Forum:Upload file Update Proposal

Howdy everyone, CIA391 from Halopedia here. I am here to suggest an update to the Upload File page.

A few days ago a few editors were mentioning on Discord that it was common for editors to upload files without a source, license, or even the relevant file Information template.

I mentioned off-hand that Halopedia uses a system of dropdowns and how it "mostly" solved the issue... and well here I am properly discussing it in a place you all can discuss this idea, and see if you lot like it, and so on.

• Halopedia Special:Upload - Our upload file page (may need to be signed in to see)
• Halopedia Template:File_info - Our template that is placed on pages after files are uploaded.
• Halopedia MediaWiki:UploadScript.js - The Upload Script. Based on the Pikipedia Upload script by Espyo here
• Halopedia Special:NewFiles - Use this to quickly look though examples of files uploaded that use this system. But I can provide other examples per request!

To start off, the "Source file" section and "Upload options" section remain largely untouched. Editors still need to upload a file. (We also allow uploading via the "Source URL:" which speeds up matters in some cases. I'll make that a side thing to suggest)

Where everything differs is the "File description" section. On Minecraft Wiki right now, all that is there is the "Destination filename" and "Summary"... this unfortunately has the issue of newer editors not bothering to include a decent enough summary at times.

On Halopedia we solve this (mostly) with dropdowns that when filled out, enters fields into our "File_info" template. This means even with the most limited understanding, new and old editors will provide a "basic" template, with the information requested from the get go.

The fields adapt to the fields you enter...

• if you select that its "Non-Halo media" in Media type, the Halo media, Game fields vanish as they are pre-set to every piece of Halo media released. Leaving a field to type in the Non-Halo title if known.
• if you select "Halo media" in Media type, then select "Film/series" in Halo media, a Film/series dropdown appears listing all media released in that grouping such as "Halo: Nightfall", "Halo: The Television Series".

The "File_info" template also sets categories if they exist for files based on the fields given. For example: If "Halo: Combat Evolved" was selected as the "Game" and the File type is "Artwork", and the Art type is "Storyboard", it will take that information from the fields and sets Category:Halo: Combat Evolved storyboards as a category for the file.

We also added a Categories field also, where if editors know of Categories not covered by the automatic process of "File_info" then editors can edit them in. In Halopedias case, every character such as John-117 needs to be done manually. I expect the same here will need to be done for stuff.

I want to suggest adopting a similar system here, Dropdowns to make uploading files easier on editors, and help make files easier to understand down the road. (I'd also suggest allowing upload via "Source URL".)

Now I fully understand you can't just copy Halopedias version, some stuff like "Subject" may need to be changed if you go that far to be more "Minecraft" focused. You lot will probably need to investigate what you think is important information to record in your files.

Here is hoping that the idea is used! I am willing to discuss this idea more if you feel I need to be clearer in any area. - CIA391 (talk) 18:05, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

I would support this, but only if citation templates are included in it because this wiki has them amd so it would be a waste to not use them. Also, they allow readers to not need to click the link (especially true in cases where the source us no longer accessible).Drour1234 (talk) 18:10, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

To counter, simply linking the source is easier for fans to understand than adding an extra step in file uploading. I personally also view it as raw data tied to the source. This idea is to make stuff easier after all. - CIA391 (talk) 18:18, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

But if that raw data is deleted, it becomes no longer assessable to people who click a link.Drour1234 (talk) 19:48, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

That's why you make archives. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
23:42, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Generally 👁 Image
 Support the idea of improving Special:Upload to automatically add the Information template and have drop downs to fill out the Information template's parameters. I am hesitant on trying to do automatic categorisation (I'm not sure what else to call it) via Special:Upload though. I can't quite articulate why, I just feel like having a drop down for categories themselves would be neater. We'd have to update the type drop down and information template every time we add a new kind of image category (which I don't feel is infrequent). Perhaps the category drop down could only show you categories relevant to the game you've chosen though. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
23:42, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

In regards to categories.

It pretty much merges terms together and sees if a category exists. Or is on the nose with some stuff.

Halo: Combat Evolved + Concept Art fields would toss the image into a Halo: Combat Evolved Concept Art category.

If a category doesnt exist. It wont toss it into a category. For example if we put the Non-Halo media as "Gears of War 2" and put "Concept Art". We dont have a Gears of War 2 Concept Art category so it wouldnt push it.

The TLDR is that you get full control over what the file information template does!

The idea was to make stuff REALLY easy for folks that may not understand categories, and the less they have to deal with the better! At least in practice the idea worked on our end. - CIA391 (talk) 23:59, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

I would support the proposal as long as BOTH the url AND the wording of the source are on file pages, even if citation templates become merely optional.Drour1234 (talk) 01:32, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

That topic is not relevant enough to this proposal for you to be bringing it up here so much. This proposal is improving the file upload system, whether or not we use cite templates on file pages should be a different topic. To me, this really just comes across as you trying to persuade an editor to change their mind about something by offering them your support on an unrelated proposal if they do, which is really not good. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
15:09, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

In my comment that you are replying to, I did not mention using citation templates being required for my support, but rather, I mentioned an alternative to that if citation templates are not required.Drour1234 (talk) 13:23, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

I understand how it works, I just worry about the work that would come with it, such as the example of an issue I gave. I'd be happy for us to look into it later, but I think for now I'd just like to add the basics of the improved file upload system (drop downs to fill out the already existing Information parameters). - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
15:09, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support. i think having input boxes for the Template:Information parameters (and possibly an input box/picker for categories as well) would vastly improve the process of providing additional information on file upload. Regarding future proofing the accessability of file sources, maybe a separate "archive-url" input box would incentivize the uploader to add an archive link as well. – 👁 Image
Delycache ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 16:56, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support. It'd make the process of filling the information template far easier. The URL upload would especially help editors who upload lower quality images due to how they download them (which seems quite common to me). - Zamburger (talk) 21:56, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support this proposal as a whole and support anything that makes adding citations, sources, archives, categories, URLs, content etc. to file uploads easier for the end user. ESPECIALLY a URL uploader that would pull highest quality image. Will end a lot of the frustration over multiple pain points that have been creeping into the realm of file uploads lately. -BrianGLHF (talk) 02:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Very strong support except for the upload from link option, since that can be a security vulnerability. 👁 Image
ArduFish123 (talk) 20:29, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

I do think its not as big of an issue. The file upload feature concerns can be mitigated however. Us at Halopedia has never had issues that were not possible via regular upload. Vandals in the rare case they manage to become "autoconfirmed" have never uploaded a malicious/compromised file (we purge their files regardless).

One could argue a case of only letting autoconfirmed editors upload if thats not already the case? That ups the barrier for entry for file uploads.

Deleting vandal files regardless is a good policy to have regardless of how it was put onto the wiki.

You still cant upload files unless they match the file type anyhow. Which again lowers the issues. Though admittedly one committed enough could upload a compromised file via link OR regular file upload. (The issue isnt exclusive to link upload.)

And I expect malicious files if any happen to be dealt with fast. This is something that the wiki staff/host can deal with fast.

Ultimately its your lots choice, but link upload certainly goes a long way with this, and the issues can be mitigated and well arent exclusive to link uploads. - CIA391 (talk) 21:00, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Extremely strong support I will beg for this. It's so useful, it removes the tediousness of the file uploading process. As someone who does upload many, many files, this will save my time to edit on the wiki a lot more. 👁 Image
Ayaan 19:31, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Question Your screenshot doesn't work because you've uploaded it on Discord and you can't view that externally. Also I don't have an account at Halopedia so I don't know what exactly you're proposing. Uploading screenshots here would be appreciated.

The main issue I see with this is that we have multiple alternative ways of uploading things, not all of which we have control over (e.g. visual editor, non-visual editor toolbar, DiscussionTools, maybe more?). Just adding something to Special:Upload doesn't implement it in all these places at once. We already have this issue with our license template as it is (which I personally think is fully sufficient for our purposes) | violine1101 ^(talk) 18:51, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support - I don't think there is an issue with the template we have where we have to write all the information, but it can get confusing for new and inexperienced editors. - 👁 Image
StizzurpXDD^(talk) 04:46, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

As there is genaral support for this proposal, can we move forward and work towards an implementation? — 👁 Image
Delycache ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 23:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Yet another JavaScript kludge? No thank you. What about revising MediaWiki:Uploadtext instead? BabylonAS 08:55, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Do you mean the default file summary? There is nothing that could be done to Uploadtext that would satisfy the purpose of this proposal. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
17:41, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

At the very least it could explain how to make a good file summary, and it also doesn’t require JavaScript. — BabylonAS 08:30, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Updating Uploadtext couldn’t hurt and could be done while the logistics of this proposal are still being worked out. What changes do you have in mind? Want to discuss further at MediaWiki_talk:Uploadtext? -BrianGLHF (talk) 01:39, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

As I said on Discord. While I am all for good Uploadtext. I fundamentally believe drop downs and fields are the better solution. They make what people enter clear as day.

Not everyone will read the Uploadtext unfortunately and then understand everything that they need to enter. Or they wont try regardless.

The drop downs and boxes encourages some input, and may actually get "something" right in the worst case scenario.

This doesn't stop some people ignoring the drop downs and boxes also. But every step to encourage better standards is (in my opinion) the better route.

Now can the Uploadtext be improved alongside this. Yes very much so! I am 100% not dismissing that idea. :) CIA391 (talk) 16:49, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

I’ll make it clear, anything that completely replaces the built-in text area (as opposed to being added beside it) is absolute no-no. BabylonAS 16:52, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

It hasn't caused issues on Halopedia and the other wikis that have used this system, and we been using this for a few years at this point (since 2019)! So I admittedly struggle to see why it is an absolute no-no. Its been pretty stable on our end though my experience.

And most editors (on Halopedia) have engaged with the system as opposed to prior when there wasn't anything outside Uploadtext. It legitimately made uploading files on our end way easier on everyone involved. - CIA391 (talk) 17:05, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Still, I think the summary text box should remain, but be beneath everything in your proposal.Drour1234 (talk) 17:08, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Fun fact! We still allow users to edit the text! We understand that more direct control is VERY useful at times so we don't outright stop that! ([https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/449243256849563648/1351242256421617735/image.png?ex=67d9a9ea&is=67d8586a&hm=07d34caa56076dfbecfe4d46c0524c393742f705ce562d46025213b5b883c58d& Temp Discord link showing this])

Its hidden unless someone needs it. But very intuitive to find. - CIA391 (talk) 17:17, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Not if it comes at the expense of flexibility that the standard summary entry gives. Also, I am probably alone with this, but I think that standardized summary templates are simply unnecessary, and I’d like to have an option to not use them. — BabylonAS 17:13, 17 March 2025 (UTC)