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.
If the provided date is wrong, why not just remove it? Using a large message box template to tag wrong dates isn't useful for users in any way, and Incorrect date has a too broad scope to be of any use as a maintenance category. FDMS 4 21:54, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply] Also, this isn't metadata-compatible, so tools such as the MediaViewer will still display the wrong date, without any warning. FDMS 4 20:16, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The template needs improving but I think there is a need to be able to tag dates in descriptions which are obviously wrong (normally they are dates relating to upload or scanning rather than the event depicted). I'm not a wizard with these things - the template format was just grabbed from something else to get the ball rolling. Railwayfan2005 (talk) 12:10, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Mainly to warn other users that the date is wrong. For example the date in the description of cannot be the date that photo was taken because 87024 was scrapped in 2005. I don't know the date it was actually taken. A non-expert will not recognise that the date is wrong. Railwayfan2005 (talk) 14:36, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but the info that this file hasn't been taken on October 12, 2013 is hardly useful for anyone, the whole date field could just be emptied instead of displaying that potentially confusing non-information. Also, if you haven't deactivated the MediaViewer, it will tell you "Created: October 12, 2013" if you click on the thumbnail, which cannot be "fixed" by improving this template. FDMS 4 14:58, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It does highlight cases where the "The date of a photograph must be when the original photograph was created, and not the date of upload, nor the date of any scan or other derivative action." instruction in the Information template has not been followed. Railwayfan2005 (talk) 19:40, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would think that if you detect that the date given is the upload date, the right thing to do is to use {{Upload date}} on that and to tag the page as having the wrong date. - Jmabel ! talk15:48, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel: {{Upload date}} could just set the maintenance category itself as well, if the provided date is the (correct, not in 4501 cases) upload date, "This date is not correct." would be very confusing. FDMS 4 20:23, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well the only meaningful difference was the maintenance categorisation. The wording could be beefed up, perhaps "Date unknown because the EXIF metadata are incorrect or invalid". Railwayfan2005 (talk) 18:17, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Kept: It is in use in 434 places. While I agree that many of them would be better if the date were simply removed (I saw one that had the year 4501), the example that Railway Fan gives us is good -- a date that an expert would know is wrong -- the subject didn't exist then -- but others will not. By highlighting the error, perhaps it will be fixed. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:32, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)