Commons:Deletion requests/Chemistry-related gallery pages

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
[edit]

Over a month ago I asked about this issue on WikiProject Chemistry talk page with only one answer (Leyo). I can only repeat my motivation here and request the deletion of 39 galleries about chemical substances. All that I stumbled upon curating WD data.

Such galleries are a relic of the past. Only a few of them had any meaningful edit in the last 10 years, many were not edited (except bots and technical edits) after creation in the late 2000s. Also, only a few have any meaningful arrangement of content, most have 1–5 random (from present point of view) files. These galleries are unmaintained, have no use and no educational purpose. Moreover, the sections that exists in some galleries seems to be much better reflected in subcategories – like Category:Chemical structure diagrams of acetic acid, Category:Chemical structure of methane. In other words, with the resources we have, it is much more constructive to maintain categories, with limiting the number of files by removing redundant duplicates (what we do anyway on a regular basis) or creating additional subcategories. Maintaining galleries in the same time – that introduce no additional advantages – is just counterproductive. The existence of galleries was not a big problem in the past (these pages just hung in categories and were not visited) and wouldn't be right now, however, here comes Wikidata. In WD items the main sitelink to Commons will always be a page, not a category. In many situations it may be correct, but in this case – it is not. Sitelinks from Wikidata are exported to other Wikimedia projects and outside Wikimedia. And what the readers get from it? A link to a crappy page that was not edited for about 10 years and have a bunch of random files. They may not know that there are also galleries, that there are more files about this topic. Even if they know, these pages are the worst showpiece of this project. Wostr (talk) 17:21, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If your concern is how WikiData displays it, the logical fix might not be to delete what you don't want displayed, but to advocate there to change what is prioritised when displaying commons information... Effeietsanders (talk) 17:56, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If the problem was only WD then I would try to find a solution there and i wouldn't bother here (despite the fact that changes in WD in this regard are, in my opinion, not possible, as I tried once to change it). In fact, what shows up in WD is just a Commons problem. Wostr (talk) 09:38, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Deleted all the galleries. An example of the non-maintenance is Carbon dioxide, where the gallery is titled “Photos”. However, only 1 out of 15 images is actually a photograph. --Leyo 21:43, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete Delete all, we have categories of these chemicals which are used nowadays. — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 13:32, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete all. Categories display what we have automatically. Galleries must be manually currated, but there's no clear basis for that task (some have many equivalent rather than a variety "best of" each style or type of detail) and nobody seems to care enough to do it. Nor are they updated when new or better images become available. They therefore they continue to decay. DMacks (talk) 03:35, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete. As other commenters have noted, these pages no longer serve any need and because of their lack of maintenance may actually present more harm than good. Marbletan (talk) 20:01, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:45, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]