User:Peteforsyth/Customer service/Proposed new Commons deletion wizard

Currently, there is a simple process to suggest that a file be deleted from Commons.

It's a button called "Nominate for deletion"; it's at the bottom of the left-hand navigation bar, for any file on Commons. (Once we've got the design figured out, here's where the code lives: User:Peteforsyth/Customer service/Javascript code links)

There are at least two things that could be improved:

1. It doesn't inform the end user that their entry will result in a publicly viewable/debatable nomination
2. It doesn't offer them another avenue (for instance, in a case where privacy is at the core of the problem. Like if the reader just found an embarrassing photo of herself, and wants to suggest deletion without seeking out more public attention to the photo.)

There are many reasons somebody might want to delete a file. By asking the right questions early in the process, we can both (a) Improve the quality of nominations (that is, encourage people to say more explicitly what they mean) and (b) educate the people in the process, by providing links to relevant policy pages etc.

Proposed new design

Working on designing this as a flow chart here: http://wiki.freegeek.org/index.php/User:Halfasspete/Sandbox

Here is a proposed design that would address this problem (and maybe just more general upgrades as well):

So, the first thing we might want to do is ask what their relationship to the picture is:

1. I am the creator of the file
2. I am personally connected to the file (it's a photo of me, it's a recording of my brother singing, etc.)
3. The file has nothing to do with me
   1. (if reader clicks [1. creator] or [2. connected]): My request for deletion is sensitive, involves privacy, or requires discreet handling (YES/NO)
   2. (if reader clicks [3. nothing to do with me]): ……
      1. (if answer is YES): Okay, your request will be sent by private email to our email support team, rather than posting on a public page. Our support team members are chosen because of their ability to be discreet and deal with complex issues. Does your issue require even more special care than that? (YES/NO)
      2. (if answer is NO): ……
         1. (if answer is YES): Okay, we will gladly deal with your needs to the best of our ability. Please be advised that complex special requests may result in delays, as our resources are limited. Please describe any special circumstances, so that we may assign the best person to your case: (TEXT FIELD)
         2. (if answer is NO): ……

Possible outcomes

At the end of the "wizard", there will be an outcome. Here's a list of possibilities:

• File a nomination (the current wizard's behavior) – but perhaps pre-loaded with the reader's input.
• Automatically send an email to on OTRS email, pre-loaded with the reader's input.
• Clearly tell the reader their why request is invalid. For example: "We understand that you don't read Japanese, but Wikimedia Commons is a site for everyone in the world. We don't delete images on the basis that a reader can't read words in them."
• …others?