Commons:Village pump/Archive/2022/05

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Embassy of Syria.jpg

I tried locating info about the sculpture that's in front of the embassy, but with no luck. If anyone has a source for the age of the sculpture or any other info, I would appreciate it. Thanks. APK (talk) 09:12, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

@APK: looking at historical Google satellite and streetview images, the sculpture seems to have been placed between April and October 2010. --HyperGaruda (talk) 12:01, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
In the picture itself an Arabic signature is visible at the bottom left of the sculpture, together with the year "2009". Guess that is the creation date. --HyperGaruda (talk) 12:10, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Could just about figure out the first name, Lutfi, which brings me to the following. This is probably the sculpture when it was still at its workshop. This website confirms (in French) that we are looking at a 2009 Syrian marble sculpture by Lutfi Romhein. --HyperGaruda (talk) 12:21, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
@APK and HyperGaruda: So under US and Syrian copyright law as explained at COM:FOP US (no exception for sculpture) and COM:FOP Syria (this is not a broadcast), we may not host that photo until the copyright on the sculpture has expired in the source country and the US, regardless of the CC-BY-SA-4.0 license of the photo.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:34, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Though we could host a version with a Gaussian blur over the sculpture. - Jmabel ! talk 14:30, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
✓ Done @Jeff G.: I removed the speedy deletion tag after uploading a blurred version. Anyhow, please feel free to open a regular DR if you think the image is now useless with the blurry spot. De728631 (talk) 14:49, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
@De728631: The first version should still be deleted. Glrx (talk) 14:54, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
I revdeled it which should be sufficient. De728631 (talk) 16:47, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you everyone. APK (talk) 03:24, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Jmabel ! talk 19:57, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Old stained glass windows, which licence? 2-D or not 2-D?

So far I have always photographed stained glass windows myself, and licensed them as my own photos on commons. No problem there.

But now I would like to use this stained glass image of St Buriana to illustrate her in her article Buriana (as a 6th-century saint, she can be illustrated but not identified visually because her real appearance is unknown). This stained glass window is a 19th-century artwork by Anon, photographed less than 10 years ago by a named photographer. It is in Cornwall, England, and I cannot travel that far. If it were a 19th-century 2-dimensional picture (drawing, painting, photo etc.), then the licence would be for the artwork, not the photographer, and it could have a PD-old-70-expired licence. However, this is stained glass.

So my question is: is a stained glass window to be considered 2-D for the purposes of an artwork copyright licence on Commons? If the leading makes it 3-D, then what if I just crop out the central painting of her face, which is definitely a 2-D painting on glass and includes no leading? Could that cropped extract then have a PD-old-70-expired licence?. Storye book (talk) 20:10, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

@Storye book: The question is not really whether the window is 2D or 3D, but whether there's any creativity in taking a photo of a stained-glass window. From my experience, I'd say that there is, because you're trying to find a position (and time of day, and weather) that will illuminate the window to look at its best, and that's not just a matter of trying to make an accurate copy of the window. Put another way, no photo of a window is a photo of just the window: it's also a photo of whatever's on the other side of the window. --bjh21 (talk) 10:54, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
I would disagree with your statement, "you're trying to find a position (and time of day, and weather) that will illuminate the window to look at its best, and that's not just a matter of trying to make an accurate copy of the window". I have photographed many church windows for many years. You just need to do two things: 1. take the photo in daylight; 2 adjust the camera to take a much darker picture than usual, to prevent burnout on the lighter areas (e.g. the faces of saints etc.), so as to capture all detail and colour. That's not creativity; that's just making the camera work properly. I take many pictures of e.g. lithographs in indoor archives under awful lighting, where you have to adjust the camera to prevent colour-cast etc. That's not artistic creativity. That's just making your camera work properly in the circumstances. In other words, you have to adjust the camera, one way or other, for both pictures on paper and canvas, and for paintings on stained glass. That's not doing art; that's just getting an accurate reproduction of 2-D art.
As for "finding a position", that's not artistic creativity as in finding a good angle to photograph a 3-D object such as a human face. What you want with a church window is to get in a position where the perspective is not going to distort the window shape, which is usually a rectangle with a fancy top-end. You have to do that with any rectangular painting, lithograph or whatever. With a large and valuable book of lithographs in an archive, they open the book flat on the table for you, then you have to get on a ladder or chair and lean over the book to get above the rectangle, so as not to distort the perspective. It's the same with a church window, when you have to stand back, directly in front of the window, take your shoes off, and stand on a pew or bring a ladder (if they let you). Those windows are usually much taller than yourself, and you will often have to adjust the perspective in Photoshop, Gimp or whatever app, but that is just correcting the picture to a rectangle - not artistic creativity. If those techniques of using your camera properly were considered artistic technique, then we would all be able to copyright our pictures of 18th-century lithographs on the grounds of having adjusted the camera for light to get an accurate reproduction, and the image for perspective.
Regarding your second statement, " no photo of a window is a photo of just the window: it's also a photo of whatever's on the other side of the window", well, maybe we are talking at cross-purposes here. I am talking about those highly-decorated and painted church windows that we have in the UK where you cannot see objects through the window at all, due to all the painted decoration. The only thing that you can see through the window is the fact of daylight. When you photograph paintings or lithographs you need light of some kind, too, whether daylight or artificial light, just so that the camera can see the colour and detail. The example that I gave above is that type of British traditional stained glass.
So I don't think that we can say that there is any creativity or merit in taking a photo of stained glass, beyond the ability to use your camera properly. It is true that most people don't realise that they should adjust the camera to take a very dark picture in order to capture all detail of stained glass, but that is because they don't know how to adjust the camera for light, or their camera is a simple one, which cannot be adjusted in that way. Storye book (talk) 14:56, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Photos of old stained glass are listed explicitly in the list of works of art eligible for a public domain license, with a few minor exceptions. --HyperGaruda (talk) 05:01, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Whoopee! Thank you. That is good news. Storye book (talk) 11:32, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Storye book (talk) 11:34, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Do these images meet the threshold of originality in this country?

This and this logos are uploaded as non-free on Wikipedia. The copyright laws of their country of origin, Japan, is stated on COM:TOO Japan. It looks like the threshold of originality is quite high in Japanese law. Does anyone here think that these two logos are below that line and hence could qualify for exporting to Commons? --Morita Akio (talk) 22:47, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Discussion moved to Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#Do_these_images_meet_the_threshold_of_originality_in_this_country?, as that's where the experts are. Please proceed over there. --El Grafo (talk) 09:22, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

File:Germany-Italy line ups.svg

Can anyone tell me why, when I uploaded a new version of this file today, half of the Italy team's icons disappeared? They appear when I view the actual SVG file, but when the image is rendered at smaller resolutions, they're nowhere to be seen. Any help? PeeJay (talk) 18:38, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

@PeeJay: Phab:T276684: A use element xlink:href links to another use element. The better organization is to have the uniforms be groups or symbols in the defs section and then use those groups/symbols instead of elements in the rendering tree. Glrx (talk) 19:24, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't know what that means. I made this in Inkscape (perhaps that tells you my level of skill with vector art) so what would I need to do to fix it in that program? PeeJay (talk) 15:37, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
@PeeJay: I believe that you have cloned a clone in Inkscape. That is, you had an original jersey, and you cloned that jersey a few times to make copies. Those are the jerseys that display. But then you cloned one or more of the clones. That should work, but it is not ideal, and it confuses WMF's SVG agent. You can unclone the ones that do not display. That's not ideal, but it should work. See https://inkscape-manuals.readthedocs.io/en/latest/cloning-objects.html
The better approach to make the jersey a symbol and then use that symbol. See http://jeromebelleman.gitlab.io/posts/graphics/inksyms/
Glrx (talk) 16:25, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
I think I've managed to figure it out. It's all a bit complicated for me, but I'll keep your advice in mind for next time. Cheers. PeeJay (talk) 16:40, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Where can I request volunteers to help convert some files to SVG?

As someone who is not familiar with vector graphics, I would like to request a few images for kind contributors to create in SVG format. Is there a place I can request this? --Morita Akio (talk) 09:59, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! --Morita Akio (talk) 14:40, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Load a MP4 video of Augrabies Waterfall in flood!

Hi there! I only learned today that we cannot load MP4 files. I have got a fantastic video of the Augrabies waterfall (taken this past weekend) in flood that I want to load. I need advise and/or assitance. Help! Regards! Oesjaar (talk) 17:40, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Please see Help:Converting video. Verbcatcher (talk) 18:47, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

A popular article writing competition CEE Spring (about Central and Eastern Europe; now with special subcategory about Esperanto) is happening on the English Wikipedia until the 31st May 2022. I warmly invite you to participate, write some article and win a valuable prize! If you have question, I will happily answer it on the competition page talk.

Also, for more wide outreach, I have just asked for a CentralNotice, which should appear also in this project. If you have a comment on the request, you are welcome to write it on the request page. --KuboF Hromoslav (talk) 18:30, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

What are the rules around adding graphs which include an organisation's logo?

Hi all

I'm working with a UN organisation who are interested in sharing their graphics on Commons. Lots of really useful content, especially around the current Ukraine conflict. What the rules are around including their logo in the graphics? Its a simple text logo so including the logo wouldn't introduce any copyright issues. To be clear this would not be a watermark, just a logo in the corner of the graphs which wouldn't obscure the content.

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 10:58, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Date posted in SD

I am unable to use d:Q102109830 (Date posted) in SD for this post card.Smiley.toerist (talk) 23:14, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Smiley.toerist, are you looking for publication date (P577) perhaps? — Huntster (t @ c) 00:03, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
No I was looking for date postally canceled (P9052).Smiley.toerist (talk) 08:58, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Call for Election Volunteers

The Movement Strategy and Governance team is looking for community members to serve as election volunteers in the upcoming Board of Trustees election.

The idea of the Election Volunteer Program came up during the 2021 Wikimedia Board of Trustees Election. This program turned out to be successful. With the help of Election Volunteers we were able to increase outreach and participation in the election by 1,753 voters over 2017. Overall turnout was 10.13%, 1.1 percentage points more, and 214 wikis were represented in the election. A total of 74 wikis that did not participate in 2017 produced voters in the 2021 election. Can you help change the participation for this year's?

Election volunteers will help in the following areas:

  • Translate short messages and announce the ongoing election process in community channels
  • Optional: Monitor community channels for community comments and questions

Volunteers should:

  • Maintain the friendly space policy during conversations and events
  • Present the guidelines and voting information to the community in a neutral manner

Do you want to be an election volunteer and ensure your community is represented in the vote? Sign up here to receive updates. You can use the talk page for questions about translation.

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 15:12, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Revert-only users: Spam or misunderstanding?

Hi. There are surprisingly many users, whose only contributions are reversions of various images (often flags or coats of arms). Example 1, example 2, example 3.
Of course some revert-only users are undoing vandalism. It's definitely not a blockable offense to specialize in reversion. Some revert-only users get blocked for vandalism or upload wars, and that's fine, too.
But what about the users, who immediately revert their own reversions? They are unlikely to get blocked, because they don't leave files in an objectionable state and they don't antagonize other users. Their actions are not particularly disruptive, but also not constructive at all.
@TilmannR: Perhaps those links would be less likely to be pushed / clicked / tapped if they were labeled "restore", or the too-long "revert to this version"?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:48, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Dead slow

Hi, Commons is again dead slow for me. Upload is at 12 KB/s... :(( Anyone else? Yann (talk) 18:08, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

@Yann: I had a look at one of my bots and noticed it got stuck too. I see these kind of errors:
  • API error backend-fail-internal: An unknown error occurred in storage backend "local-swift-eqiad".
  • API error backend-fail-stat: Could not read the status of file "mwstore://local-multiwrite/local-public/a/a7/Lady_Waterford_Hall_-_geograph.org.uk_-_3479033.jpg"
Swift is the image backend so it looks like it had some problems today. Might be related to phab:T279637. Multichill (talk) 20:53, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Category:2015 in rail transport in Lower Saxony

An upper category is 2015 in rail transport in Germany. However from this upper category the Lower Saxony one is invisible. All the other landen categories are visible. This frustating the use of Cat-a-lot scripts. Category:2015 in rail transport in Germany stil has 753 items to move to regional categories.Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:17, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Links: Category:2015 in rail transport in Lower Saxony, Category:2015 in rail transport in Germany. From Hill To Shore (talk) 14:33, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
For me, it's right there between Hesse and North Rhine-Westphalia ..? El Grafo (talk) 15:19, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
It is now shown on my PC also. Probably some maintenance was done or background processes caught up.Smiley.toerist (talk) 09:00, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
Usually purging helps. I guess someone did yesterday. Regards, --Kleeblatt187 (talk) 20:01, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Kleeblatt187 (talk) 20:01, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Experienced user nominating official release videos for deletion

i'd like to draw your attention to Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Patricia Janečková. (i invite you to give your opinion so that this specific DR can hopefully be closed before mid-june.)

but the kind of behaviour as shown in this DR is more troubling. the user in question is Special:Redirect/user/384465. it's not the first time that he nominates official channels' own creative works, which do not involve third-party copyright, for deletion. RZuo (talk) 12:13, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Android App and bad structured data

The (an) Android App is still leading naive and good-faith users to make bad edits, adding vague generic tags as "structured" data.

Compare the recent:

  • [1] - ‎add-depicts: Q16970|church building,Q21|England,Q2256|Birmingham,Q5385291|Erdington

which I reverted and replaced with:

  • [2] - depicts (P180): St Barnabas' Church, Erdington (Q7592583)

The image (above) is in Category:St Barnabas' Church, Erdington, so an app should be able to deduce that the latter is an appropriate suggestion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:42, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

is there a way to check if any of my photos are used in Wikipedia or other wiki projects?

Hello, newbie here. Out of curiosity, I wonder whether there is some kind of tool that I could use to check whether my photos are used by other wiki projects? In addition to "What links here" for individual photos, are there more efficient ways to check (or get notified) whether my photos are being used (without checking the photos one by one). Thank you very much!--Suiren2022 (talk) 07:54, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@Suiren2022 Yes, Glamorous does that - just enter your user name and check the "show details" box. --El Grafo (talk) 09:06, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Thank you very much! very useful.--Suiren2022 (talk) 17:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

This new file - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PHO.1.1.2.034_final.jpg#%7B%7Bint%3Afiledesc%7D%7D

as seen on wikipedia page Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge should be titled: Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge 1934 Thanks Srbernadette (talk) 08:14, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@Srbernadette: I renamed it for you this time. Next time, please ensure that the description is correct and then use RenameLink, or {{Rename}} (if you can't use JavaScript). See also mw:Help:Links#Internal links.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 09:34, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Logo competition for the Content Partnerships Hub

Hi all

Wikimedia Sverige is having a logo competition for the new partnerships hub, winners can chose anything from the Wikipedia Store. The competition is open till the 16th, details here. Please let people know who you think might be interested.

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 12:40, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

“Structured data” not shown – why?

On the description page for this photo, when you click on the “Structured data” tab, no data are shown; it looks like there were no structured data for this photo. However, if you take a look at the revision history, it is obvious that there must be some structured data. And indeed if you view some older version, e.g. this one, the page shows structured data as appropriate. It seems that since this edit made by the BotMultichillT the structured data are no longer shown.

Can somebody spread some light on this issue? Can I do anything to make “Structured data” visible for this photo again? Thank you very much for any help, --Aristeas (talk) 07:31, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@Aristeas It's not just that image, same happening with e.g. File:Plassenburg, Kulmbach from Rehturm.jpg. --El Grafo (talk) 09:10, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
It is a glitch that has been happening for a few months now. It seems to occur at random and resolves itself after a while. I have been able to fix it on individual images by using the purge function, which suggests it is related to caching of old data somewhere between the servers and the individual computer. From Hill To Shore (talk) 12:18, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, purging indeed seems to help. El Grafo (talk) 14:28, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Thank you very much, El Grafo and From Hill To Shore! It is good to know that the problem does not only affect this photo, but is a general glitch. And, of course, thank you very much for the hint that the purge function helps! All the best, --Aristeas (talk) 19:00, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
@Aristeas, From Hill To Shore: At least it seems developers are aware and working on it: phab:T301048. El Grafo (talk) 07:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
@El Grafo: That’s great, thank you for the hint! --Aristeas (talk) 07:29, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Czech and Czechoslovakian steam locomotives numbering systems

Czechoslovakia
Czech

These is the same locomotive: see Overview of ČD’s Historic Vehicles / Steam Locomotives with a Tender I want to adapt the category description for Category:ČSD Class 556.0 and maybe rename the category to refect the historic Czechoslovakian numbers.

However there is a problem: the Czechoslovakian 935 type was much broader than the Czech 556.0 type.

475.101/ 935.0136 475.111/ 935.0115 498.022/ 935.015 498.106/ 935.2291 534.0323/ 935.117 534.0432/ 935.1102

I havent even looked at the Slovakian locomotives types. Is there some expert in numbering to give us some advice? maybe better to create separate Czechoslovakian categories? My thinking is rename the category ČSD Class 556.0 to ČD Class 556.0 / ČSD Class 935 Smiley.toerist (talk) 09:26, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Sorry: I confused the separate tender numbers with the locomotives numbering. All are ČSD numbers. Maybe we need to create seperate tender categories.Smiley.toerist (talk) 09:37, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Are these promo?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Vecho3745 — Preceding unsigned comment added by VScode fanboy (talk • contribs) 12:09, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

My bad, I thought they were photos of some restaurant opening. VScode fanboy (talk) 07:25, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Harvest / Harvesting

It looks like the category tree around Category:Harvest and Category:Harvesting is a bit of a mess with, for example, Category:Harvesting being the direct parent of Category:Harvesting wheat but Category:Harvesting => Category:Harvest => Category:Harvest by crop => Category:Grain harvest => Category:Oats harvest. Category:Harvesting wheat and Category:Oats harvest are, as far as I can tell, two categories that differ only by type of grain, but they are in entirely separate parts of the cat tree and are not named in a parallel manner. I have no concrete suggestion how this should be, but surely it should not be like this. Pinging @Anthere, Auntof6 as people I know are active and who have edited the relevant categories. - Jmabel ! talk 00:54, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

hmmm. yeah. Ideas anyone ? Anthere (talk) 01:18, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
The noun "harvest" can mean either the process of gathering resources or the gathered resources themselves after a harvest. That makes the term ambiguous. I would do the following:
  • Eliminate or rename the categories that use the word "harvest" because that word is ambiguous.
  • Use the word "harvesting" in categories that show the process. This could include images of already-harvested items if the image shows something that is specific to harvesting. For example, this image doesn't show the activity of harvesting, but the apples are in a container that is used during harvesting. This image shows apples in a basket, and you can't tell how long ago they were harvested, even if they look like they're sitting in a field.
  • The products of harvesting (mostly crops, but harvesting can be used for other kinds of things) are probably already in appropriate categories such as "apples," "vegetables," "grain," etc. If not, they can be put there. I don't think it's necessary to specify that they have been harvested if they are shown already removed from the place where they grew.
The various subcategories would need to be examined because some of them contain media both for gathering resources and for the resources that have been gathered. See Category:Tomato harvest for an example; the contents there could be split between Category:Tomatoes and some subcategory of Category:Harvesting. Auntof6 (talk) 04:34, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Auntof6's proposal seems reasonable. @Anthere and Auntof6: Do you think there are others we should ping? Or should we go through a whole CfD thing? or what? - Jmabel ! talk 01:14, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Problem with CfD is that discussion often lose momentum, and people forget about them. This seems like a relatively straight-forward idea. I'd say maybe wait a little bit longer for others to chime in here and then just do it. I'm just wondering whether it should be Category:Harvesting of wheat or Category:Wheat harvesting rather than Category:Harvesting wheat. El Grafo (talk) 10:32, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
i think "Harvesting of xyz" is the best title. for crops that are a few words long, like black glutinous rice, "black glutinous rice harvesting" may not sound so natural.--RZuo (talk) 07:31, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Second that. It is also more readable to have list of categories that all start with the same words. But that being said... I see here Category:Grain harvest that most grain are of the type « Category:GrainX Harvest ». Not sure if it was ever meant on purpose or not... Would this imply renaming those as well ? Anthere (talk) 22:56, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
There is also the huge category Category:Harvest by country‎ with many sub categories. All named Harvest, not Harvesting. I am happy to help implement any change. But English is not my primary language, so I am NOT sure whether Harvesting or Harvest make the most sense. We need more opinion here... Anthere (talk)

Heads up

Have an idea to simplify setting up POTD using titleparts and some subst commands. I'll have to test it, though, so expect a few test pages with dates in the Middle Ages or so which I'll nominate for speedy deletion after. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:05, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Okay. I've got it down to this, which simplifies the first part:

{{Potd filename|Menger-Schwamm.png|{{subst:#time: Y|{{subst:#titleparts: {{subst:PAGENAME}} | 1 | 2 }}}}|{{subst:#time: m|{{subst:#titleparts: {{subst:PAGENAME}} | 1 | 2 }}}}|{{subst:#time: d|{{subst:#titleparts: {{subst:PAGENAME}} | 1 | 2 }}}}}}

With appropriate use of <includeonly> on the subst: parts of that, that can be templated no problem. The problem is going to be extracting the language code from the rest of it for the description. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:35, 8 May 2022 (UTC)


Is there any reason why StringFunctions is disabled on Commons? Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:41, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Are they enabled on any WMF wiki? There is Lua for this. Ruslik (talk) 08:29, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
There is, but ideally, we don't want to break anything that already exists, which means it should subst: down to the extant format ideally. Also, I believe the transclusions require it to be subst: to stay working, since the details being filled out depend on the specific page.
We could get aroubd this by changing, say, 2022-02-03 (en) to 2022-02-03/en but that changes functionality. Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:02, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
are you trying to do something like Template:Motd/Day/preload Template:Motd_description/preload?
since potd and motd template formats seem to differ by only one letter, we could tweak the preload templates to make it serve for both. do you want that?--RZuo (talk) 16:00, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
That is pretty much exactly it, yes! Didn't re alise you could subst invokes.Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:22, 9 May 2022 (UTC) Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:21, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
i've edited both preloads, which should now work for both potd and motd. i'm sorry i'm quite busy so i'll leave editing Template:Change image to you. it should be similar to previous changes to Template:Change media file. RZuo (talk) 19:17, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
@RZuo: Should be live. Had to edit Template:Potd and Motd/Day as well. Template:Editnotices/Group/Template:Potd could probably use an update to match. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:50, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
i meant to utilise the same preloaders for both motd and potd... anyway, since you created a separate preloader i'll revert them back to motd only.
an unrelated note: i've always wanted to make an interactive gadget like vfc or a tool to make the whole process easier -- by filling in a form it creates both the main template and the description templates, but i'm lack of the sufficient coding skills and time for now.--RZuo (talk) 07:31, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Two (almost) identical images

I just found two almost identical photos, well, of the exact same subject at least, but with totally different descriptions and categories. What do we do about that kind of thing?

Thanks, --217.239.10.196 12:52, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting this! Let's dig into it: They both show the same section of the en:Bayeux Tapestry. File:Flotte normande.jpg seems to be fine in terms of description and categories. File:Floki Vilgerdarsson.jpg seems to suggest that this is the ship of en:Hrafna-Flóki Vilgerðarson. That name is not on the list of people known to be depicted on the tapestry provided at en:Bayeux_Tapestry#People_depicted. The blog this one comes from has an image description that translates to something like "Representation of the voyage of the Viking Flóki Vilgerdarson, called Raven-Flóki, due to the episode of the launch of the crows, which led him to find Iceland." That does not seem to fit at all with how this section of the tapestry is being described at en:Bayeux_Tapestry_tituli: The ship is part of section 5, which is Aabout Harold arriving in en:Ponthieu. I can't see anything that would link this section of the tapestry to Vilgerðarson or Iceland. --El Grafo (talk) 14:20, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
So how do we handle it? I'd say rename the file to something less speculative and adjust categorization and description to reflect the state of what is actually known. For transparency reasons it might still be a good idea to mention that the source website sees some kind of connection to Vilgerðarson and Iceland, but we should make clear that that is speculative. El Grafo (talk) 14:26, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
It is not necessary to save two identical pictures, especially if one transports a historical incorrect description. See: de:Benutzer_Diskussion:RAL1028#Teppich. Regards. --RAL1028 (talk) 20:36, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Well, they are of the identical subject, but the pictures themselves are not exactly identical. We'll have to make sure we keep the better one of the two. Which is an easy choice, as the "Flotte normande" one is of much better quality.
So, does that mean we simply nominate the other one for deletion? --217.239.10.196 22:42, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
We routinely keep multiple photos of the same artwork (compare e.g. Category:Mona Lisa), even if one of them is clearly inferior. File:Floki Vilgerdarsson.jpg has been on Commons for more than 10 years. One reason is that if we just delete it now that may break source links and attributions on an unknown amount of external (non-wikimedia) pages. Description etc. have been fixed, and I have requested a move to a more reasonable file name. Unless you find anything else that needs improvement, there's nothing left to do. El Grafo (talk) 08:11, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Near identical images

So I've stumbled across File:George Washington John Trumbull.jpg and File:John Trumbull - George Washington (1732-1799) - H54 - Harvard Art Museums.jpg, both allegedly from the same source although one came here via Wikidata and they are the same resolution but are not the same file size (although despite the file size difference I can't tell that the larger is definitively better than the smaller, just a different compression). I'm not sure how that should be handled, or if anything should be done with it at all, so here I am. Help? VernoWhitney (talk) 14:40, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

strangely, neither of them seems to be the exact same as the original https://ids.lib.harvard.edu/ids/view/45398647 which is 84 kb. RZuo (talk) 14:54, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Bot to upload National Archives photos

I would like a bot to transfer all of the photos in https://catalog.archives.gov/id/532388 Black and White Photographs of Marine Corps Activities in Vietnam, 1962 - 1975 to Wikimedia Commons Category:United States Marine Corps in the Vietnam War. Its more than 13,000 images, hence the need for a bot.

Is this something that Python can do? If so how do I start? Or can someone create this bot for me?

Any help gratefully appreciated. Mztourist (talk) 10:50, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

how can i add us flag to the combatent comanders section of a battle history template in wikepedia

how can i add us flag to the combatent comanders section of a battle history template in wikepedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krisshna.J.Peswani (talk • contribs) 08:31, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

IP blocked

Recently I found a blocked notice on my Commons page, telling me I was blocked for two years. The info people said it had something to do with some obscure relationship I allegedly had with Amazon, which was a complete mystery to me. After a few days, the block disappeared as mysteriously as it had appeared, and things were back to normal. Has anyone else had this experience? Sardaka (talk) 09:06, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

You only got blocked on commons one week in 2011 for "Repeated DRs after warning" globally your account was never blocked. The IP you have could belong to AWS, an amazon VPN or an other amazon service blocked because such services are often used for spamming. --GPSLeo (talk) 09:32, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Let's talk about the Desktop Improvements

Hello!

Have you noticed that some wikis have a different desktop interface? Are you curious about the next steps? Maybe you have questions or ideas regarding the design or technical matters?

Join an online meeting with the team working on the Desktop Improvements! It will take place on 17 May 2022 at 12:00 UTC and 19:00 UTC on Zoom. Click here to join. Meeting ID: 86217494304. Dial by your location.

Agenda

  • Update on the recent developments
  • Questions and answers, discussion

Format

The meeting will not be recorded or streamed. Notes will be taken in a Google Docs file. Olga Vasileva (the Product Manager) will be hosting this meeting. The presentation part will be given in English.

We can answer questions asked in English, Italian, Polish; also, only at the first meeting: Farsi, Vietnamese; only at the second meeting: Portuguese, Spanish, Russian. If you would like to ask questions in advance, add them on the talk page or send them to sgrabarczuk@wikimedia.org.

At this meeting, both Friendly space policy and the Code of Conduct for Wikimedia technical spaces apply. Zoom is not subject to the WMF Privacy Policy.

We hope to see you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 05:02, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Photo challenge March results

Parliaments: Entries • Votes • Scores
Rank 1 2 3
image
Title Eastern facade of the Capitol in La Habana, Cuba The House of Parliament Parliament. View from the Danube
Author Virtual-Pano Ermell Vi Ko
Score 16 14 8
Refraction: Entries • Votes • Scores
Rank 1 2 3
image
Title Stift in Wasserglas Krokuswiese in Glaskugel IMG 0193WI Rainbow and drops on a CD
Author ThoBel-0043 Kora27 Balise42
Score 13 13 9

Congratulations to Virtual-Pano, Ermell, Vi Ko, ThoBel-0043, Kora27 and Balise42. -- Jarekt (talk) 02:01, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Painted borders

Do we have a category for artworks with painted borders, like the above? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:06, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Category:Paintings with borders would seem to be it. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:38, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. That seems to include a lot of pictures like File:Brooklyn Museum - Bathers - Edward Henry Potthast - overall.jpg, where the border is an artefact of cropping; not painted. Perhaps it needs cleanup? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:49, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

VRT

Zdravím, OTRS už není v provozu, je někde nějaký vzorek, jak správně sepsat VRT oznámení o odsouhlasení použití souboru na Wikipedii? Aby to zase nekrachlo na slovíčkaření.

Děkuji. --Profil 1652022 (talk) 05:34, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

VRT

Hello, OTRS is no longer up and running, is there any sample how to correctly write a VRT file usage approval notice on Wikipedia? So that it doesn't crash into words again.

Thank you.
translator: Google Translate via   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 11:47, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
@Profil 1652022: Ahoj a vítej. Udělal jsem VRT/cs a označil pro vás vaše selfie {{subst:PP}}.
Hi, and welcome. I made VRT/cs and tagged your selfie {{subst:PP}} for you.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 11:47, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Uploads

After a week or so of tranquility, the uploads have stopped working again. Is it just me or has anyone else had the same problem? Sardaka (talk) 09:17, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

@Sardaka: Special:Newfiles shows 50 in the past five minutes.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 11:19, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Adding SDC metadata to vertical aerial imagery

I have uploaded some aerial imagery, taken vertically, on Commons.

I want to "warp" it, so that mapping tools know the coordinates of its four corners.

I want to add multiple "depicts" statements, with coordinates, to note the various features seen.

I am sure we have tools to do these things, but I can't recall where. Am I mistaken? I have searched using obvious terms, and looked at pages like Commons:Georectification and Commons:SDC, to no avail,

Where are these tools, and why is it so hard to find them? What could we do better? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:11, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Also, is there a tool to convert (old-style) "notes" to SDC? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Apparently, the answer to the former, as detailed at Commons:Wikimaps, is to replace {{Information}} with {{Map}}, then use the big blue button that it generates. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:42, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

The other - excellent - tool, for locating "depicts" (P180) and "named place on map" (P9664) using "relative position within image" (P2677) is User:Lucas Werkmeister/Wikidata Image Positions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:35, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Smartify

I don't want to complain too much; having the files brought over here is useful. But Smartify uploads tend to be scaled down a fair bit from the original. Take File:Anonymous_-_Deans_Yard_-_B1977.14.16416_-_Yale_Center_for_British_Art.jpg. Is it great Smartify uploaded it for us? Yes. Is it the full resolution? No. The upload from Smartify is 1920 pixels wide, if we go to the source that SmartifyBot linked, https://collections.britishart.yale.edu/catalog/tms:33245 , and just click on the download button, we can see one that's 5390 pixels wide is trivially available.

Especially for the Yale collections, it'd be really useful to have a bot to just go in and grab the largest JPEG available (not any TIFF, I'd say: File:William Byrne - Carnarvon Castle - B1977.14.14573 - Yale Center for British Art.jpg had a TIFF with much, much lower resolution than the biggest JPEG) Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:25, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Rename request, can only be done by an admin

Hi, this request is open for a while. I doubted if I should decline it the first time, because it was all Dutch, but it was also 'uploaders request' (criterion 1). Now the requester self thinks like that, but I cannot rename it to the Dutch name now, and it's 15 days ago, see: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Invoice_Jan_Perquin.png Thanks in advance, - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 14:34, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

@Richardkiwi: We mere mortals have to wait for Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rekening Jan Perquin.png to be closed as delete by an Admin. Why is "(talk)" in your sig twice?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Done. Please check. Also User:Richardkiwi, please add categories to File:Rekening Jan Perquin.png. - Jmabel ! talk 15:53, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
@Jmabel: Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:08, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Suggested new gadget

I've suggested a new gadget over here, and any community commentary is welcome. ···日本穣 Talk to Nihonjoe 15:26, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Media may be deleted - what to do

Hi! Norwegian contributor with limited technical experience here. I have received a warning that a picture I uploaded may be deleted, due to unclear copyright status. I did my very best when uploading this picture, which I have taken myself. The bot warning me now, have written a nice "how to", but I'm afraid I still don't understand how to do it right. I would really like to do as suggested, but I don't understand where to insert the right tags.

"If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)"

Anybody out there who could help me in the right direction, please? Would really appreciate it! Link to the warning here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:EllenPaulsen

In the preview I can see my question is already answered by auto. But I really still don't understand where to put the text, and how I copy it correctly with links and all. I'm so sorry, this is new to me.

Thanks! --EllenPaulsen (talk) 12:04, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

@EllenPaulsen: Hi, and welcome. In your upload, you specified "Permission= Free Art License 1.3 (FAL 1.3)" as plaintext. Above, you mentioned "{{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}}" and "{{PD-self}}" as active templates (without code or nowiki tags or quotes), and Andy was kind enough to defang them for you here using code and nowiki tags. The copyright tag which you seemed to like at first is {{FAL-1.3}}; you may use that copyright tag (without "t2|") as an active template in the licensing section or after "Pemission=".   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:01, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for this, Jeff G.. I have tried my very best, and hope I did it right this time. Could you please take a look, and see if it's good enough to remove the delete-warning? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:DUGG_konsert_Gamla_16102021.jpg Thank you, and I really appreciate it! --EllenPaulsen (talk) 06:34, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
@EllenPaulsen Looks good now, I have removed the warnings and some other unnecessary stuff from File:DUGG konsert Gamla 16102021.jpg. Thanks! El Grafo (talk) 09:00, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, appreciate it! --EllenPaulsen (talk) 06:23, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

File:La-jacquerie-de-lalo-et-coquard-gallica-bnf.jpg

I can't read the signature on this file. It's been on here a while, claiming it had an unknown artist despite the signature in the lower left; can't help but feel we can do better than that, even if it's a somewhat odd signature. Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:18, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

[3] has it as "M. Parys", which seems plausible. I couldn't find any additional info on that person. I can't help but wonder if it's a pseudonym ("Monsieur Paris"?). – BMacZero (🗩) 15:31, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
The text caption at the bottom of the image says "Dessin de M. Parys"/Drawing by Monsieur Parys. Looking online for "Dessin de M. Parys" shows that we have several images on Commons with the same credit line and signature. Also, Journal général de l'instruction publique et des cultes, Volume 33[4] suggests there was a M. Van Parys in 1864 who was a professor of drawing. This may be the same person or a relative. From Hill To Shore (talk) 16:23, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
@From Hill To Shore: Right! That gets it a bit better. I'll put it down as {{PD-old-assumed}}, then. That also led me to Creator:A. de Parys, which does, at least, document it further, and links it if we ever discover he lived to a hundred or something. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:25, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Trap templates

It kind of annoys me that Template:CrownCopyright directs, not to, say, Template:PD-UKGov, but to a speedy delete page, despite Crown Copyright's expiry dates and changing definitions being literally the definition of the out-of-copyright clauses listed PD-UKGov. There's a bunch of trap templates out there; I think we should lose at least some of them, or turn them into a "Did you mean?" page - because not having a copyright tag will lead to deletion too, just with a warning on your talk page, and people actually looking at it. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:12, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Of the redirects to Template:Nonderivative, I'd say the following are mistaken:

Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:21, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, is there some users who can help me to make a Wikipedia Wordmark () for Crimean Tatar and Uyghur?

Wikipedia → Vikipediya ( Approved: File:Wikipedia-wordmark-crh.svg

Wikipedia → ۋىكىپېدىيە ( Approved: File:Wikipedia-wordmark-ug.svg)

And also to updated the Uyghur Wikipedia logo:

Wikipedia → ۋىكىپېدىيە

The Free Encyclopaedia → ئوچۇق ئېنسىكلوپېدىيە TayfunEt. (talk) 04:44, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Edit on a template being null, why?

Two weeks ago I edited this template, but my edit doesn't yet come into force. Its English translation shows it still works under the old algorithm. Why is this? What should I do to make my edit active? --トトト (talk) 22:42, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Uploading a file provided by a friend

If I have a file that a friend provided me directly, and he asked me to help him upload the file, what options should I choose while uploading? Since it is not downloaded from the internet or other sources.--Borueichen (talk) 15:19, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

@Borueichen: Hi, and welcome. You may upload it now as your own work, but then immediately tag it as {{subst:PP}} and have the photographer post permission on their website or social media, send it via VRT, or clarify how the sublicensing or copyright was transferred to you.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:41, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
And also immediately correct the "author" field of {{Information}}. - Jmabel ! talk 20:02, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
There seems to be a similar problem with File:Herb Robert Geranium robertianum Potawatomi State Park Wisconsin.jpg. According to the current version of the source, [5], someone else (presumably the "author's" mother) took the photo. Is this o.k. or is there something that should be done about this? --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 20:16, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
@Robert Flogaus-Faust I think it is ok and I doubt something should be done about it. Editor B (the Flickr uploader) claimed permission from his mom Ruth Everson in this edit. She could send permission via VRT.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 20:26, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
I am sorry; I somehow missed the answer and never read it before the thread got archived. Thanks a lot! --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 20:38, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
@Robert Flogaus-Faust It's not your fault he posted to the archive and didn't ping you.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 21:52, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

GSoC'22: Improving the custom picture selector

File picker showing differently pictures that have been uploaded to Commons already

The Commons Android application is the official Android application for Wikimedia Commons. The app allows authenticated users to upload pictures from their Android phone/tablet to Wikimedia Commons. The app has multiple features like uploading an image, editing categories of an image, nominating an image for deletion, nearby upload, a leaderboard based on the number and quality of uploads, an enhanced custom picture selector, and much more.

Custom Picture Selector: The app has a custom picture selector which has the ability to show the images differently which have already been uploaded while selecting images for upload. The feature indicates an already uploaded image with a Commons icon overlay, thus it's saving time and improving the user experience.

Issue: Some images are not meant to be uploaded to Commons, like family pictures, personal images, images with copyrights e.t.c. The contributors will try to avoid those images while uploading some images to the Commons app and might want to see only those images which can be uploaded to Commons.

Solution: This project solves the problem by letting users manually mark images as Not For Upload. The feature will indicate a not for uploaded image with a 🚫 overlay icon (and grey them out). There will be a button to show only uploadable images which means if the contributors turn on that button the already uploaded images and not for uploaded images will be hidden. Thus, it allows the contributor to more easily spot pictures they might want to upload.

Additional Features:

1. Bubble Scroll Bar: A bubble scrollbar will be added so that users can easily locate the picture they are scrolling for. The bubble will show the date on which the pictures were taken.

2. Enhanced full-screen mode: Fullscreen starts when the user long-press any picture in the custom image picker. For a good user experience, the full-screen mode will be enhanced such that the user can do all operations while staying in the full-screen mode. It will make the app more convenient for the user. A small overlay will be shown on the left corner of the full screen indicating whether the picture is selected or not, showing the number of selected pictures. Swipe Left/right to go from one picture to another. Swipe up to select the picture. Swipe down to immediately mark that picture as Not for upload.

Phabricator ticket: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T299748

--Ayan184 (talk) 17:55, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

@Ayan184: Thanks, but will my complaints at Commons talk:Mobile app#Deletion (and the others on that page) ever be addressed?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 18:34, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
Jeff, we just fixed one of them, it will be in the next release which is imminent. Thank you for the feedback always! Syced (talk) 01:15, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
@Syced: Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 10:53, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

I made Template:LGBT symbol

LGBT symbol Legal disclaimer
This image or video file contains a symbol that represents sexual and gender minorities, including lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender.

Use of these symbols may be subject to punishment according to applicable laws in Afghanistan, Iran, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Uganda, the United Arab Emirates, etc. In Russia, the applicable law is federal law #195-FZ.

In addition, using these symbols for the purpose of discriminating against sexual and gender minorities may be subject to punishment under anti-discrimination laws in the Netherlands, Sweden, the United Kingdom, etc. In the United Kingdom, the applicable law is the Public Order Act 1986.

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ हिन्दी ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ slovenščina ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ +/−


This template was created by looking at the state of homosexuality laws that differ from country to country.

(Don't get me wrong. I'm not gay.)

How about this?

And can we translate it into different languages?

Correction of content due to errors is welcome.

Ox1997cow (talk) 07:56, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

First impression: Compared to, say, {{Nazi symbol}} or {{Terrorism symbol}}, this is quite vague with a lot of "etc." El Grafo (talk) 09:53, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
We recently decided not to implement a template for "Z symbol" wich is problematic to use in many democracies. We should not add a disclaimer for every symbol forbidden in some oppressive states. For the purpose we have the Commons:General disclaimer. --GPSLeo (talk) 11:01, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Service: discussion on "Z symbol" at Commons:Village pump/Archive/2022/03 § Create {{Z symbol}} or not?. --El Grafo (talk) 13:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
@GPSLeo: Then, which these template have a problem?
If you think some templates have a problem, you can nominate for deletion some templates. --Ox1997cow (talk) 11:49, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikimedia Sound Logo contest discussion

Wikimedia Sound Logo contest discussion

Hello everyone,

The Wikimedia Sound Logo contest is under discussion here, and your input on the talk page is appreciated: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Sound_Logo/Contest_proposal There will also be two video conversations on Friday May 27 @11:00 UTC and Tuesday May 31 @15:00 UTC, in case you want to chat live.

Thank you!

VGrigas (WMF) (talk) 00:10, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Attribution issues and Media Viewer

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T68606

So, as you may know, there's a bug in Media Viewer, that's existed for 8 years, where if a file has more than one Creator template, or a Creator template and a text attribution to another creator, it only returns the name of the first creator as the credit. So, for example, in a Brady-Handy photograph, only the first of them will be listed on Media Viewer. On a collaboration such as File:Humanité René Philastre and Charles-Antoine Cambon - Set design for the second part of Victor Hugo's Les Burgraves, première production.jpg, you can choose whether it credits Humanité René Philastre or Charles-Antoine Cambon, but not both.

Since it's been made very, very clear that it's not going to be fixed any time soon, I think we can fix it on our end relatively easily. All we need to do is to check the input, and if it either A. has text outside of a Creator and/or Wikidata template, or B. has more than one Creator/Wikidata template, we can add the following code:

{{Information field |name= |value=See file page for creator info. |class=fileinfotpl_credit |id=fileinfotpl_credit |style=display:none; |stylevalue=display:none; |classvalue= }}

Ideally with internationalised text. I suppose there should be an override for if people want to enter the credit manually, but... let's be honest, the percentage of people that would even know about the bug so that they knew they had to fix it manually is tiny.

It's better to do it on our side, so that in the unlikely event the bug is ever fixed, we can simply pull the code out. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

This is quite frustrating. When using {{Artwork}} at least is shows "PersonX and n other authors" (example). But if you can override the default and let it show "See file page for creator info", doesn't that mean you should also be able to force it to show whatever you want, including the correct author(s)? El Grafo (talk) 14:46, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
In theory, yes. Although it might require some clever a code to strip author info from whatever Creator templates are used Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:09, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
I think the easiest way might be to add something to the base Creator template to have it return the name of the creator. Might require a certain amount of bot work to modify existing Creator templates (probably just add a mode= switch to all of them, but I think it'd work. So the credit line would just add mode=nameonly to the Creator template using lua. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:32, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Adam Cuerden, I think all you are trying to do is for the Commons templates to be broadcasting hidden metadata that will inform Media Viewer about what attribution to display. I think that can be done by improving {{Information}} template. I always considered Media Viewer as kind of broken as it usually displays nonsense matadata. Then there was hope that the code can read Structured data and not rely on noisy wikitext. However If there is some published documentation on how to set the metadata so it shows correctly in Media Viewer we can try to set it correctly. --Jarekt (talk) 04:22, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
@Jarekt: With the code I quote above, we can improve it by replacing "See file page for creator info." with a better credit line; the trick is going to be getting the better credit line. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:46, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
</nowiki> Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:45, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Adam Cuerden, {{Information}} or {{Artwork}} templates can access Wikidata items of Creator templates in the "author" field. I am just not sure if that is helpful. --Jarekt (talk) 18:55, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Let me do a code dive. It at least gives us a start. Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:56, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
This appears to be Template:Label/Module:Wikidata label, though I'm not quite sure I see how the wikidata number is extracted. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:35, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Okay. Going to do some diving. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
I can't figure out how to get a name from a Creator: template, but that does allow us to cover any case with one Creator template or less. I'll go with that and we can improve from there? Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:10, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Cannot correct the structureed Geodata of some files

I have tried to correct the structureed geodata of these files but couldn't. Why cannot some files be edited in the structured fields?

These are obviously wrong, and I want to synchronize with the data in the {{Location}} of both files, which I managed to figure out. --トトト (talk) 12:45, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@トトト That's strange indeed: the "publish changes" button for coordinates of the point of view (P1259) just won't work for me. Adding a depicts (P180) to the first file worked just fine. Does that happen for all files or just some? --El Grafo (talk) 14:11, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Not all files, of course. I think it happens in some of old files in commons. In this file (Ajiyoshi Junior High School East Cross 20131212.JPG) I had had difficulty just changing a category, but eventually I was able to do it a few days after I reported to this village pump. I have no idea if any admin or WMF people silently fixed it or no. --トトト (talk) 14:37, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Making ALT text part of Commons

User:DrMel brought this up at our latest Seattle meetup; User:Peaceray and I are helping to flesh it out.

Be My Eyes has a large network of blind and sighted people who can collaborate to create ALT texts for images. DrMel is pretty certain that this network of people would be interested in providing ALT text in a variety of languages for a large number of our images, especially those that are used in Wikipedia in the various languages. However, there would need to be a clear decision on how best to store of this content and solid support for the process of creating it (and presumably for using it in Wikipedia). We've thought some of this through, but I think it still needs to be kicked around a bit before making a proposal.

Just to be clear: ALT text is meant mainly for the blind and vision-impaired, and is distinct from the description in {{Information}} or from the SDC caption. Basically, good ALT text is intended as a substitute for being able to see the image. E.g. a short English-language ALT text for File:Kleine gedigten voor kinderen - KW 2220 G 15 - 012-012a.jpg might be "Two facing pages in an old book. On the left is a poem in Dutch; on the right is an etching. Both are entitled 'Het Medelijden' (in English, 'Compassion'). The etching shows a well-dressed roughly 8-year-old boy at left dabbing his eye with a handkerchief and, at center, a young woman with a mournful look, but not to the point of being completely distraught, sitting in a simple wooden chair. To the right of that, in the background and slightly less distinct, a man lies in a canopied bed, presumably a sickbed. There is a door open to outdoors at extreme left, and a few domestic items scattered about suggest modest domesticity, just above the level of poverty."

We think the best vehicle for storing this would be a new property corresponding to Wikidata item alt attribute (Q1067764); it could be used in SDC and also within Wikidata: for example, this could be useful on a Wikdata item referring to a work of art. (Wikidata may or may not want such a thing, since, like captions, it is not internally structured, nor is it entirely objective.) Each value for a statement using the property would require free text for the content, plus a qualifier indicating the language.

We would need tools that let someone look at the image while creating this content, possibly some system of marking these for a review process (that could be as simple as a template placing them in a subcat of Category:To be checked), and, if we want to make this really useful, a templating approach for Wikipedia (and other sister projects) analogous to en:Template:Cite Q that would allow such ALT text to be pulled in as needed, to form ALT text where the image is used.

@DrMel and Peaceray: Anything important I've left out? Anything I got wrong?

Anyone: thoughts? comments? - Jmabel ! talk 19:09, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

I do not like the Cite Q template idea. The model I want is alt-text additions to a File: page are automatically inserted in the appropriate pages. That way, wiki pages that already use a file do not need to be edited; the alt text would just appear. MW already does something similar with multilingual SVG files. When an SVG file is translated to German, then the German wiki automatically displays the German version of the SVG file. There is no need to add |lang=de to each page on the German wiki that uses the file.
MW already generates alt= text or uses an option. (mw:Help:Images#Syntax) The file included above contains alt="Kleine gedigten voor kinderen - KW 2220 G 15 - 012-012a.jpg", alt text generated from the simple filename. MW would have to implement a more involved alt-text default.
Glrx (talk) 19:59, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
It would be wonderful if we could skip the templating part, but as I understand it getting alterations made to MW is a much higher bar. If you think we could get that to happen, though, it would be great. - Jmabel ! talk 21:12, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
I think it must be part of MW for the project to be successful. It is relatively easy to get people to add translations using SVG Translate. If those people also had to edit the wiki pages, then I doubt many would do it. Automatic insertion also has the advantage of avoiding errors.
Yes, software updates to MW take forever, but alt text has a slight advantage: w:Americans with Disabilities Act. WMF does not sell anything, so it does not have to follow ADA, but it would be tough for Maryana Iskander to say ADA upgrades should not be done. Glrx (talk) 21:38, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
"does not have to follow ADA" Perhaps that's not a legal requirement, but making our content accessible is certainly a moral one. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:49, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
I guess having a piece of StructuredData that is actually being used in the wild routinely would also be a bit of a boost for the whole StructuredData initiative ... El Grafo (talk) 15:00, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
Much as I'm in favour of SDC, I don't want to promote it at the expense of damaging accessibility. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:24, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
I meant that more as a motivation for WMF to get things done properly. --El Grafo (talk) 10:14, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Your example illustrates well the deficiency of providing "alt" text without regard to context (and note that a proposal for such a property has multiple objections on this basis): In many cases, the best value might be, or include, a transcription of the poem. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:49, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing: Yes, I thought of that, but was trying to give a concise example. Since the content of a direct quotation is absolutely uncontroversial, there didn't seem much point in my transcribing that as part of a proposal. - Jmabel ! talk 13:04, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  • I very much like this idea - alt text is too often neglected. However, alt text is often contextual; what matters in an image depends on the usage. For example, consider File:Mrs Vanderbilt ElectricLight.jpg. On en:Electric Light dress, the alt text should discuss the dress in some detail, while on en:Alice Claypoole Vanderbilt the alt text would not need to describe the dress. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:51, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
    • Well, whatever we do it should be possible for a given usage to override any default ALT text from Commons, but for most images my guess is that the same well-written alt text would work for all uses. - Jmabel ! talk 22:28, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
      alternative alt text
      thumb with alternative alt text using the alt= parameter
      Alt text for a thumb can already specified manually using something like [[File:foo.jpg|thumb|description|alt=alt text]]. Just keep that functionality and let it override the default alt text specified at Commons and everything is good. Love the idea, btw. El Grafo (talk) 14:49, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
I definitely support adding alt text to files through structured data. I think using a property would not be a good way as it is not so convenient with multiple languages. As the caption is the label parameter of wikidase we maybe could use the currently not used description parameter for the alt text. --GPSLeo (talk) 14:40, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
I'd want to work with the Wikidata community on whether this should be a new property. I'm not sure if 'description' is a good choice, because one would think it should relate to the "description" in {{Information}}.
Pinging @Peaceray, DrMel please do weigh in either to say that this is the discussion you wanted or to raise any issues where I'm not bringing in your ideas. - 22:29, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
Description would only be the field in the database and how to call it from the API. The GUI of course would say alt text. --GPSLeo (talk) 06:33, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
That's messy, though, isn't it? Better introduce a new field that is properly named. API users are humans too. --El Grafo (talk) 10:10, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
I think that this is most worthwhile. As Jimmy Wales one said, Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge.[1] There is no question in my mind that extending Wiki[mp]edia capabilities to better serve our blind users would serve this purpose.
I think that having default alt= parameters for .svg files or via the MediaWiki software is a good thing, but we can make alt= more useful by extending it. It would be good to enter an alt text for each language, like a language specific label for a Wikidata item or the Captions in the File information section of the file.
There are probably a few ways this alt data could be used, but I think that creating an alternative to "Use this file on a Wiki" would be an appropriate place to start. Take File:Centre College, 1847 engraving.png for instance. Right now "Use this file on a Wiki" only generates:
  • [[File:Centre College, 1847 engraving.png|thumb|Centre College, 1847 engraving]]
It does the same for Deutsch, English, Español, et cetera, despite having captions in eight different languages.
Now imagine being able to use the different language captions, plus the alt text, for however many languages were entered. Perhaps we could come up with a way to generate something like the following.
  • For German:
    [[File:Centre College, 1847 engraving.png|thumb|alt=Ein Stich von Lewis Colilins aus dem Jahr 1847, der die Haupthalle des Center College und die Residenz des Präsidenten auf der rechten Seite zeigt, mit Bäumen um sie herum und einem Zaun im Vordergrund, der diagonal von der vorderen linken Ecke verläuft.|Gravur des Centre College, 1847]]
  • For English:
    [[File:Centre College, 1847 engraving.png|thumb|alt=An 1847 engraving by Lewis Colilins depecting the main hall of Centre College and the president's residence on the right, with trees about them and a fence in the foreground running diagonally from the front left corner.|Engraving of Centre College, 1847]]
  • For Spanish:
    [[File:Centre College, 1847 engraving.png|thumb|alt=Un grabado de 1847 de Lewis Colilins que muestra el salón principal del Center College y la residencia del presidente a la derecha, con árboles a su alrededor y una cerca en primer plano que corre en diagonal desde la esquina frontal izquierda.|Grabado de Centre College, 1847]]
Peaceray (talk) 05:32, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

References

  1. ↑ Roblimo (28 July 2004). Wikipedia Founder Jimmy Wales Responds. Slashdot. Retrieved on 28 April 2014.
@Peaceray As far as I understand, the idea behind this is to go even further than that. General-purpose alt texts in differend languages would be specified for a file at Commons, and software magic in the background would automatically deliver them whenever the image is used (unless overridden because a more specific alt text is needed for the given context). ← that was me a couple of days ago, somehow my signature got lost. --El Grafo (talk) 14:01, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm wondering if there is yet something concrete enough here to propose at Commons:Village pump/Proposals. Would a loose proposal there be the best we to proceed, or can someone suggest a different way? - Jmabel ! talk 20:05, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

I created a proposal: Commons:Village pump/Proposals#Adding alt texts through structured data --GPSLeo (talk) 18:38, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Again Pinging @DrMel, Peaceray to participate in that proposal discussion. - Jmabel ! talk 22:59, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

File moving

Yesterday there was something wrong, but it's fixed now. What's not fixed, I have it for a week now, is that during renaming there comes a little screen thay says 'Deze pagina vraagt te bevestigen dat u deze wilt verlaten - gegevens die u hebt ingevoerd, worden mogelijk niet opgeslagen' (in English: 'This page asks to confirm that you want to leave - data you receive may not be saved.'. This normally happens when a page is not fully loaded yet, but this is during renaming. When I rename a couple of files at the same time, with only a short time-difference, sometimes a renaming doesn't work, and I can still find it on the 'request page'. This pc is 'old', but this weekend I was somewhere else, and I had the same problem. Does anybody know? I work with Firefox, the latest version. It also sometimes happens when I only rename one file.- Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 16:24, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

@Richardkiwi: I got something like that, too, but not related to renaming. I chalked it up to my scripts not having fully loaded, but now I wonder. I will try to screenshot next time.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:29, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: - Ok, we will see :-). I got on error also, but it was only a few minutes (like yesterday, the pink screen). I can make a screenshot too, but it's in dutch and I have to upload it to Commons (or something). - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 16:33, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
@Richardkiwi: On my laptop, I get a dialog entitled "Leave site?" with advice "Changes you made may not be saved." and buttons "Leave" and "Cancel".   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:00, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: - Yes, I had the same. At the moment, no problems. Yesterday a few times, but it was very often in the week before 20 May. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 12:05, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
@Richardkiwi: That's good news. On my iPad, I get an untitled dialog with two buttons, "Stay On this Page" and "Leave this Page".   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:20, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Help for identifying wild orchis

Hi, I need help for identifying wild orchis

Thanks a lot! Yann (talk) 19:40, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

✓ Done on French Wikipedia. Yann (talk) 11:39, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Effect of deletion

G'day, if a file page currently displays a free image (the top image, so to speak), but there is a previous version of the file in the history which is a copyvio, if there is a deletion request for the file/page, presumably all the versions of the file are also deleted, including the current free version? The example I am referring to is here. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (talk) 07:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

That would be a revision deletion (revdel. Only one (or more but not all) revision of a file is deleted. As there is already a DR you might want to point out there, that a revdel is wanted. --C.Suthorn (talk) 07:42, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
✓ Done I also blocked UserNameSRB for edit-warring and abusing overwriting. Yann (talk) 07:47, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Of course, thanks all! Peacemaker67 (talk) 07:51, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Topic list

I've added a list of topics in the header. I wonder if this will help the discussion run more smoothly. Any comments would be welcome, thanks. Kanashimi (talk) 09:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Report on Voter Feedback from Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) Enforcement Guidelines Ratification

Hello all,

The Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) project team has completed the analysis of the feedback accompanying the ratification vote on the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines.

Following the completion of the UCoC Enforcement Guidelines Draft in 2022, the guidelines were voted on by the Wikimedian community. Voters cast votes from 137 communities, with the top 9 communities being: English, German, French, Russian, Polish, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese, Italian Wikipedias, and Meta-wiki.

Those voting had the opportunity to provide comments on the contents of the Draft document. 658 participants left comments. 77% of the comments are written in English. Voters wrote comments in 24 languages with the largest numbers in English (508), German (34), Japanese (28), French (25), and Russian (12).

A report will be sent to the Revision Drafting Committee who will refine the enforcement guidelines based on the community feedback received from the recently concluded vote. A public version of the report is published on Meta-wiki here. The report is available in translated versions on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Again, we thank all who participated in the vote and discussions. We invite everyone to contribute during the next community discussions. More information about the Universal Code of Conduct and Enforcement Guidelines can be found on Meta-wiki.

Best, Zuz (WMF) (talk) 10:23, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Moving Cabalism to Qabalah

The current Category:Qabalah redirects to Category:Cabalism. The issue is, that the Cabalism WikiMedia page was originally meant for cabals, ie secret or conspiracy groups. The page is a strange mix of both: it's linked to the en:Cabal and its cabal (Q1416414) WikiData page is mostly about cabals as well. But the content is entirely about en:Hermetic Qabalah, or non-Jewish forms of Category:Kabbalah. I tried to make some changes months ago, but I don't know enough about WikiData to make any moves so I reverted all of my edits. What is the proper way to go about taking the current content of Cabalism and changing it back to the Qabalah WikiMedia page, with links to the Hermetic Qabalah Wikipedia page? AnandaBliss (talk) 14:19, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

I have fixed several of the links in your message. I'll try to look in to this if I get time later (a bit hectic at work this week) unless someone else responds first. From Hill To Shore (talk) 15:53, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
My suggestion for sorting this out:
  1. Content should go in a new Category:Hermetic Qabalah.
  2. Category:Qabalah and Category:Cabalism should become disambiguations.
  3. Category:Kabbalah and Category:Hermetic Qabalah should each get a {{See also cat}} or other appropriate tag pointing to the other.
  4. In Wikidata, Category:Kabbalah is already correctly aligned; Hermetic Qabalah (Q1613576) should link to the new Category:Hermetic Qabalah.
  5. I've already removed the incorrect link from cabal (Q1416414).
Jmabel ! talk 18:22, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Unless anyone objects in the next 24 hours, I'll move forward on that basis. - Jmabel ! talk 18:25, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi user:Jmabel, that works for me, thanks so much! It's been bothering me for quite a while but I don't know my way around well enough yet to get it all done. AnandaBliss (talk) 20:29, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Just to add one more thing, I think that the categories Cabalistic books‎ and Cabalists‎ should be moved to Qabalistic books (or maybe Books about Hermetic Qabalah) and Qabalists, respectively, just to keep everything as consistent as possible. AnandaBliss (talk) 20:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Largely completed. User:AnandaBliss, would you please look at the remaining content in Category:Cabalism and sort it out to the proper categories? Thanks. - Jmabel ! talk 15:17, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

I've looked everything over, thanks so much! I've also moved the rest of the contents of Cabalism into Hermetic Qabalah. Should I put in a separate request for the other category name changes? AnandaBliss (talk) 15:40, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
@AnandaBliss: Ah, missed those. I'll have the delinker do those, since they are simple cat moves. - Jmabel ! talk 17:10, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks so much again!! AnandaBliss (talk) 20:23, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@AnandaBliss: you still need to empty out Category:Cabalism. This may involve creating a new category under Category:Christian mysticism specific to Christian Quabalah, but it does need to be done. These categories and images can't be left as members of a category that is now a disambiguation. - Jmabel ! talk 20:17, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Ah, thank you for the reminder, user:Jmabel! Christian Cabala (regrettably, there are 3 different spellings to remember) probably needs to exist as well. I'll get to that. AnandaBliss (talk) 22:27, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Wich cat in English?

Hi there.

I have problems while categorizing some pics of Levée de la Divatte because I don't know the exact term even in French so even in English... I don't find anything in the Commons' cats. And I'll have 300 files (or more) to upload.

This levee has many accesses to the Loire river, kind of "doors". Some of them are small accesses to stone stairs (*1) (1 meter width or less), small piers, small private or public slipways (*2) (2-3 meters), big accesses to a harbors (*3) for river barges, or to vegetable farming (*4) (famous Val-de-Loire products) or former river sand loading scales (*5) (15-20 m width). All are made to recieve a "cofferdam" (*6) in case of high flood. Each one wanted to access the bank at the foot of their home, to fish, to moor their boats (important commercial ports on the Loire, before and after the levee). Each "door" has a number (1 to 107) so I'll have to create 107 cats and they cannot be in one unique cat.

So, my question is: how do I call these "doors"?

Here some links to Streetview to see what's about:

Thanks a lot for help. lol LW² \m/ (Lie ² me...) 23:27, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Llann Wé²: I think you could make Category:Loire River access points as a subcat of Category:Loire River, or Category:Gaps in Levée de la Divatte as a subcat of Category:Levée de la Divatte. You could also make one or more subcats of Category:Marinas in France, if necessary.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 00:15, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks a lot, good idea Jeff.
I wrote almost it... but I didn't think to name them like that... It'll be a mix: cat:Loire River access points in Levée de la Divatte because this 15km levee is not the only one along the Loire.
Have a nice w-e. lol LW² \m/ (Lie ² me...) 01:59, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
@Llann Wé²: You too, and you're welcome.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 11:44, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata references do not see publication dates

File:HomicideNorthAmerica Europe3.svg includes multiple {{cite Q|...}} references. Each is displayed with "(Please provide a date or year)", even though a "publication date" is provided with all of them.  ??? Thanks, DavidMCEddy (talk) 05:32, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Two disambiguation pages or one?

cat:mia is a dab. cat:MIA is also ambiguous. should it stay as a redirect to Category:MIA letter combinations, become a dab page on its own, or redirect to cat:mia? RZuo (talk) 10:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Move file to original name

I request that Special:permalink/657140008 be fulfilled to restore the original episode name given by VOA. Thx. Roy17 (talk) 22:47, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

The original filename is the original episode name given by VOA. Roy17 (talk) 15:16, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Moving several categories from Programme spelling to Program

Several subcategories of Category:Television programmes regarding the U.S. need to be changed to American spelling. They are:

  1. Category:Television programmes from the United States
  2. Category:Logos of television programmes of the United States
  3. Category:Logos of television programmes of the United States by name
  4. Category:SVG logos of television programmes of the United States

AnandaBliss (talk) 15:19, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

 Support.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:22, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Handed off to the Delinker. - Jmabel ! talk 21:56, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Thank you, Jmabel and Jeff G.! I promise I will get to learning to do this myself. AnandaBliss (talk) 22:00, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
I can see that the "program" categories exist, is there anything else that I need to do other than move the files and subcategories over? AnandaBliss (talk) 16:43, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Hmm. My intent was that the delinker would do all the moving. It worked for two of the categories. Let me see if I can get the other two to happen. - Jmabel ! talk 16:46, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
I see: it's because there was already a redirect in the other direction. I've reversed that. Should sort itself out in the next few hours. - Jmabel ! talk 16:54, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Question - logos of wikimedia

In about a month, it will be the Hebrew Wikipedia's 19th anniversary. Normally, there is a special logo made for these occasions, and therefore, I made one. Now, my question is, how do I upload the Logo, and what License do I choose (And more importantly, where do I add the Template:Wikimedia trademark)? פרצטמול (talk) 04:11, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Is there any special procedure? Use the Upload Wizard (unless you have another favourite). Give "{{Own work}}. {{Derived from}}" as source, with the filename of the logo you used as parameter to the latter. Use the same licence template as that one, and add the trademark template in the same way. Add Category:Wikipedia logos for anniversaries and Category:Hebrew Wikipedia logo variants‎.
For derived works, I usually open the file description of the original work and copy all of it to the new description (often after upload, as the Wizard makes that complicated) in suitable chunks, and edit as needed.
–LPfi (talk) 09:04, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
@LPfi, Thanks, done in file:הצעה ללוגו 19 שנים.png, I'll change what that is needed according to the procedure you wrote. originally asked for I was warned automatically not to upload this. פרצטמול (talk) 09:57, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
by the way, this is merely a proposal, for I know at least two more proposals and none of which were chosen yet, so I don't think that Category:Wikipedia logos for anniversaries is needed yet. פרצטמול (talk) 10:03, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in the #WPWPCampaign 2022

Dear Wikimedians,

We are glad to inform you that the 2022 edition of Wikipedia Pages Wanting Photos campaign is coming up in July.

This is a formal invitation to invite individuals and communities to join the campaign to help improve Wikipedia articles with photos and contextual images.

The campaign will run from July 1 to August 31, 2022 and several communities and Wikimedia Affiliates have already indicated interest to organize the campaign in their localities. Please find your community or community closer to you to participate: WPWP2022 Campaign: Participating Communities.

The campaign primarily aims to promote using images from Wikimedia Commons to enrich Wikipedia articles that are lacking them. Participants will choose among Wikipedia pages without photos, then add a suitable file from among the many thousands of photos in the Wikimedia Commons, especially those uploaded from thematic contests (Wiki Loves Africa, Wiki Loves Earth, Wiki Loves Folklore, etc.) over the years. In this third edition of the campaign, eligibility criteria have been revised based on feedback and campaign Evaluation Reports of the previous editions. Please find more details about these changes and our FAQ here on Meta-Wiki

For more information, please visit the campaign page on Meta-Wiki.

Best,
Ammar A.
Global Coordinator
Wikipedia Pages Wanting Photos Campaign 2022.
17:38, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Is it an Robinia pseudoacacia?

The leaves look the same, but it is such a big tree. Most of the Robinia pseudoacacia are much smaller. Are the fruits correct? In other images these fruits are much more gathered together and on specific fruit branches.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:38, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

This is definitely not Robinia pseudoacacia, R. pseudoacasia has much smaller pinnate round leaves (and they are less glossy). Based on the fruits I would say that this is some unidentified Fabaceae tree. — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:14, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
It looks like a Pterocarya fraxinifolia. Do you have more photos (close up, of the bark)? Wouter (talk) 12:51, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
No, but I could visit the tree again.Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:28, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Looks like Pterocarya fraxinifolia. It was windy, so I could not get very scharp macro images. Smiley.toerist (talk) 08:58, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Lynching

If you know the history of lynching - and that's a phrase I really don't want to have to use - you'll know that accusing the victims of some awful crime is pretty standard, and usually completely spurious. File:Lynching-1889.jpg has a description that looks to buy in 100% to the accusations of the people who killed the guy. I'm just... going to delete that, unless we can put it in hellish amounts of context. Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:33, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Hey there, what other phrasing would you propose using for this file? I think the term "lynching" is easily understood and widespread. What the victim may have done might not be a crime nowadays, but it likely was at the time of the picture being taken - so it'd be the best description for the event. Unless there's some source affirming that this person did not actually commit any crimes, I don't see a reason to use a different term. It doesn't aim to attack the individual shown either - the description is written neutrally, and he's described as a victim. -- Aimarekin (talk) 14:07, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
See en:Lynching of George Meadows: They just killed someone who had the same skin color as the rapist/murderer. The victim begged them not to, because she could not identify him. The next day the sheriff decided he was innocent. The text Adam removed was:

George Meadows, "murderer & rapist," lynched on scene of his last alleged crime.

That uses quotation marks, but without knowing the story behind this, these can mean a couple of different things. I have linked the Wikipedia article now - that's probably better than trying to tell the whole story in the file description. El Grafo (talk) 14:27, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
I've also removed the file from Category:Criminals from the United States, as it seems quite clear that he is one of several victims here. --El Grafo (talk) 14:31, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
There's also File:George Meadows, murderer & rapist, lynched on scene of his last crime LCCN2012646363.jpg and File:George Meadows, murderer & rapist, lynched on scene of his last crime LCCN2012646363.tif that need to be dealt with. Already fixed at source [6]. --El Grafo (talk) 14:36, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Ech.... Stuff you find while trying to go through POTD stuff on en-wiki. (Well, by way of trying to figure out why a file was on the bad image list.) Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:24, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

So we're committing historical revisionism with respect to information provided by the Library of Congress, while at the same time elsewhere on the project we refuse to address obvious factual inaccuracies attributed to them because, by golly, they're the Library of Congress and how could they possibly be wrong about anything? Meh. Does the work you're doing on en-wiki ever point you in the direction of WP:NOTADVOCACY or WP:RGW? Too many people are trying to parrot Wikipedian agendas over here instead of merely being concerned about curating data, and there's tons of work to do in that regard.RadioKAOS (talk) 06:07, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Struggle to get a photo deleted

I have tried several times to get this foto deleted: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sogndal-Raufoss_310720_Igoh_Ogbu-1.jpg

Simple reasons: 1) It was uploaded by mistake 2) It's not my photo 3) It's in violation with the license and is a copyright infringement. Please advice what I can do to fix this. I have thousands of quality images uploaded here and this is, to my recollection, my very first deletion request. This whole process has not been a great experience. --Bep (talk) 17:51, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

  • @Bep: You were asked directly, "Are you the photographer of this photo? Are you the photographer of the other photos of the series? If there is some difference with this photo and others of the series making them ok for free licenses but this one is not, could you please explain what it is?" You never answered. - Jmabel ! talk 18:17, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
(After edit conflict) Looking through the history at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sogndal-Raufoss 310720 Igoh Ogbu-1.jpg you have probably alienated some other users by being evasive and offering confusing answers. There is at least one comment there from someone who said they would !vote delete as a courtesy if you gave them a clear explanation, but you didn't respond (at least not on that page).
To stand a chance of deletion here, you will need to give a clear explanation of what happened. This is one of a series of images from an event that you claim to have made and released here under a free licence. Why is this one not your image when the others are? From Hill To Shore (talk) 18:27, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
From looking at the (kept) DR for the cropped version of the image I assume, that Bep wants to have this file deleted, because them strongly dislikes the cropped version (that might be deleted as COPYVIO, if the original file was deleted). --C.Suthorn (talk) 19:45, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Note: I've bought up a similar image which had been deleted as Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#File:Sogndal-Raufoss 310720 Daniel Eid-1.jpg. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:12, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
  • The problem appears to be that every rationale for deletion contradicts actual facts about the image. Rationale includes: "It's not my photo" despite the EXIF data showing it is. "It's in violation with the license" the license is valid. "copyright infringement" all usage is in compliance with the license it was released under. Maybe they are angry because someone cropped it, an the credit for the crop goes to someone else. If that is the actual problem, there is an easy solution. -RAN (talk) 21:54, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

All of this makes me want to sell all my camera gear. Thank you all for taking that hobby away from me. --Bep (talk) 22:51, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Photographs by Thomas Patrick Norton II by user:Racconish

The DR contains a number of fotos from the archive of Thomas Patrick Norton II and is not about copyright, not about personalit rights, but "out of scope".

I could argue that the fotos are in scope, because there is an section with the works of TPN II in wikisource and the fotos in the DR will sooner or later be added to that section of wikisource - but will not mention that.

Instead I say that "out of scope" should be dropped nearly completely. For years the InstantCommons extension for MediaWiki-Wikis exists, is promoted by WMF and used by hundreds of thousends of wikis that use the WMF MW software. A media file that may be out of scope is nearly always in scope in thousends of MW wikis.

Furthermore WMF/WMDE is turning Wikipedia/Commons with the project picsome / Curated Commons into an universal free stockfoto service (https://www.wikimedia.de/projects/picsome/). Nothing can be out of scope. C.Suthorn (talk) 06:57, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

this is more of a user problem. take a look at another nonsense batch DR by this user. he never gives anything coherent to support his nominations. RZuo (talk) 09:09, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
The user in question is an admin. And them is not the only user requesting out of scope deletions. --C.Suthorn (talk) 09:47, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
desysop is appropriate, as this user's behaviour clearly shows he is not willing to contribute and cooperate. look at the response at 10:21, 30 May 2022 below, his attitude says he doesnt care. he makes no effort at all to explain how he thinks the policies he quotes apply in his DR. in fact, his DR are clearly not in accordance with those policies. RZuo (talk) 11:29, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
i just realised, that's the same user behind these "complete bollocks": Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Photos from Parlamentul Republicii Moldova Flickr stream. RZuo (talk) 11:58, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Currently, Commons:Project scope is our official policy. — Racconish 💬 10:21, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
It is. Category:20th-century family portrait photography doesn't seem to have too much content. Do you argue the category is out of scope? Do we not want coloured photos of families in New Jersey in the 1950s (you never answered that argument in the discussion)? I assume we do want to document amateur photography; there is no shortage of recent photos (although not all relevant categories are well-populated), but for photos before the digital era we should be very careful not to delete too much.
At least one of the files in the request is in use at Wikipedia (and was at time of filing the request), so in scope by definition. Didn't you check usage?
–LPfi (talk) 11:43, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
"Currently, Commons:Project scope is our official policy." Yes. Yes, it is indeed. And it says unambiguously that images that are in use on other projects are in scope. Yet, several of the images you nominated in that DR are - as you acknowledge there - in use on Wikidata. You might like to explain why you are acting blatantly against what you know to be "our official policy". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:09, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
  • I also find problematic the wording in Commons:Scope "Examples of files that are not realistically useful for an educational purpose: Private image collections ". It is often used in debates for deletion, ignoring the list of examples because no list can contain all examples. Every image uploaded by a user from their own camera is uploading images from their "private image collections". My series of local churches and my series of local cemeteries are all from my "private image collections" and are not wanted according to scope. This really should be reworded to remove the phrase "private image collections" and just include "private party photos, photos of yourself and your friends, your collection of holiday snaps and so on." Even "holiday snaps" is problematic if I take images of churches and cemeteries while on vacation, they appear to be not wanted by Commons. As worded my trip would have to be dedicated to the purpose of taking images and not involve any vacation activities or be taken on a holiday. I imagine most images taken outside of one's home area are taken while on vacations/holidays. --RAN (talk) 20:33, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
My series of local churches and my series of local cemeteries are all from my "private image collections" and are not wanted according to scope - ??? - I think I haven't seen this case, but if you were told that your images of churches and cemeteries were out of scope, there must have been some misunderstanding, mistake or a really wrong interpretation of COM:SCOPE, as such objects are basically always clearly in scope. You can always use images of local churches or cemeteries for articles etc. about that location. There are also many educational uses outside of Commons for such images. Gestumblindi (talk) 08:13, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Regarding the sentence "Private image collections, e.g. private party photos, photos of yourself and your friends, your collection of holiday snaps and so on" - I think this needs to be interpreted according to its spirit, not literally. It certainly doesn't mean that photos taken on vacation/holidays are out of scope just for that reason; Commons certainly has a lot of valuable, excellent photos of important buildings etc. probably taken on holidays. What the sentence means is, I think, "holiday snaps" that focus on the activities of you and your friends, especially if they are in the pictures. Though over time, even such photos may gain historical value... like, I think, no one would doubt that photos that show how people spent their holidays in, say, the 1920s, are interesting and potentially of educational use now. Gestumblindi (talk) 08:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Remember if you make enemies, they will use the wording to nominate your images for deletion, as a form of harassment. That is why it should be reworded, exact wording matters. Saying no to "private image collections" makes it sound like you only want "public image collections", like those released by archives. --RAN (talk) 04:31, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
  • I also find problematic the wording in Commons:Project scope "Must not contain only excluded educational content." It is so poorly worded with a double negative that it is incomprehensible. An explanation is given as to what it means: "no news" and "no text" images, and then a second explanation that contradicts no-news, with yes news, I have had public domain obituaries deleted because of the no-news rule. Oddly Wikisource demands that Commons keep an image of all news articles transcribed there, so they can be compared when transcribed. --RAN (talk) 03:54, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Can we reword this section so that it doesn't have to be explained three times with contradictions and double-negatives. --RAN (talk) 23:56, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
  • I think pictures of non-notable people should be treated the same way as we do COM:PENIS: nothing is inherently in scope or out of scope. Rather, we should lean towards keeping images that have something unique going for them, and deleting images that are no different from countless others in the same category. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:06, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
I also have a rule, that we should have as many images in a category as we have for the categories "cats" and "dogs" before we say we already have too many. We have over 5,000 images of cats and dogs. --RAN (talk) 04:31, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
  • "Non-notable" has different meanings in each project, in Commons and Wikipedia, it tends to mean famous-people. At wikidata, just that a reliable source has provided enough information to create an entry for them. --RAN (talk) 00:00, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
    Yes, Wikidata counts as in-use = inherently in-scope. I'm referring to images that are not in use. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:39, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
    • The problem here is – as with sexual images – that there are many people more concerned about not having too many than to have the relevant categories populated with good images. Look at Category:Birthday parties in Germany – is this really the best we can do? We need more family albums pictures, even contemporary ones. Anybody nominating a holiday shot for deletion should point at a well-populated category including images that make the nominated one redundant (for each main aspect of the shot). Contemporary holiday shots with poor descriptions should mostly be deleted, as we would get drowned in them, but ones with decent descriptions should definitely be kept. I' hope for something like "Two 17-year old high school friends from the UK on their first Interrail trip, in 2016, at Piazza San Marco of Venice (selfie)", but much less would do. –LPfi (talk) 08:50, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 Comment I closed as Kept Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by RZuo. These are professional quality fashion images, so clearly in scope. I also think that the deletion of Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Photos from Parlamentul Republicii Moldova Flickr stream is a mistake. Images tagged as public domain by an official Flickr account should be kept. Feel free to ask for undeletion. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:19, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
  • I see two items of concern here. First, we've been headed down a slippery slope for a while now indulging editors who believe that we should only parrot "notable" subjects as defined by Wikidata and/or Wikipedia, without regard to what COM:SCOPE actually says. For instance, I would be interested in building the poorly-populated tree underneath Category:Local politicians. You're saying I shouldn't bother because Wikipedia believes the vast majority of local politicians aren't notable? Second, I see the DR in question has to do with RAN. It's obvious to me he's using Commons as a platform for his private genealogy project and has no qualms about bending the rules to achieve those aims. As mentioned in another DR, take a look at File:John Howard Lindauer in the University of Alaska Anchorage yearbook in 1976.jpg and File:John Howard Lindauer in 1976 (background removed).png. RAN's obsession with Lindauer extends to repeatedly referring to him by his full name, even though EVERYONE else refers to him as simply John Lindauer. That's beside the point, though. The photo from which those two files were derived was taken in 1983 (see page 9). He stated it was taken in 1976 and sourced to a nonexistent publication in order to claim it was public domain. Despite how prolific he is on this project, he appears to have nothing to say in response. Nonsense like this is causing me to be immediately suspicious of his contributions.RadioKAOS (talk) 07:02, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
  • If you are expecting someone to respond, ping them or leave a message on their talk page. I did address the issue, at the image: "John Howard Lindauer said this image was taken when he was dean of the University of Alaska in 1976. Subsequent research by User:RadioKAOS shows that the image appears in the 1983 Alaska State Legislature directory. Either Lindauer misremembered the date, or he recycled an older image for the 1983 directory. Either way the image is in the public domain." I believe I found the 1976 image he was referring to, it was published in an Alaska newspaper, and he is wearing a different tie. Is this an "obsession", or do we all contribute what is of interest to us? The train guy uploads images of trains and the church guy uploads images of churches, and everyone contributes images of cats and dogs. None are obsessed, just contributing in their area of interest, which is the entire concept of crowdsourcing information. I am also accused of "bending the rules to achieve [my] aims." Either I am abiding by the rules of Wikidata/Commons notability or I am not, which is it? --RAN (talk) 20:05, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

freedom of panorama in the US: paintings on buildings

Hi, newbie here doing some research about FoP. I've understood that freedom of panorama in the US only applies to buildings, which do not include other 3D arts and 2D art. However according to Leicester v. Warner Bros., paintings on the exterior of buildings are integral parts of the buildings, thus included in the FoP. Is it safe to say that those paintings, murals and graffitis are with FoP so suitable for Commons (talking only about paintings right on the buildings, not about posters or separate paintings which are not parts of buildings)? Taking the mural in Quebec City for example, if this were located in the US and within time period of copyright protection, would this mural still be under FoP in the US because it's an integral part of the building? Thanks --Suiren2022 (talk) 01:36, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2022/05&oldid=670216146"