Discussioni Wikipedia:Ambasciata/Archivio 1/Questions from en

I recently came across Koehler's Medizinal-Pflanzen and noticed a gallery of seemingly every scanned diagram from the book. On the English Wikipedia, this would be unacceptable given that such a gallery already exists on Commons. The policy is that Wikipedia is not a repository of images, and that galleries should be used sparingly.

Therefore, I removed the gallery. I added back just one of the scanned diagrams. On en:, we would consider one diagram acceptable to illustrate the artistic style, the labelling scheme, the level of detail, etc. However, although we might also include scans of covers and of other types of charts, there would only be one diagram.

I have two questions: First of all, does your policy agree with the English one as far as galleries are concerned? Second, I relied on Google's translator to compose my edit summaries and the image caption. I know this translator badly mangles text when translating to English. Did it do a decent job in this case? I would prefer a response on my English talk page. NeonMerlin 05:50, 18 lug 2006 (CEST)

I will answer here, for advantage of the it.wiki people as well. We do not have a specific policiy regarding galleries, but of course generally speaking they are preferred to reside on commons. The most important thing is that the images themselves reside on commons (and so it is in this case). However I have preferred to rollback to the image gallery since not only the pictures can be considered usefull (even if - I agree - redundant if compared to the commons gallery) but the captions with the plant names are in my view very usefull, pointing to missing or existing article on it.wiki. The caption of the image was not very clear (never rely on google translator). We could maybe agree to keep the list of plant names and only some few image as an example. --L'uomo in ammollo 15:30, 18 lug 2006 (CEST)

A gallery with plant names as captions exists at Commons:Koehler 1887 alphabetical latin. On en:, we would consider the full set of images encyclopedic only in articles about plants. Someone would search for each of the aforementioned Latin names, add each image to its respective article, create (and categorize) stubs for any missing articles, and then be done. While a gallery or derived list might be kept in the User: or Wikipedia: namespace to help them, it would not be stored on the main namespace. NeonMerlin 18:18, 18 lug 2006 (CEST)

FYI, the gallery layout is the result of this discussion which determined consensus of the Italian community - and compliance with local community policies - over the current version, as opposed to the previous one which was proposed for deletion, and was composed of several articles containing images only. --Lp ↤ (sysop) 00:58, 19 lug 2006 (CEST)

Thank you, NeonMerlin, for your kind remarks and your keen attention to our articles. Unfortunately, differences might come to surface between different wikis' policies. This is due to difference in cultures, a diversity which leads us to always choose what we would immagine better for our readers, for our authors, for the italian version of the Project. Due to the possibility that we might have reached a consensus on different points than other Wikipedia Projects did, I'd kindly like to suggest a discussion before assuming other policies as universal, which they aren't. Our sysops will be happy to let you feel more comfortable in it.wiki and find the best way to help our encyclopedia develop. Best regards --Sn.txt 01:29, 19 lug 2006 (CEST)

From what I can understand of the deletion discussion (with the help of Google's translator), Square87's position is the one in line with consensus on en:. Your policies say that Wikipedia is not an image repository, nor an indiscriminate collection of information; however, this appears not to be true in practice. I must therefore conclude that your policies, even when properly translated :-), are contradictory or unclear. I prefer to work on a Wikipedia that knows, and can tell me, what it's doing. NeonMerlin 22:00, 19 lug 2006 (CEST)

Thank you for your opinion, but we think we know what we do a little bit better than you. Our policy states that wiki is not a collection of pictures or multimedia without a proper caption and text illustrating the article ("foto o file multimediali senza un testo che accompagni l'articolo"). Of course we can always improve our policies (which not necessarily must be a mere translation and acceptance of the equivalent page on en.wiki, right? as an example the equivalent page on fr.wiki fr:Wikipédia:Ce que Wikipédia n'est pas does not even mention the pictures). We can (and must) also improve the application of the policies (in fact I proposed to keep the list of plant names and only some picture as an example), also on the basis of other languages contributors and their point of view, which however should not consider what they do the only and the better way to do things. Please also, do not take a single case for reaching general (and a bit arrogant) conclusions. Best regards. --L'uomo in ammollo 22:55, 19 lug 2006 (CEST)

We are happy to know, from your own words, which positions would be in line with consensus on en.wiki. We are also happy to know that you, solely with the help of google transaltor, can perfectly read, understand and judge the it.wiki policies and directly come to the conclusion that such policies are unclear or contradictory. Most of all we are happy to know that you prefer working on a Wikipedia that knows, and can tell you, what it's doing. If you would ever change your mind on it.wiki policies (or - easily - won't rely on an automatic translator pretending to understand such policies) we'll also be happy to welcome you back. Regards. -- Pap3rinik (..chiedi ad Archimede) 23:53, 19 lug 2006 (CEST)

Dear foreign Wikipedian,

Our policies, indeed, respect consensus and require it (together with NPOV, of course) as a fundamental condition for any other policy: we like to look at it as a fundamental rule which governs any other policy. This applies to your Wikipedia too, I presume. If our Wikipedians agreed upon a point, they would expect anyone to respect their choices. You are welcome to discuss them, there's absolutely no limit to discussion, and you might eventually reach consensus on what you would like to propose. No prevention, at all. But until that precise moment, - and, of course, further on - we could also sincerely appreciate if you won't ignore or disrespect our previous choices.

I can tell you, I don't know, really, what we are doing here around, I'd rather know what, personally, I'm certainly not going to do: I'm not going to enter your Wiki and suddenly make such an edit regarding your internal policies. I would ask, instead; first. Or perhaps I would read, yet before.

Thank you for your interesting analysis about the Italian Wikipedia. Greetings. --Sn.txt 23:55, 19 lug 2006 (CEST)