![phew wallops phew wallops](https://www.pilotonline.com/resizer/riwAJrbIbj7XxoyHcBfo4iLMaPg=/1200x0/top/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-tronc.s3.amazonaws.com/public/MDSZPHKUH5GMHPEIJWQSUSWANM.jpg)
By the way, you might try reading the reference document you so helpfully posted on Wikipedia talk:Sound. You might also want to review Wiki pages on polite discourse.
![phew wallops phew wallops](https://img-aws.ehowcdn.com/700x/cdn.onlyinyourstate.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Evl7Q2DWQAAO2DE.jpg)
![phew wallops phew wallops](https://thesnowbaby.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/img_4801.jpg)
(Your implicit accusation is also unfounded on anything I want to upload, which I've made clear from the start - illustrative sound samples for encyclopedic topics that I create, hold the copyrights to, and license under GFDL, just like the images in my very modest gallery.) You should avoid personal attacks and try to stick to the topic at hand. Unlike what your above statement implies about you, I have never uploaded any copyrighted material, and I have never in my 42 years bowed to any trend considered cool, which is more than I can say about anyone I've ever met. Ericd 22:20, (UTC) Sorry, Ericd, but your ad hominem attack accusing me of wanting WAV and MP3 support because it's "cool" is totally unfounded on anything I've written. When your vanilla Media Player can play MP3. Yes, it's not cool to have to install a Direcshow filter. Jeff Q 23:10, (UTC) Sorry Jeff I rememberalong time ago some wikipedian arguing that it was very cool to upload copyrighted images. I think User:Zarni02's proactive, bold action is a commendable effort to bring this issue to the forefront. The problem is that few of the latter seem to be speaking up on the issue, leaving the argument to default in favor of the OGG crowd. (The software support alone for OGG - a dozen or so players and encoders and no inline browser plugins - compared to hundreds of software components for each of many other formats is an obvious argument for WAV, MP3, etc.) It seems to me that this whole dialog is confined primarily to a sizable number of existing OGG users and a few new folks looking to use a more readily-available format. The OGG crowd routinely rejects the complaint that OGG is virtually unheard-of outside the world of open-source when compared to WAV, MP3, and other popular formats. There are certainly practical concerns about the size of WAV files, although the recommended WAV and MP3 filesize limit of 64KB is certainly more restrictive than the up-to-2MB files that OGG users have already uploaded. (I'm still reviewing that.) However, I want to point out that there are some very vocal OGG users who seem fixated on preventing WAV and MP3 files from being used by Wikipedia on specious legal grounds.
![phew wallops phew wallops](https://leightontravels.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/The-Jellyfish-Factor-a-short-story-from-China-1-1.jpg)
More Wikipedia technical problems?) I applaud the effort to broaden sound support on Wikipedia, though not necessarily the path taken. (I check my Wikipedia watchlist at least 10 times a day, but never saw the edit to Wikipedia:Sound and Wikipedia that announced it. I don't know what happened, but I never heard about the Wikipedia:Request for comments posting until it was over. From a legal POV I see it like accepting copyright violations or deciding that Wikipiedia is not GFDL. WAV is an horrible solution from a technical POV. It was announced on Requests for comment. However he has gathered very few comments and run no polls before instituting this change. User:Zarni02 has instituted a new Wikipedia policy allowing the use of WAV and MP3 sound files instead of just OGG. I'm not conviced that this change is a good thing and I don't think it has received large support. 15 Suggest to allow MID & WAV as per policyĬan user have a look to Wikipedia talk:Sound.