Forum:Mass deletion of unused illustrations

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Index > Village Dump > Mass deletion of unused illustrations
Note: This topic has been unedited for 408 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

There are literally thousands of unused files on this wiki. I think it would be good to delete them, but normally that would require a lot of effort. However, I'm pretty sure that it's possible to incorporate your script used for deleting UnNews categories. I have an extension named ListFiles (from Dev Wiki), which gives a list of all files on the page, so it can be used to get data for script so it knows what to delete. The only difference would be making script work with exact provided page names instead of these provided by loops. Expert 3222 23:51, July 24, 2016 (UTC)

I have now read that they actually show unused files as an example of using this script, and even provide another nice extension to do the deletions. It makes the work even easier. Expert 3222 00:00, July 25, 2016 (UTC)

I am in favor of deleting unused photos, and I do so whenever deleting an article after a Vote for Deletion. They can always be re-uploaded, or even gotten back on behalf of anyone who knows their name. The large number of UnusedFiles are partly the result of a decade of deleting articles without going through them and deleting their illustrations if they are orphaned.
There is a small minority of these that are used even though they appear in UnusedFiles. For example, there may be no links to a photo but it may be used by giving its name as an argument to a template. We have a tag that is supposed to be put on photos to warn people not to delete them even if they appear on UnusedFiles. Spıke Radiomicrophone01:30 25-Jul-16

So, should we mass-delete them? As for "used unused" files, I have a workaround. Do you remember the name of that tag? We could add something like <includeonly>[[Category:Test (temporary)]]</includeonly>, then go to that category (or just see Special:WhatLinksHere) and write down list of files. After that, just remove them from list of files generated by extension. Expert 3222 03:11, July 25, 2016 (UTC)

I don't remember the tag. Let's open this to other users and Admins. Spıke Radiomicrophone03:14 25-Jul-16
I would be cautious about doing this in case we end up losing a lot of images and creating holes in articles as a result. I don't see it as a particular issue and not something Wikia has brought up either with us. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 09:18, July 25, 2016 (UTC)
I don't see any reason to delete the unused files, since our host doesn't seem to be complaining about the server space they take up. They could be used for future articles. -- Simsilikesims(♀GUN) Talk here. 16:01, July 25, 2016 (UTC)
No, it is not as though we have an upper gigabyte limit that we are in imminent danger of hitting. But I do see a reason to delete unused photos, which is the same reason we use VFD to delete old articles: The wiki is not helped by being cluttered up with unfunny things, even things that a gifted Uncyclopedian might some day make funny (at the expense of being funny in other ways). Speaking of unfunny, we have a solid consensus that Uncyclopedia should not be used to make scorecards for reality-television competitions, and we delete these, though Wikia has not told us to recycle their bytes, either.
Romartus's concern about opening up holes in articles (borne of experience at the hands of Wikia's nudity censors) is also unfounded, as these photos would not be on Special:UnusedFiles in this case. I mention above one way that an article that appears in Special:UnusedFiles might be used anyway. So I'd support the deletion of anything in the File: space (1) that does not have a template warning that it might be used even though it seems unused; (2) that is an "ugly shoop" as defined in Uncyclopedia:How To Be Funny And Not Just Stupid THE IMAGE VERSION; or (3) lacks any categories or other hooks by which anyone would ever find it. And your discretion does not depend on expertise in the English language, about which I have fewer doubts than you do.
There is one special type: Several Uncyclopedians have galleries in their userspace of nudie photos. These may get us or Wikia in trouble someday; they might not show up in UnusedFiles, but are being warehoused for possible future use that will not be allowed when it happens.
A manual operation on "thousands" of files is tedious, but you have embraced tedious assignments before, and this one does not have to be done all at once, nor completed by a deadline. So my recommendation is to pick and choose particularly awful illustrations on the page and delete them in your free moments. For illustrations that are not awful, such as a politician in a pose that an author might take advantage of, you might instead attach Categories that would lead them to be found and used later. But I'll concede to my colleagues that you should not use the "nuclear option" on them. Spıke Radiomicrophone05:01 29-Jul-16

Alright, I'll do it like this. Expert 3222 19:36, July 29, 2016 (UTC)

Personal tools