Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Random picture of the day

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was No Consensus/default keep. Following GeorgeMoney's suggestion, I will reuserfy the page to satisfy some concerns of its detractors. Xoloz 18:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Random picture of the day

Competes with two already established projects, WP:FP and WP:PPR. Also, Linuxerist and GeorgeMoney have declared themselves the "presidents" of this page, and will not allow anyone to make changes without discussing it with them first. See my tak page for more details. --Hetar 18:44, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Comment - I am not the one reverting your edits. It is linuxerist. I am not involved in this edit war. Don't blame me. From my point of view, the only restrictions are copyright. If you want to nominate someone else's pic, give them credit and tell them. I was away the whole time this edit war was going on and I was not involved in it. I have left a comment on Hetar's talk page explaining this. The only reason for this MfD is because Hetar didn't agree with one of the rules which could have been easily changed if he posted it on the talk instead of getting into an edit war. If you look at the history, it is: Hetar, Linux - rv, H, L - rv, H, L - rv, H - mfd. Apparently, this MfD was Hetar's only way to settle an edit war.--GeorgeMoney ^T·C 19:08, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

• What rule? That's the whole problem I have with this project, two "presidents" seem to have an undefined set of rules. They aren't written down on the project's page anywhere, so how are we supposed to know what they are or follow them. The only rule I see on the page is, "Anybody can put a picture here." --Hetar 02:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

All of this should be discussed on the talk page of the project, not here. This MfD was filed for the wrong reason. Please retract it. --GeorgeMoney ^T·C 02:57, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

On the contrary, the existance of a project page with undefined rules and two presidents is a violation of WP:NOT and an excellent reason to nominate it for deletion. --Hetar 03:05, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

• Weak, weak keep. I don't like how George + Linux declare themselves as president because that is not how it should be. I do, however, like how it allows users to add pictures that maybe may not have been exactly "featured" quality...but then again the process of choosing is too layed back. I say keep for now, but the structure of it must be fixed to accomodate all opinions of all people at all times, and to allow/disallow certain pictures. → J@red  18:55, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. After viewing other comments on this page, I have decided to change my vote to a delete. → J@red  19:55, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Keep - bad-faith nom - The only reason for this MfD is because Hetar didn't agree with one of the rules which could have been easily changed if he posted it on the talk instead of getting into an edit war. If you look at the history, it is: Hetar, Linux - rv, H, L - rv, H, L - rv, H - mfd. Apparently, this MfD was Hetar's only way to settle an edit war. So I vote Keep because of a bad-faith nom.--GeorgeMoney ^T·C 19:08, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I think it's a great idea to show pictures that are not quite featured quality. Not sure what the "president" business is about, but I'm sure it could be addressed without MfD. Thanks -- Samir धर्म 21:27, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

• I do agree with the comments that userspace may be more appropriate -- Samir धर्म 14:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. About the nomination, I suggested to the user that we see what the members like. Anyhow, keep per Samir. ~Linuxerist A/C/E/P/S/T/Z 02:30, 4 June 2006 (UTC) I, being involved in the project, am going to withdraw my vote. LINUXERIST@ 01:31, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Suggested that we see what the members like? You said nothing of the sort. I left a message on your talk page that said, "Why do you insist on changing one of the images i nominated at Wikipedia:Random picture of the day? The whole point of that project is that anyone can add a picture, and that there are no requirements (other than obvious copyright ones). Please explain your reasoning." To which you responded, "Please talk to one of the presidents before making changes." (diff). --Hetar 02:36, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - how does this help us build an encyclopedia? Take these games elsewhere, please. — GT 03:43, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, how does WP:POTD help? So, you're saying if WP:POTD got nominated for MfD, you would vote delete?--GeorgeMoney ^T·C 03:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

That doesn't really address my complaint. At the very least, POTD is project-wide whereas this is just yet another one of your many ill-conceived attempts at having control of some sort of side-project. — GT 04:57, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

So what's that supposed to mean? So now I am a person with "ill-conceived attempts at having control of some sort of side-project" --GeorgeMoney ^T·C 05:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Here's another. And another. I don't know why you bother with this stuff. — GT 06:12, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Why do you care about User:GeorgeMoney/UEW? It is just a stupid list of people. Also, did you read the talk page of WP:TRUSTED? I don't care af it's deleted. The only reason I made it is because it has potential to be something useful. --GeorgeMoney ^T·C 06:17, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

What I'm getting at is that you tend to create things that don't really end up being very useful and are little more than a waste of time and space. I wish you'd concentrate more on editing and less on these projects of yours. — GT 06:40, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Not to argue, but I don't view picture of the day as a waste of time. Disseminating non-featured pictures does help stimulate interest on making articles based on the pictures, if they do not already exist. For example, I uploaded an image from Foreign body to picture of the day. Who knows, maybe someone would help out to make Foreign body removal, an endoscopic skill, based on seeing the picture. -- Samir धर्म 06:44, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

The prospects of that happening seem rather dubious to me, to say the least. I don't see much discussion around these images. It looks to me like people just plug in pictures wherever they want and there's no further discussion. And on most days, such as today, the result is a picture for the sake of a picture without really being of much conceivable interest or value to anyone. — GT 07:13, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep per Samir. Computerjoe's talk 08:11, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per GT. Under WP:NOT section 1.5, Wikipedia is not a collections of images. Images emphasize articles. The reason why WP:POTD exsist is to give examples of great images that are used to emphasize articles. This is a slippery slope to a collection of images. GWatson • ^TALK 11:10, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Gwatson. This is a fork of a topic that is not core to wikipedia. The web is full of picture archives etc.. and this really belongs here. WP:FP is there to set a high standard, this is a collection of miscellany - Peripitus 12:21, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep This exemplifies the notion that every contrib to WP is a good one. --Osbus 14:07, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep This is one of the more harmless new community interaction projects. NoSeptember ^talk 15:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Weak conditional keep. Weak, because it's a "duplicate" of WP:POTD, but let's give it a shot. The condition is that if you have decided to go to the Wikipedia: namespace with it, then it should be considered a (semi-)oficial project. If so, write some clear rules and put them on the page. If not, go back to User:GeorgeMoney/potd with it. Misza13 ^{T C} 15:43, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Second thought: maybe move to commons? Misza13 ^{T C} 15:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
    • If we move to commons, it can't be transcluded on the userpages of Wikipedians. --GeorgeMoney ^T·C 15:53, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep I love the PotD, it always brightens my day and excites me to see what picture I'm going to get, and It's nice to know that images that aren't featured quality still get seen. Sergeant Snopake 15:45, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep FellowWikipedian 15:51, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Re-Userfy & delete from Wikipedia space per Quiddity below. Is a good project for having non-featured quality images getting recognition. But images uploaded should be associated with mainspace, not just for the heck of getting into potd. --Srikeit^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 16:01, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep--Airforceguy^Scramble! 16:55, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep ILovePlankton 17:19, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Per nom. QuizQuick 18:21, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. I strongly agree that the naming of participants of wikiprojects as "president" and other hierarchical designations is counter to wikiquette, by giving strong connotations of inequality. (commenting on as i've seen you do it elsewhere too). Please see WP:OWN. Participants should list their names, and any special expertise/aims they have to contribute; not made-up titles. -Quiddity

  There are no more presidents. GeorgeMoney ^T·C 18:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Re-Userfy/Userfy into gallery/ Delete. As for the random picture project, i Strongly Agree with GWatson. This is a random collection of pictures, which wikipedia specifically is not. This project only encourages the use of wikipedia as a Personal Home Page, or Free Webhost, which wikipedia specifically discourages. Many users have gallery subpages, like User:GeorgeMoney/Gallery, which is where this really belongs. Thanks. -Quiddity 18:42, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

  I didn't want to move it to WP space in the first place. GeorgeMoney ^T·C 18:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

  I'm changing my vote to a full delete, because. This far too strongly encourages the use of Wikipedia as a homepage. It's too close to being a myspace style gadget. People might even upload pictures just to be able to enter them in this. WP:ENC: We are not a blog service. Use wikipedia for what it is for, and keep the homepages at flickr and myspace and blogger and livejournal where you can grow them however you like. -Quiddity 03:41, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep--Oreos^TalkContribs 18:48, 4 June 2006 (UTC) I like the fact some images people make that aren't featured quality still get to be just a LITTLE famous.
• keep: Per above. Ombudsman 19:26, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Per Oreos.--Gangsta-Easter-Bunny 19:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: It's worth noting that almost all of the keeps on this page are from participants in this activity, and that GeorgeMoney has been recruiting these users to come vote here if they haven't already. Of course everyone is permitted and encouraged to participate in XfD discussions but this is useful knowledge for the closing admin, lest he or she assume that the preponderance of keeps here represents some sort of community-wide consensus. — GT 19:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

So now you're saying I don't have the right to tell the members of the potd what's happening? --GeorgeMoney ^T·C 21:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

It's vote spamming, yes. Ral315 (talk) 21:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

And why is this bad? If RPOTD was deleted without having my vote on it, I would be mad. I think that the members should be notifed. If you were a member, wouldn't you like to know?!?!?! the_ed17^(T)_(C)^(P)_(F)^(WW) 13:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as patently unuseful in Wikipedia space. Userfy if you wish. Ral315 (talk) 21:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per others -- getcrunkjuice^contribs 23:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Ral315. DarthVader 03:27, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. This was never proposed, and it duplicates existing efforts. To all participants: I'm sure your input would be welcomed on WP:FPC and commons:COM:FPC and other such places. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 12:18, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strongest Possible Delete First, Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. Second, the pictures are not 'Random', like the Random article. This makes it both confusing, and deceptive. ॐ Priyanath 19:35, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strongest Possible Keep This is completely harmless, just change the name back to User:GeorgeMoney/potd. When I actually get back on here regularly, this will be one of the highlights of my day! Besides, if it is a user subpage it shouldn't be subject to deletion, I think. the_ed17^{(talk)(contribs)} 21:31, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

But we're not voting on a user subpage, or on moving it to a user subpage. We're voting on whether to keep or delete Wikipedia:Random picture of the day. — ॐ Priyanath 21:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

But it was moved from being a user-subpage only recently, and that should obviously be taken into consideration. We're not "voting" on anything; we're discussing options, and using bolded keywords to make at-a-glance summaries of people's positions easier to see. -Quiddity 23:50, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! the_ed17^{(talk)(contribs)} 16:46, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification - I still 'recommend' delete, even on user space. Yes, let's move on. ॐ Priyanath 17:00, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

• comment -- the image for june 8 is 14MB. Even a movie of the earth rotating would be smaller than that! (admittedly there is a note next to its entry to change it. please do so soon. consider wiki's bandwidth, and user's with slow connections or unstable browsers.) Thanks. -Quiddity 22:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• comment --Please see today's (June 7) 'Random' Picture of the Day, titled 'The back of Ashibaka's head', to see just what a waste of the project's time this is, and what a joke is being played on everyone here. ॐ Priyanath 18:51, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Well, it is the random picture of the day... Ashibaka tock 02:32, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

SO? How is ONE not-so-great picture reason to denounce this as a joke? the_ed17^(T)_(C)^(P) 01:03, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't see what was wrong with the picture. Yay! Azumanga Daioh! Sergeant Snopake 14:19, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

(Cough, Cough) Nice. (chuckle, chuckle) ROFL!!! the_ed17^(T)_(C)^(P)_(F)^(WW) 14:22, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

• Userfy this. --maru (talk) contribs 17:32, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep For godsakes, we're not allowed to have a little fun here anymore? Search4Lancer 18:26, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.