I'm not really sure what this would accomplish, since image deletions are
already limited to admins since a couple years ago.

If I understood correctly, users can "tag" their own images as originals and
they are not to be deleted. Alrighty then, but anyone (including vandals) can
upload some images (some maybe obscene or something) and they couldn't be
deleted? That's just wrong. The wiki software is built so that everything can be
reversed. Undeletion would be just fine.

robchur wrote:

(In reply to comment #2)

The wiki software is built so that everything can be reversed. Undeletion

would be just fine.

At this time, MediaWiki does not contain features for, nor support, undeletion
of images. It's permanent. See bug 2099 which is an open request for this feature.

Oh. I was misleaded. Someone told me that got enabled and I didn't care to
check. Sorry. But still...

Resolving INVALID.

vacuum wrote:

Perhaps I wasn't clear in my description. I do not want an undelete action, I
want a way to mark which revision to keep. Sort of saying "all others are edited
version, keep last one and this". John

The original is the earliest one. How hard can it be? :)

vacuum wrote:

It is this which is the problem I guess. The initial uploader uploads one, or
several, images. Then the next user or sysop picks up one of those and edits it,
and reuploads. After a while there exists several versions. One is the original,
or the best source, and the rest are edited copies. Later some sysop wants to
clean up all redundant revisions and makes some ad-hoc asumptions about which
images he can delete. Still later the original uploader notes his image is
missing and a small war breaks out.

I believe there are two notable revisions. One "raw" image and a bunch of edited
copies. Most of the time the original will be the first image, unless the user
(me) makes a mess. then the original can be any one of those he (I) uploads. I
believe the last image the original uploader posted is the one to tag as the
original.

The next notable revision is the "final" edited copy. This is the one in use
today in wikipedia. I don't want to change this and this should be used as today.

What I would like to do is to somehow tag the raw image so

a) it is clearly visible to everyone as the original image
   - probably nothing more than a bolded link
b) it is not easy to delete, even for a sysop
   - the "original" flag has to be cleared before it can be deleted (del is

hidden/insensitive)

c) it is (nearly) always possible to revert back to this image
   - it is not deleted by accident
d) it can always be used to make new edited copies
   - it will not interfere with "free" images in any interpretation of the word

I don't think any additional privs should be necessary for å sysop to clear the
original-flag on an image. The additional steps should be necessary to make it
very clear that this is the original and deleting this one is a unwanted action
by at least the original uploader.

I believe there are some additional actions which should be possible. One is for
an admin to clear the original flag from one revision and adding it to another
revision. This should (?) be two different operations to make it clear for the
admin that this is highly unusual. The only reason I see for this is to overrule
an unwanted revision.

I believe any new revision uploaded by the same user as uploaded the original
image should take the role as the new original revision. The user should be able
to overrule this. Probably by a single click on a link.

I'm tempted to believe it is a good idea to let the admin use the same kind of
single-click link, but I'm also tempted to believe it is wiser to let the last
image uploaded by the original uploader get the original flag anyhow.

So, what does this lead to? It creates a kind of three-layered image repository.
At the top-level it is the image in-use. This is the one used by all the wikies.
At the next level it is all the diffrent edited copies which is not in use but
also is not marked as the original. At the bottom level there is the original.
That one should not be easilly deleted.

A benefit of this is for a photographer that his original is retained even if
some users find it interesting, or usefull, to edit the image.

An other benefit is that the deletion rules for an revision can be somewhat
relaxed because a user can only delete the revisions which is not marked as
original. This can remove some tedious cleanup tasks from the sysops. If this is
to be allowed no important image should be marked as anything as the original.

John