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Glad you liked the photos. I found most pictures using google, and some on the foreign languages wikipedia pages. For details see Wikipedia:Finding images tutorial.
About the blanket request: If there is no specific article that needs an image, then the blanket request is likely to be ignored for ages. If there is a specific article, it is much more likely to get an image. I often check Wikipedia:Requested_pictures for new requests, and try to help. Also, pretty much ALL articles without images need images, and the requested images section would turn into a list of Anything related to (insert topic here), which makes it very hard to use. Please, if you want others to go trough the effort of finding an image, add one line per article for which you want an image. -- Chris 73 | Talk 07:28, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Okay. You're right. --Eequor 12:54, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Drugs/Structural diagrams/Requested: You mean the image links ARE the requests? That confused me a bit. The images do not exist, and nothing links to them. How about replacing the request with e.g. Methamphetamine needs a diagram similar to Image:Corticosterone.png? -- Chris 73 | Talk 07:28, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Right. For some reason Wikipedia created empty pages for them; otherwise they would have been red links. I'm asking specifically that the images be named Image:Mescaline.png and Image:Methamphetamine.png; the drug infobox uses {{PAGENAME}}. Hopefully at some time in the future templates will be mature enough that we can simplify the drugbox to a parameterized template. --Eequor 12:54, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
About the Templates: They are hard to find. If i add an image, i'd like to comment that the request is done. But finding the templates is tough, unless you know where to look. About the messing up: they somehow removed the numbering from the headlines on my system. Not sure if this is on all computers, but that is one thing I could live with. The difficulties in editing and the very different layout however, feels wrong to me. -- Chris 73 | Talk 07:28, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Dah. The Standard skin numbers the headings correctly.
Using templates is meant to make the requests easy to find. Nobody outside of WikiProject on Drugs is likely to know about Wikipedia:WikiProject Drugs/Structural diagrams/Requested and Wikipedia:WikiProject Drugs/Photographs/Requested; I included Edit here links so nobody needs to know the pages' exact locations.
====Drug photographs====

Edit here (archive)

Please obtain these legally.

[edit] To improve or replace
[edit] New images
[edit] Fulfilled
Placing the requests on their own pages also makes them easy to keep track of using the watchlist. Putting them on Wikipedia:Requested_pictures allows people to find them without the watchlist. --Eequor 12:54, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
What is the parent page to which you moved the Wikipedia:Requested_pictures link? I added the links to the two templates on the Wikipedia:Requested_pictures page, so anybody with images can check the templates. Maybe this is a possible compromise for you? Happy editing -- Chris 73 | Talk 07:28, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Are you using the Monobook skin?
The parents are Wikipedia:WikiProject Drugs/Structural diagrams and Wikipedia:WikiProject Drugs/Photographs. The Standard skin displays their navigational links at the top of the pages:
< Wikipedia:WikiProject Drugs | Photographs
--Eequor 12:54, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Image:No_image_yet

there is no such an image Image:No image yet.gif neither Image:No image yet.jpg why it says so in the page?

They are placeholders; as it says at the top of the page:

  • You can also request an image by adding the image Image:No_image_yet to the article. This image is a placeholder for requested images.

I'm not sure why there are JPEG and GIF versions. Anyhow, the idea is to link to that placeholder from articles that need images; they will then show up as "What links here" for that image. -- Wapcaplet 20:36, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] People Pictures: CD, Record, Book Jacket Pics OK?

I noticed in one of the articles I had been looking in on that someone added a "photo" that was actually a jpg or gif of a record-album cover from the late '80s. Another article has a picture of an author that I'm certain was on the back flap of one of his books.

Are these okay? It seems to me that they might be okay (i.e., non-infringing) because they are drawn from a sort of "publicity" usage and have thus been out in public. On the other hand, they may not be okay (non-infringing). Can anyone tell me? (J.R.)

Yes, there is a belief that we have fair use of covers (generally just the fronts). They are typically tagged with Template:Albumcover, Template:Bookcover and so on. iMeowbot~Mw 00:48, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Move this page to the commons?

I wonder if this page and all other languages should just be redirected to the commons page? I just found this page on french wikipedia fr:Utilisateur:Cdang/gallerie that has all kinds of useful images, including some that I saw requested elsewhere, but I bet no one on the english wikipedia ever notices them. - Omegatron 18:12, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)

hmmm... something to consider. If we could work out the multilingual problem, I would support it. We should also probably wait for tne unified login, so users can sign their request easier. -- Chris 73 Talk 10:36, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Photography

Just a heads up... -- AllyUnion (talk) 23:43, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Propose sub-categorising requested images

I have made a category for the reqimage template which is Category:Articles needing images. This would fill up quickly. I propose we will have sub categories for this. For example, sub category for requesting images of people, another for maps, another for screen shots and so on. In this way, it will be similar to stubbing. - Zondor 15:29, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Updating the template

I propose we update the current template and add {{reqimgbox}} as a new template. Please see my proposal and talk pages: Reqimage, Articles needing images. Original proposal, on the Reqimage talk page, made on (02:20, 22 May 2005 (UTC)). Thank you <> Who 22:16, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Strike out non-used template. <>Who?¿? 18:17, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Iron Bridge

Where should I request? --Northernwolves 20:11, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Try Iron Bridge. -- RHaworth 22:37, 2005 Jun 8 (UTC)

[edit] Separate "pictures" into "photos," "graphics," and "drawings"

This category is too big to be useful. A drawer is just looking for things to draw, just as a mapmaker (Category:Wikipedia map requests) is looking for things to map, etc. Lumping all of these into "pictures" is no longer a useful way to work. Do others agree that this needs to be split? -St|eve 17:58, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

It might be good to organize them out into three different categories, but perhaps don't put them on separate pages, or if we do, heavily interlink them. Some graphics people are comfortable working in some or all of those categories, and people who are willing to dig through existing fair-use material can often come up with stuff across categories. Another consideration is that I think this page is currently under utilized, and we shouldn't do anything that makes it harder for others to add items here. -Interiot 19:21, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
Underutilization may be due to its current state of organization. IAC, the Wikipedia page isnt important - its more important to get the Categories separated but organized (and related), and basically point people directly to the categories if they are looking for work. Relying on any hand-taken lists as an active requests list is a thing of the past, and using something like Template:Mapit is clear enough, or Template:Drawit is more clear and organized. SinReg-St|eve 17:09, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, I was looking for things to draw or diagram but it's hard to find specific instances where this is appropriate or necessary. --Sketchee 22:30, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use replacement requests

I'm not sure if a note should go on the main page or not, but there is a category set up for images on Wikipedia which are currently tagged as "fair use" but could be plausibly re-created as "free" images. One thing desperately needed are free photographs of different makes of modern U.S. automobiles (almost any variety is needed), for example, and there are a number of maps which could have their informational content re-drawn onto free outlines, etc. See Category:Fair use image replacement request. Thanks. --Fastfission 03:45, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] What's Wikipedia politic toward images ?

Is it part of Wikipedia politics to try to have (at least) one image per article ?

I have a good bunch photo I've made that could illustrate some articles: comics covers, Subbuteo players (could illustrate evolution), Field Hockey crosses from the 50s, 70s,..., Lincoln cars pictures, ... and I'm wondering whether it is a good idea to upload some of them. Lvr 17:27, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, having pictures is good. Please read the Picture tutorial for help with images and remember to add the correct image copyright tag to any images you upload. WAvegetarian (talk) (email) (contribs) 18:00, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks. There picture are all done by me, so there is no problem for rights.Lvr 10:00, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] A possible thought

It would be nice if there were a subset of this page for diagrams in particular. The reason is because at the moment it is impossible for me, without going through the whole list, to see which of these are diagram entries, and I think setting those aside would get them filled quicker. The reasoning is simple: any user with some ability at Adobe Illustrator or Inkscape can create a diagram (especially if the requester gives an example from the web of what type of thing they are looking for), whereas there is simply no way I could ever fulfill some of the photography requests and very unlikely I'd be able to fill the basic image requests. There are a lot of Wikipedians with grpahic design ability, this should be encouraged in some way... --Fastfission 02:04, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Added image

Uploaded an image of Bisto gravy to the Bisto page. Spark13579 04:48, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Subcategorizing Category:Wikipedia requested photographs

Since you can only take a photo of something that exists near to you (and there are tens of thousands of geo-stubs lacking pictures), can I suggest subcategorizing this category?

  • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs by location - probably the biggest
  • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of people
    • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of historical people
      • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of German historical people
    • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of people by nationality
      • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of German people
        • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of German entertainers
        • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of German football (soccer) players
        • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of German politicians (specific categories might work quite well if there are enough articles to populate them)
  • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of objects
    • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of aircraft
    • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of automobiles
    • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of ships
  • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of organisms
    • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of micro-organisms
    • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of fungi
    • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of plants
    • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of animals
      • Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of African animals

Any thoughts? TheGrappler 18:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

It would be a good idea since it would allow you to watch particular subcategories that you're interested in. However, it will require people to manually find the appropriate category, and they might not want to do that; also, we won't be able to include the category by means of the template anymore. But what we could do is like how stub-sorting works - someone requests a picture, and that goes onto the main Category:Wikipedia requested photographs, and then users more familiar with the subcategories places it into the appropriate one. enochlau (talk) 02:04, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Good idea - rather than using a whole batch of templates to achieve this, I guess it would be easier to adapt the current template to use a parameter. Another idea is that the category page itself could be used to give more detail to the request e.g. if there is a particular aspect that is wanted for the article (an example I can think of is the article is for a person, and what is requested is a picture of a statue or painting that can be found in a certain town, then the category page can include "further guidance" on what is being asked for). TheGrappler 02:35, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure a set of categories would do any good. They don't pop up in your watchlist when an article is added to them, so you have to manually look at them every once in a while, which I believe is a big contributor to getting request categories ignored. I think a set of subpages would be much more valuable. Just start with some high level topics and only break it down when the volume of a particular subtopic overloads the page. So Wikipedia:Requested pictures/Spain for example. Then it would pop up on people's watchlist that have an interest or ability to take pictures of Spain or already have one meeting the current request. But the categories are better than nothing I guess. - Taxman Talk 11:30, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
That's a good point, thanks for pointing it out! I guess the other advantage of using a list on a page is that the specific details of the request can be given. On the other hand, it wouldn't be updated so easily. It would be good to get some more feedback on this and see how people would react to subpages rather than categories! TheGrappler 16:39, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Good idea in breaking down the list into regions the current version is difficult to use. Commons:Picture requests also has a request page for images, Maybe Wikipedia should be deferring editors to Commons for requets. Two reasons one is Commons has been established a repository specialising in image/media files we should encourage images being loaded there to make them available across all wiki projects. The other reason is that Commons is language neutral so when you request for say an image Berlin Train Station not only do english speaking editors see the request but also German speaking editors see the request so there a better chance of the request being fulfilled. Another benefit would be that wikipedia wouldn't need to provided as much storage space for as many images because more image would loaded into commons Gnangarra 00:44, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
I agree we need to get more people to upload onto Commons rather than WP - the big problem is that Commons pages don't appear on WP editor's watchlist. Perhaps a note encouraging people to upload on Commons if possible would be a good idea? TheGrappler 05:42, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
I also agree we should defer more of this to commons, but I agree with the problem TheGrappler notes. Is it solved by having request pages here, but encouraging uploading only to commons? That duplicates the request effort, because ideally you would request at commons too for the possibility that another language Wikipedian will see the request. Maybe just ask that if people make the same request on Commons and here to link from each request to the other. If we go with subpages here, I think we should keep it really broad, like Europe, Asia, NA, SA, Africa. Any overlap is just more duplicated effort, so maybe just geography categories and an Other and Diagrams for now? The Europe subpage for example could cover everything you could take pictures of in Europe such as monuments, animals, etc. Other could be used for things you could take a picture of anywhere. - Taxman Talk 12:34, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

The following comment was copied from the village pump [4] by TheGrappler 05:47, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

This may be a good idea. We need to encourage those in the area and who have digital cameras to actually take those pictures and submit them here.  Denelson83  23:54, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
There is definately an issue with the crossover of information from wikipedia's to Commons there would also be the problem of linking back to the article and/ or the person requesting the image. Possible solution is a bot that take updates from here and creates them in commons. Gnangarra 14:11, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Featured articles/Featured Pictures use a template system that you can monitor for changes could that format be used here. The template could be something thats added to the talk page of an article the editor needs to just fillin image request in the template and it populates the request pages. when the request is filled the photographer just add the image back to the talk page and removes the template. The request pages would show the addition of the templates when they occur. Gnangarra 14:20, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Depending on how much effort is spent tagging articles that could do with an image (at the moment, not a lot - my guess is that 100,000+ pages fit this description!) the lists could become too large for general subpages. I buy the logic that it is more important to establish diagrams and geography sorting. As for whether images should be uploaded to Commons instead, the Wikipedia upload page already states that for PD/GFDL images, that is preferred. Making that clear in the image request templates/categories/subpages too would be A Good Thing in my opinion. Linking with Commons image requests - hmm, not sure what's the best way to do this, though again, it's a very sensible idea. It may be even more important to try to link to WikiProjects and indeed other Wikipedias (where the same watchlist-problem exists). I also am under the impression that pages most likely to be "watchlisted" will tend to be more specific. I suspect many more Italy-dwellers will watchlist a "Requested images in Italy" than a "Requested images in Europe". I am still wondering whether a neat trick may be to use category pages to store a list too - this seems like twice the effort, but what I am envisaging might work like this:

  • User adds an article's talk page to the appropriate category
  • User follows up by listing on that category page the exact nature of the request (e.g. if Mr X has a statue in Foovillia, add Mr X's talk page to Category:Requested pictures in Foovillia, then add to the list on the category page: "Mr X. statue in the centre of Fooville City")

So major or specific requests cause changes in the category that would make it noticed on the watchlist. "Minor", non-urgent additions, like adding a stub article on the hamlet of Smallfoo, Foovillia, may well not warrant an inclusion on the main list, but when a Foovillian who lives near Smallfoo checks over the category (perhaps alerted by the addition of Mr X. to the main list), Smallfoo's request will also be visible. Does this sound like a viable approach? TheGrappler 17:18, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

  • This sounds viable in that if your request is major then you'll want to make it visble, if it just another stub-page that has just been created as a spinnoff from a larger aricle then that makes sense two. I must admit I would prefer to watch a request page for Western Australia rather than all of Australia but I would watch further up the tree if thats the process. Gnangarra 13:12, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
    • I'll have a go at implementing this, then. Seems like there is sufficient support for the proposal. TheGrappler 16:48, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Maps of Chicago, Illinois

I've created the above cat and started to add images to it. The specific map desired by the requestor may not be present but there are maps of Chicago on the project. Meanwhile, I'm working on at least one generalized blank map of the city that others can use to create more specialized maps to suit. John Reid 01:50, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Suggest restructure by place

This page would be more useful if it was split up into a single page of photos that could be taken in many different places (eg, sports, activities, foods, etc), and those that effectively have to come from one place (eg, Eiffel Tower, photo of Greenwich...). These would each appear on a page by place. Then, photographers could more easily find photos that they would be capable of taking. There's absolutely no point me even looking at bridges in America. Whereas a bridge in France I could potentially visit and take a photo of. And a photo of an orange, anyone could take. So, to summarise:

  • Requested photos
    • Requested photos/anywhere
    • Requested photos/specific place (links to all the below)
    • Requested photos/France
    • Requested photos/USA
    • ... Stevage 14:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Gee I'm smart, I see this is covered above :) Will look at commons and these cats. Stevage 14:28, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Linking of titles

Does anyone object to the removal of links in the titles? For example, the title of the people section has a link to people. It's somewhat confusing, at least to me. Since titles are not usually linked, I expect it to go somewhere useful, like a subpage of the Requested Pictures article or something. It looks like they're all common words that anyone would know and the actual pictures requested are linked. Do they serve a useful purpose or will I have to seek psychotherapy for my irrational link expectations? -- Kjkolb 12:26, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I removed them. If anyone prefers the old way, feel free to revert. -- Kjkolb 08:17, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image requests for the article of Marth (Fire Emblem)

I could post images but I for one don't make my own graphics nor do I have any contact with others who design their own graphics. If you are able to obtain or make your own graphics of Marth (no fanart), than I'd like to ask if someone could replace the "No Image Yet" spaces with the images as told in the captions. Remember they must BE of Marth only! ~ SamusFan80 (7:39pm MT, May 29, 2006)

[edit] good image source

I have found an extensive collection of public domain images provided by the US government. [5] Lawilkin 18:08, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/e/q/Wikipedia_talk%7ERequested_pictures_ccc6.html"