It would shave off time from back checking images, as well as decrease the likelihood of duplicate images

This feature would effect the upload page, best type of link in my oppinion would be one that opens a new tab when clicking said link

I don't know if it is possible, but maybe if uploading a file choice automatically ran a harry.lu upon input on the selected image, telling users that said image is already on e621 as an alternative to simply having harry.lu as a linked option

If this feature is approved, maybe include a small tutorial on the file type one must use to check harry.lu to avoid user complaint on "incorrect filetype" notifications

-1 because it's an outside tool and it goes down every so so.
If they were to add something, it has to be an internal tool.

And you can't check automatically.
Just use tools for that.

AoBird said:
-1 because it's an outside tool and it goes down every so so.
If they were to add something, it has to be an internal tool.

And you can't check automatically.
Just use tools for that.

I don't see the harm in having this as a link on the upload page quite frankly, even if it does go down from time to time.
http://iqdb.harry.lu/

hey just fyi on the bug report forms and feature suggestion forms you are not supposed to replace the questions with your answers. you are supposed to write the answer on the next line after the [/b]

siikaprinssi said:
hey just fyi on the bug report forms and feature suggestion forms you are not supposed to replace the questions with your answers. you are supposed to write the answer on the next line after the [/b]

where did I make the mistake so I can correct it

Versperus said:
where did I make the mistake so I can correct it

like i said, you replaced the titles with your answers for the questions instead of writing your answers after the titles. the text is easier to read and understand when its sectioned properly with titles instead of all bold text with no context about what question you are answering with them.

example:

What steps did you take to replicate this bug?
i tried different browser

instead of

i tried different browser

siikaprinssi said:
like i said, you replaced the titles with your answers for the questions instead of writing your answers after the titles. the text is easier to read and understand when its sectioned properly with titles instead of all bold text with no context about what question you are answering with them.

example:

What steps did you take to replicate this bug?
i tried different browser

instead of

i tried different browser

does this look better?

.. I can't say for sure whether it looks better, but it doesn't appear to have addressed siikaprinssi's comment at all - none of the questions are present, only your answers.

Most 'feature request' threads clearly illustrate what kind of formatting is expected. For example Fifteen's recent thread on abstract tags.