"by policy they _should_ delete the lower quality image if a better quality 
image is also available"only when it is an exact duplicate - not just photo of 
the same object

Aug 26, 2020, 21:45 by [email protected]:

> Didn't we have an OSM tool in the past that showed points with broken links? 
> (Also I think the citations I've given earlier a few hours ago should clear 
> up what should or should not be deleted - by policy they _should_ delete the 
> lower quality image if a better quality image is also available)
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 8:49 PM Paul Allen <> [email protected]> > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 19:39, Mateusz Konieczny <>> 
>> [email protected]>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> In practice you need horrific image quality,
>>> to the point of unasibility for deletion to 
>>> succeed
>>>
>>
>> So maybe the chance of deletion is low enough that we can drop the
>> argument that "wikimedia might delete it" when discussing using
>> wikimedia images.
>>
>>>
>>> They have backlog of copyright violations,
>>> and tricky cases where legality is not clear.
>>>
>>
>> Ah, in that case we might need a bot that works in the other direction.
>> Not one that tells wikimedia we've used one of its images but one
>> that tells us that one of the wikimedia images we used has gone.
>>
>>
>>> People making backlog worse by making
>>> such "low quality, delete" would not be
>>> appreciated or encouraged there
>>>
>>
>> We don't appreciate or encourage people who make ill-judged
>> edits to the map, but it happens.
>>
>> -- 
>> Paul
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>  Tagging mailing list
>>  >> [email protected]
>>  >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Reply via email to