User talk:Bryan/archive/2007/05

Bot request

Hi Bryan, any interest in helping out with a bot? See here. --MichaelMaggs 16:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Error

Can you nuke this? I don't know wtf happened. Thanks. Quadzilla99 16:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Vertalen naar nl

Hey Bryan,

Mochten er nog meer pagina's zijn die naar het nl vertaald moeten/mogen worden, gooi ze even op mijn overlegpagina: ik vind het wel leuk om dat tijdens mijn slaperige ochtenden (voordat ik moet werken) te gaan doen. Ik snap dat het er erg veel zullen zijn, maar zoals bij bv First Steps, wil ik graag even wachten totdat de nieuwe procedure in het engels al beter beschreven staat. Verder heb ik nog niet zo'n zicht op wat nou wel of niet wenselijk is om te vertalen, vandaar dat ik de vraag ff bij jou neerleg.

Grz, Ciell 10:25, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Flickr

Ok, but the photo of the Koran calligraphy I've uploaded was already available on Commons here. I've just resized and re-uploaded it under a different name. --Nyo 19:44, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

CC 3.0

I don't think closing that discussion with no-consensus is a good idea (though moving it to a subpage is sensible). Ultimately, it does need a resolution one way or the other, and a no-consensus decision on Commons leaves the door open for other projects to decide as they want to accept or reject. If we eventually decide against it, that means we might end up with a chunk of free images we will have no use for. For example, a CFD of Category:Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 images is hard to justify when Commons hasn't actually rejected it.

At the same time, it is clear there is no consensus. I think the best thing to do would be to create a page at Commons:Licensing/Creative Commons 3.0 summarising the debate and our current position. An accurate summary of both sides of the debate would be advantageous. Our current position is clearly that we reject the license due to the moral rights concerns, but we may well change our position. This debate should keep going IMO until it has a resolution, whatever it may be..--Nilfanion 09:08, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

molens geffen

Bryan,

Je poste dit commentaar in de kroeg. "Ik geloof dat een tijdje geleden daar over besloten is. Ik heb echter geen idee welke van de twee het moet zijn"

Als het over de molens gaat, heb ik de juiste foto nu opgeladen. Als je dit commentar anders hebt bedoeld, dan graag een reactie.

webwolf

Question

I don't really like userboxes, is there a way I can add myself to the cat without a userbox? Like entering [[Category:Trusted users]] or some other hidden cat tag on my user page? Quadzilla99 19:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Ty. Quadzilla99 19:54, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Thorpe pic

Can you help me crop and clean up this pic? It's desperately needed over on en. It's some kind of weird file that I can't edit, I can't even get it to display on my computer using Windows picture or Media center and had trouble uploading it. I'm not sure if you're aware of the Thorpe fiasco but if you have time/interest see from here down, it's on FAR and one issue is that it has no pic. Quadzilla99 04:54, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

To clarify I talked the flickr user into sharing so that thread doesn't relate to the flickr pic in question. Quadzilla99 05:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Ty. Quadzilla99 17:04, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Glasfaser_Roving.jpg

Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --Siebrand

Image:Polyamidjacke

Hello, the copyright you can see in the description: "Image may be scaled down and subject to copyright".--Ryj 14:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Michelle_Branch.jpg appears to be (now ?) nc-nd

This image may have changed between being reviewed and now - but the link indicated shows it as nc-nd. What should happen ? Megapixie 01:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Why have you erased some photos?

Bryan: You have erased a bunch of photographs I had uploaded. Some of them, effectively, I got from a page of the city of Morelia, and probably have a problem of copyright, but others I took myself. You deleted one of the Corregidora Stadium, and the Morelos Stadium, that are public places, and I don't understand why, because I took them by myself. Can you explain me? I hope you don't delete all the photos I upload if they are fair. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gabriel monarca (talk • contribs) at 16:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Riots 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Dutch licence information

Hello Bryan, please have a look at Special:Contributions/Ralphitz. He uploaded older and younger images without source information, but give licence information in dutch (which i cant understand). Examples are: Image:Moerdijkspoorbruggen.jpg, Image:Keizersveerbrug oud.jpg or Image:Hofpleinstationvoorwo2.jpg. The images are tagged PD and Copyrighted free use. Thank you. --GeorgHH 13:15, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Uncle bush

Ten Wikipedians anywhere countries upload this image in own user sites --Starscream 22:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia projects are no place for your personal (political) agenda. The Wikimedia projects do not benifit from this image in any way, so I have deleted it a third time. Uploading this file again will be seen as vandalism and action will be taken in that case. Siebrand 00:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Commentaar op foto's

Betreffende commentaar Panoramavrijheid: In de beschrijving werd letterlijk na de eerste foto gevraagd over het hoe-en-wat over deze licentievoorwaarden. Ik ben eenmaal maar een normale burger, niet gespecialiseerd in (auteurs)rechten, en moet me zien te redden in een oerwoud van bureaucratische regelgeving. Hoewel enkele foto's afkomstig zijn van RWS (en daar dus op gelicenceerd kunnen worden), sommigen uit perioden komen waarvan de auteursrechten behoorden aan iemand met een overlijdensdatum langer dan 70 jaar geleden, plus enkele foto's van eigen archief afkomstig zijn, merk ik op dat de schoonveeg-campagne vóór beantwoording van mijn vraag al heeft plaatsgevonden. De beantwoording op mijn vraag heeft tevens erg lang op zich laten wachten. Dat heeft mij een set-back bezorgd waardoor ik geenszins meer de energie wil vrijmaken de voor u juist zijnde licenties te zoeken. Maar ook dit zal aan onontroerde ogen gericht zijn.

Betreffende commentaar Image:Vennenbos.jpg, Image:Centerparcs bouwaankondiging.jpg en Image:Spijkenisserbrug wide.jpg. Zoals benoemd staat is dit eigen werk. Blijkbaar wordt mijn integriteit betwist terwijl ik immer vragen stel bij onzekerheden. Voor uw duidelijkheid: de opnamebron is een super8/Hi8-film waarvan de oorspronkelijke auteur toebehoort aan mijn naaste familie en waarvan ik de originele bronnen van bewaar. Ik verzoek deze te bewaren.

Hierbij sluit ik tevens mijn bijdragen aan Wikimedia Commons geheel bij af.

Hallo Ralphitz. Jammer dat je ervoor kiest om te stoppen met bijdragen aan Wikimedia Commons. Het is belangrijk om je bewust te zijn van de doelstelling van de projecten van Wikimedia. We proberen alleen echt vrije informatie te verzamelen en beschikbaar te stellen. Het komt vaak voor dat wet- en regelgeving in bepaalde landen ervoor zorgt dat informatie of afbeeldingen niet vrij te licenseren is, terwijl je, zoals jij hebt gedaan, daar wel op eenvoudige wijze kennis van kunt nemen en die kan reproduceren. Wij zijn ons bewust van al deze moeilijkheden, maar het is een fundament van de vrijheid die we voorstaan: we respecteren wet- en regelgeving in de betrokken landen. Het is betreurenswaardig dat een bijdrage die jij in goed vertrouwen hebt gedaan daarom verwijderd moet worden, maar het is niets persoonlijks naar jou toe, het kan eenvoudigweg niet behouden blijven omdat het wettelijk niet vrij te gebruiken is.

Daarenboven zijn drie aanvullende voorwaarden van kracht op dit project. In de beschijving van een afbeeldingen moeten aanwezig zijn bron, auteur en licentie. Voor zover ik kan zien, ontbraken twee of drie van deze voorwaarden bij reeds verwijderde afbeeldingen. In het geval je in staat bent om deze aan te leveren, is het mogelijk om verwijderde afbeeldingen te herstellen. Je kunt een totaaloverzicht van door jou toegevoegde bestande hier inzien.

"P.s. de auteursrechten van een foto gemaakt door een fotograaf van een werk dat zich in het publieke domein liggen bij de fotograaf. Groet, Siebrand 07:17, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Zoals Siebrand al duidelijk heeft gemaakt kunnen wij alleen volledig vrije afbeeldingen accepteren. Dit is een fundamenteel principe van Commons. Het verwijderen van afbeeldingen waar nog auteursrechten op zitten hoort daar helaas bij. Op deze manier beschermen wij onszelf en u als uploader tegen juridische stappen van de mogelijke auteursrechthouder. -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

CBMT

why you ereased the pics from http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBMT ? I get them from the publication at http://www.meaningfulmachines.com/press/MM%20-%20Context%20Based%20MT%20-%20AMTA%202006%20final.pdf

and they are only "words" I could remake them with any wordprocessor —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hildor (talk • contribs) at 15:42, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Maps of Almeria

Hoi, DRBOT heeft mijn info over de Maps of Almeria op Commons:Deletion requests/2007/05/10 verwijderd. Dit zal wel zijn omdat ik het op de verkeerde plaats had gezet omdat het om incomplete deletion requests gaat. Toch is het een discussie die nog niet was afgerond (of gestart eigenlijk ;)). Kan je me vertellen waar ik het verhaal beter kwijt kan? Alvast dank. Deadstar 08:59, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Dank Deadstar 07:26, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Flickr thingy

"You're excact username" at the bottom of the page should be changed to "Your exact username". ;) Yonatan ^talk 20:12, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

You might also wanna link to the user page of the user name who uploaded the pic here:

"This image was originally posted to Flickr was uploaded to Commons using Flickr upload bot on 00:57, 17 May 2007 (UTC) by Yonatanh. On that date it was licensed under the license below."

s/Yonatanh/[[User:Yonatanh|Yonatanh]]

Yonatan ^talk 00:58, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Done. -- Bryan (talk to me) 13:52, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Flickr uploader

Hello Mr B. The flickr upload bot was unable to upload [1]. I guess it is because the photo for some weird reason is flagged as “adult content,” and that one thus has to be logged in to be able to view it. Can you make your bot log in to Flickr? --Kjetil r 10:36, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

VLVC_icons

Note: vist
--D-Kuru 21:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Flickr uploader

I was using the Flickr uploader to upload Image:Smooth Dachshund cream.jpg (tokenID 84). It allowed me to get that far, and then said that my upload limit had been exceeded. Is that normal? Should I just wait until an hour passes and then continue the upload? The last time I reached my limit it stopped me before I could upload anything. --Pharaoh Hound 21:48, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. (By the way, I love the tool.) --Pharaoh Hound 17:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your work on the Flickr uploader bot. It is truly a great creation. It works LOTS faster than manually uploading, even on a 384k upload speed connection. It is light years faster for dialup people. Let the bots and servers do the work at very high speed! Royalbroil ^T : C 15:50, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I also enjoy using the tool. Easy ro use, avoides mistakes, doesn't involve my hard-disk, etc. Thanks, DGtal 06:44, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you all for your compliments. I'm of course also open for critique and other suggestions, -- Bryan (talk to me) 16:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Template:Featured picture

Hey Bryan,

Regarding the 'nomination' link on this template - some nominations are at Commons:Featured picture candidates/ and some are at Commons:Featured pictures candidates/. It is quite annoying.

Would you be able to run a bot that would move the pages to standardise on either one name or the other? Leaving redirects behind, of course.

ta --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 05:00, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Easy to fix. I'll let a bot run over it in the weekend. -- Bryan (talk to me) 16:15, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Deadmin stuff

Hi Bryan - just wanted to point you towards a connected thread on Fred's talk page that you may wish to read (if you haven't!). I do think he has a point - if they just come back and take 5 actions, what is the difference between that & saying "I want to keep the tools"? Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:58, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Bad SVGs

Hi, and thanks for your feedback at the Village Pump.

I had a bit of free time today, so I wrote a simple PHP script to check for embedded bitmap images in SVG files. You can try it out here if you like.

If you send me the list of SVG images then I should be able to scan through them all. Do I need to set up a bot account first? -- Sakurambo 12:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Fuck.jpg

Are you sure that you wanted to give that name to image? ;) Herr Kriss 15:05, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Flickr upload EXIF info

Hi, I just used your superb Flickr upload tool to add an image of Tiger Woods (Image:TigerWoodsTPC2007.jpg). The Flickr web page has EXIF information listed, although the "Large" version (the biggest available) does not seem to contain it, and therefore neither does the image uploaded to Commons. I'm not too familiar with Flickr, but does this mean the original was uploaded with EXIF info but is just not available for download? If so, I was wondering if in these situations there was a way to capture the EXIF information from Flickr and add it to the image during upload. It seems a shame to lose that information since it's available. If not, is there a way I could get the EXIF info from Flickr in a form where I could add it manually? Carl Lindberg 17:01, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I ended up playing for a bit... if you have exiftool installed on the toolserver, that can be used to manipulate EXIF and other tags somewhat. However I think it's close to impossible to map anything other than standard EXIF tags from the Flickr data without the original image (and even that was not straightforward), and lots of the information can't be copied even if you could, so it ends up being not nearly as complete as Flickr's data. I got something sort working to apply some of the tags to those particular images, but I don't think it would work generically. I'd hate to lose the info though, as it is sometimes helpful. Do you think it would be better to go ahead and upload a new version of the image with a number of the EXIF attributes copied over, copy the tag info onto the image description page as text, or just let it be? Carl Lindberg 05:49, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Flickr upload error

Tried uploading Image:Library of Congress ceiling columns Washington DC.jpg (tokenId: 179) using bot. Got "An unspecified error occured". Decided to give you feedback! Thanks (great tool BTW - and thanks for that). Man vyi 17:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll double-check spaces next time. Thanks! Man vyi 17:24, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Question

• Image:Henninger_flats.jpg
• Image:Henninger_trailhead.jpg
• Image:Castro_Peak_Tower.jpg

I'm working with the author. What licenses are acceptable? --Evrik 18:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Second life garden.jpg

Maybe the uploader shouldn't remove the GFDL tag, but I think that he should remove the {{self|}} template, because - from my point of view - you aren't the copyrightholder ("I, the copyright holder of this work,"), because - even if you created the caracter and the garden, you haven't written the script.
What I wrote is not really that what I want to say; I'll try to rewrite it.
--D-Kuru 21:26, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair Use

Thanks for the clarification. I wasn't aware that we could also upload images directly on Wikipedia:FR. I'll try this.

MaDelle 09:43, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion: edit summaries for DRBot additions of image deletion warnings to user talk pages

Hi. Thank you for providing DRBot. It does its job well. However, would it be too much to ask of it to provide edit summaries for its additions of image deletion warnings to user talk pages? I write specifically of its emulation of "instruction 3" ("Notify the item's uploader or the creator of the page by placing the following code on their talk page") from {{Delete}} on behalf of the lazy, such as in this edit. A summary of "[[:Image:Luis Buñuel.jpg]]" or "{{subst:idw|Image:Luis Buñuel.jpg}}" would be enough. Thanks!   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 05:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

(I'll answer here; maybe more people are interested in this) Well probably. The problem is that the bot uses "section=new" to add a comment to a user talk page. The problem with this, is that if the bot adds a summary, it's added as a level two heading, == heading ==. I could fix that by downloading the entire talk page, but that gives more bandwidth use and a chance of edit conflicts. I'll think about it. I was going to rewrite the bot anyway in the next few weeks/months. -- Bryan (talk to me) 16:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for answering here, I dislike fractured conversations. It appears that the bot is already adding a level two heading, ==Image:Luis Buñuel.jpg== in the case of this edit already mentioned above.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 04:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that the level two heading is incorporated in the {{Idw}} template. -- Bryan (talk to me) 12:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Euro coins

Ouch. So we can't even have common faces of the euro on Commons? Because that's what I understood from the link they provided... Thanks for the info :). PatríciaR ^msg 13:12, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bridge_string_thru_body.jpg

Hi There, My Name's Paul Cooper from London, England. I took this picture of the shecter guitar - and am happy for it to be on Wikipedia for a reference.

Any questions please feel free to contact me, either through the stock photo site that the image was taken from or via my email address.

Paul,

I have contacted the user by email. -- Bryan (talk to me) 12:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Image deletion

I've restored the image Jennifer Walcott-D.jpg. It was deleted because "the category was unknown". However, I distinctly remember placing it under the following catagories. GFDL | CC-BY-SA-2.5,2.0,1.0 | Self-published work. I was even given a reminder by someone because I forgot the licensing which I subsequently did. Nevertheless, if I did forget to put it under catagories, I should've been informed of it prior to its deletion. --Dysepsion 22:23, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Image deletion AHWatercolor ...

In this case I wouldn't care about Hitlers rights ... so {{PD-ineligible}} or {{Copyrighted free use}}applies. Doesn't it? --Saippuakauppias 14:48, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Unsubstantiated vote

I have some questions for you. --Ghirlandajo 11:07, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Summary suggestion for Flickr upload bot

Hi there, wonderful bot you got there. Could you expand the summary it uses, to include the name of the user who requested the upload as well? I think it will be useful to try to catch users who may be using it to upload material that is unnecessary or incorrect (in example, images that are obviously copyright violation but nevertheless tagged as CC in Flickr). It would also be useful to add the name of the Flickr user (if people upload images from a Flickr user who does not respect copyright, we can somehow locate those images faster). Just two little ideas, again great bot! Someday it may even be able to read the tags used in the Flickr site and match them with Commons categories for faster categorization :) -- ReyBrujo 03:09, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment; put it on todo list. -- Bryan (talk to me) 08:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Zoo_press.JPG

THAT IS MY PIC AND COPYRIGHT WAS {{tl1|self|cc-by-sa-2.5}}! YOU MUST TO RETURN THE IMAGE IMMEDIATELY! THE PHOTO DOES NOT BELONG TO YOU AND ALSO, YOU DID NOT UPLOAD THE FILE!

And, the Gallery tool don't working. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.168.39.49 (talk)

And why do you think that the content of the image belongs to you?

The picture is filled up with a newspaper which doesn't belong to you. Because you aren't the creator of this newspaper, you aren't allowed o upload this picture - see {{Fair use}}.

Have a look at the gallerytool again. Sometimes it takes some time to work so just wait a liitle bit.

--D-Kuru 08:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks D-Kuru. I want to add to that when you create a picture of a news paper, you create a commons:derivative work. And since the news papers are not under a free license, they are not allowed here. See Commons:Licensing for more information. -- Bryan (talk to me) 08:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Template:Second Life

I've added Template:Second Life/lang and Template:Second Life/de to your Template. Moreover I've finished the deletion request for Image:Second life garden.jpg, because of the discussion.
I will ask Polarlys to correct (If necessary) the template. Category:Second Life is also created.
--D-Kuru 10:35, 31 May 2007 (UTC)