Rosetta Code:Village Pump/Image uploads

Image uploads
This is a particular discussion thread among many which consider Rosetta Code.

Summary

Relating to upload of images to Rosetta Code

Discussion

I enabled image uploads yesterday, for all logged in users. Please try to limit uploads to original and/or programmatically-generated material. If you feel it necessary to upload an image retrieved from elsewhere, please ensure that uploading it here does not violate the original copyright. I'm not going to depend on Fair Use to get around more restrictive licenses, because I don't have the legal resources to defend against an infringement claim. --Short Circuit 23:50, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm a little late with this, I suppose, but I've been dinking around with Piet (Esolangs entry) over the past few days, and its programs are entirely images. (From the Piet page: "Piet is a programming language in which programs look like abstract paintings.") I like the language (as a toy), but it's possible (although somewhat unlikely) that the images could get... big. (Biggest one known so far: [Image:http://www.dangermouse.net/esoteric/piet/pietquest.png])

So... What's the upper limit on images? Not "what will Mediawiki support", but "what do you consider too big?" -- Erik Siers 17:11, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

I think for such images a codel size of 1 should be mandatory but apart from that it's not that large. There are certainly longer examples in other languages, even non-esoteric ones. If they get too large you can do the same as for other languages: Put it on a separate subpage. —Johannes Rössel 18:43, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

My concern isn't the on-screen dimensions of the image, but rather the file size limits that Short Circuit wants to stick to. The image upload page says "Maximum file size: 10 MB", but if I upload a 10MB file for each example on the site, disk space and bandwidth would likely be adversely affected. -- Erik Siers 18:54, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Let me keep an eye on disk and bandwidth usage. If it becomes a problem, I'll kick, curse, swear, and then finally put up a donate link. :) --Michael Mol 19:32, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Piet being a graphical programming language, I would expect that it requires lossless image file formats. I recommend trying both GIF and PNG+pngcrush, and uploading whichever file winds up being smaller. --Michael Mol 19:35, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

I haven't done anything yet, but yes, PNG + pngout (via Irfanview) is what I have in mind. -- Erik Siers 19:42, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

While we're at it. Ideas for a naming convention? For the first task I did in Piet (so far the only one – File:Piet A+B.png) I used Piet «task name». If that needs work, it can surely be renamed. Better ideas maybe? —Johannes Rössel 20:21, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

A new day - a new start. Is uploading an image file still disabled? If not, how does one go about doint this?? ~~----

+1. For example, I would prefer to replace the HTML+CSS+Unicode-art diagrams on Brace_expansion with images, because in their current form they don't render quite as they should on all browsers and platforms. --Smls (talk) 12:20, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Broken with Safari

Does anyone have any idea why upload of images doesn't work with Safari? I create an image (e.g., a GIF or PNG) and try to upload it, but I get a red error message saying that only a few formats are supported, including GIF and PNG. That's bizarre! It works if I use Firefox. (Yes, I'm logged in in both cases.) To me, it smells like a bug… –Donal Fellows 13:35, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

And reading Mike's talk page, it appears to be related to Javascript. Thank goodness for NoScript, which makes it all work at all… –Donal Fellows 13:49, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

People have reported the same problem across multiple browsers. I've had it myself on Firefox and IE. I found a really weird workaround. We're hoping that a MediaWiki update can fix it. --Mwn3d 13:52, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I disabled AJAX uploads serverside, but you may still need to disable it in your user profile settings. --Michael Mol 15:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I can't find any options in my preferences related to image uploads. Which option are you talking about? --Mwn3d 15:28, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Hm. I can't find it, either. It may be hidden because I've disabled the feature serverside, or it may not be there at all. Grr. I *really* need to step on that MW update. --Michael Mol 17:10, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Looks like uploads have been broken since May 2013. Bummer! --Loren (talk) 04:01, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

---

--Loren (talk) 04:01, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

They are not so much broken as disabled on purpose, see Special:Upload. A spam issue, probably... --Morn (talk) 12:50, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

That excludes the possibility to contribute with tasks made in any graphical language, e.g. Scratch, VEE, LabVIEW etc. Thats a pitty 'cause for example Labview has a feature called snippets where code can be saved in a .png image. And if you drag this image into Labview, it inserts the code, not the image. --MaViMi (talk) 19:09, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Trusted users

Would it be possible to give certain users a "trusted" status so that they can upload images (and perhaps also post external links, make new pages without having to negotiate an almost unreadable CAPTCHA), after they have made a certain number of serious contributions over a certain amount of time? Fwend (talk) 13:20, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly endorse that idea!

CAPTCHA is a royal pain in the neckhole and for most phrase presentations, it is truly almost unreadable and it just causes multiple attempts, followed by more attempts to find a phrase that can be decyphered/readable. -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 00:40, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't like CAPTCHAs but I hate the spammers and wouldn't like to make it too easy for them. --Paddy3118 (talk) 05:37, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

I was thinking along the lines of bypassing CAPTCHAs for   trusted   Rosetta Code users, and of course, the keyword would be   trusted   users.   Since spammers do what spammers do, but the people who need to upload images and create links (legitimately), could trusted RC users could be defined as those users who have entered (say) a half-dozen entries (or some defined quota).   I wouldn't object to even a score or thereabouts.   Like ya said, don't make it too easy for spammers.   I don't envision spammers taking the time (or the effort) to enter ... well, entries (as in computer programs). -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 06:01, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

This is still a problem (June 2015)

There is much discussion above. What do contributors who need to upload an image do today? Special:Upload says "File uploads are disabled." I would like to add some Blockly entries, which are fundamentally graphical. --Chkno (talk) 23:07, 19 June 2015 (UTC)