User talk:Duesentrieb/Archive 06-12

This is an archive of old stuff from my talk page

CommonSense reloaded? :)

move to meta:User talk:Duesentrieb/CommonSense -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 15:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

BTW... I don't know if commons does Barnstars, but oh well. This is a thankyou in graphical form. :) pfctdayelise 03:48, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Why, Thank you! I have uploaded another update, btw -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 15:32, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Great tool, thank you, Duesentrieb!Longbow4u 11:40, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can be CommonSense smarter?

[edit]

move to meta:User talk:Duesentrieb/CommonSense -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 15:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Shangri-La in Category:Shangri-La (Yunnan, China)

[edit]

Hi. There was no error in classify Category:Shangri-La in Category:Shangri-La (Yunnan, China). The term Shangri-La is used to different meaning most of it around Lost Horizont novel.

I planned to make a kind of "Disambiguation category" like en:Shangri-La (disambiguation) with the different terms as "Shangri-La (Yunnan, China)" (the current name of the city before called Zhongdian in Yunan province, China).

The reason to be empty (Category:Shangri-La) was that I'm working on several things at once and I have not many time to finish at the same moment I started. Also I review this days articles and categories that I created some month ago when I started work in Commons.

Regards, --Colegota 23:42, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Disambiguation categories" seem an inheritely bad idea to me: Categories should collect things that are alike (i.e. they represent topics), not unrelated things with the same name. A disambiguation page Shangri-La would probably be a good idea, though, to help people that are searching for that term. Also, please categorize all categories you create - I only noticed it because it showed up as a "root" category in my CategoryTree. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 23:49, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish interface for CommonSense

[edit]

move to meta:User talk:Duesentrieb/CommonSense -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 15:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Doubts about how to categorize provinces

[edit]

Hi!

I'm uploading bunchs of my China photos. There are travel photos so most are of "places". I'm using a category tree under Category:Provinces_of_China, so there is categories like Category:Xinjiang where I've included subcategories of "places inside province" (cities, lakes...).

Now my question is: When someone comes to Category:Xinjiang he must have there a bunch of categories and one article (Xinjiang) or there must be also the articles related to subcategories (Turpan, Kashgar...)? (That's the current method before I started to work).

I think that tecnically speaking the articles must be inside subcategories, but practically speaking is better to find articles of the cities and places of the province at the category page too. Do you agree?

Regards, --Colegota 10:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC) PD If you find this message were better at Village Pump, please feel free to move it there.[reply]

From a "logical" point of view, the articles belong into the subcategories - that's also how it's usually done, here and on wikipedias. Having them one level further up would sometimes be handy, though... maybe ask about it on the village pump.

Generally, I would like to do away with the difference between categories and galleries alltogether... but that'S not easily done.

Regards -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 12:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

CommonSense javascript tab?

[edit]

What do you think about writing (or getting someone to write) some javascript to make a "commonsense" tab appear on image pages up near the "watch" tab? User:Avatar has something similar for check-usage -- see User:Avatar/monobook.js. It would be really handy - as soon as you find an orphan, just one click gives you categories. Do you think the server load would be ok?

If you're not interested in writing it but think it's a good idea, I can ask someone at w:WP:US. Let me know what you think. cheers, pfctdayelise 10:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

NUMBEROFFILES

[edit]

The automated File-Counter on the Commons main page is not working. Perhaps you have got an idea how to fix it. Greetings, Longbow4u 17:43, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Images by User:Shalom Alechem

[edit]

Take a look at his images, particularly Image:Wawka2.jpg, Image:Warszawa2.jpg, Image:Wawka.jpg. They remained untagged in English wiki for ages, then were tagged for fairuse but without source until some admin found the courage to delete likely copyvios. Now I see they reappreared in the Commons. Please look into the matter and delete if needed. --Ghirlandajo 14:58, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image tags, leftovers

[edit]

Duesentrieb, thank you for your note. I have added license information for all those files that lacked it. I had no idea that your tool existed, but I have bookmarked it, and I'll try to revisit it occasionally. I think most of the files it flagged were older pronunciations before I had refined my template, but sometimes I miss things, so I'll bookmark the tool and try to check it periodically. Please don't hesitate to nudge me if I forget.

I'm down to a small handful of leftovers. For Passiflora, I think I need help with categories, galleries, and possibly the complete scientific name. (I'm a Wiktionarian with a camera, not a botanist.) The rest are audio and photos associated and already linked with specific Wikinews articles. I don't know if they will ever serve any other function, but I will try to ask my favorite Wikinewsie what he recommends for categories, when I see him next, which may be after the holidays. Do you have any suggestions on where to put them? How urgent is it that these items be placed in categories? --Dvortygirl 18:16, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

fehlende Lizenzen Category:Mapas de Mallorca

[edit]

Hallo Düsentrieb. Bei allen Karten dieser Kat fehlen die Lizenzangaben. Ich würde diese gerne in :de verwenden. Ich hatte seinerzeit den Ersteller der Karten einmal angeschrieben, mit der Bitte, fehlende Lizenzen nachzutragen. Hier findest Du die Antwort. Sollte ich jetzt einfach als PD taggen ? Antwort bitte in de:Benutzer_Diskussion:Diba Grüße diba 13:47, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Im Prinzip ja, aber es muss deutlich werden, wer die Karte gemacht hat: verwende am besten {{PD-user|Llull}}. Allerdings hat er/sie die Bilder ja hier nicht selbst hochgeladen... wenn du auf der entsprechenden Wp verifizieren kannst, dass die bilder von Llull stammen, dann ist alles gut :)

Ach ja: die Benutzer, die die Bilder hier hochgeladen haben, ohne Quelle, Autor und Lizenz anzugeben, sollten darauf angesprochen werden...

Frohes Fest -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 13:54, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

New CheckUsage

[edit]

moved to meta:User talk:Duesentrieb/CheckUsage -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 17:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

neue Lizenz ? Military-Insignia

[edit]

Ich habe heute diese Lizenz bei Image:Wiceadmiral Poziom.png und anderen gesehen. Ist dies eine offizielle Lizenz ? —gildemax 18:16, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hängt wohl vom Land ab - wenn Rangabzeichen z.B. der polnischen Armee PD sind, ist es OK, dieses Template zu benutzen, um das anzugeben. Es sollte allerdings irgendwo dokumentiert sein, für welche Länder das zutrifft, und auf welches Gesetz wir uns da berufen. Evtl wäre es sinnvoller, Landesspezifische Tags dafür zu haben. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 12:29, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Untagged images

[edit]

moved to meta:User talk:Duesentrieb/UntaggedImages -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 16:51, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bitte bring ein Policy Proposal ein

[edit]

Hi Duesi, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Forum#Ein_paar_Jahre_mehr_in_de Es wäre nett, wenn du als angesehener Commons-Administrator diesen Vorschlag auf Village Pump o.ä. einbringen könntest, wobei vielleicht klarzustellen wäre, dass sich bei US-Bildern nichts ändert und die Policy nur für EU-Bilder gilt. Gruß --Historiograf 20:11, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Darf ich dich bitten zu meiner Bitte Stellung zu nehmen? Danke --Historiograf 18:44, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, ich hab' mich bisher nicht eingehend damit beschäftigt - dir so mal eben aus dem Bauch raus zu Antworten hat sich in der Vergangenheit als Fehler erwieden;)

Ich finde "mehr als hundert jahre alt" auch netter als "vor 1900", andererseits will ich aber nicht zusätzliches Baustein-Chaos stiften. Was die USA angeht... da ist doch eh alles, was vor 1923 veröffentlich wurde, PD, oder? Dann würde das da ja eh nichts ändern.

Also, grundsätzlich unteerstütze ich den Vorschlag, kann mich aber nicht wirklich qualifiziert dazu äussern. Du schriebst z.B.: Eine neue bildrechtliche Regelung in de... ist das eine neue Policy in der deutschen Wikipedia, oder hat sich an der Gesetzeslage / Interpretation in Deutschland etwas geändert? Ein Link wäre an der Stelle auch ganz gut... -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 18:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wir brauchen keinen neuen Baustein, es geht ja nur um alte PDs. Es ist eine neue Regelung, die ich auf der dafür maßgeblichen Seite Wikipedia:Bildrechte in Kraft gesetzt habe und die von Elian akzeptiert wurde, der also niemand widersprochen hat. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bildrechte#Gesch.C3.BCtzte_Fotos Wie ich auf Firum ausgeführt habe, ändert das für die USA nichts, aber wir müssen ja unsere bildrechtlichen Policies auch hier importieren, wenn auf Commons default-mässig umgestellt wird. --Historiograf 21:21, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, ich hab' den Vorschlag mal eingebracht: Commons talk:Licensing#Assume PD for Images older than 100 years. Ist auch von der Village Pump verlinkt. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 23:34, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Moth-003.jpg

[edit]

Hallo Düsentrieb, das o. g. "Bild" wurde wieder zum Löschen vorgeschlagen (nicht von mir). Nachdem die Debatte dazu inzwischen im Archiv gelandet ist - existiert es immer noch. Daher meine Frage: Nach welchem Verfahren werden Bilder in den Commons gelöscht? Ich muss ehrlich sagen, dass mich einerseits die Unverfrorenheit des user:Monedula langsam nervt auf diesem Pixelschrott weiterhin zu bestehen. Andererseits verstehe ich die Gleichgültigkeit der Administratoren nicht. Da wird allerortens von Qualtitätsoffensiven geschwafelt, aber im konkreten Fall passiert eben schlicht und ergreifend nichts. Dein pseudoliberaler Kommentar zum ersten Löschversuch auf meiner Diskussionsseite paßt leider auch dazu. Sorry für die harten Worte - aber ich persönlich würde mich schämen einen solchen Käse überhaupt hochzuladen. Grüße, --Olei 22:30, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Die primären Probleme (und damit auch Löschgründe) auf den Commons sind a) Urheberrechtsverletzungen, b) Vandalismus/Defacement und c) Spamming. Löschungen aus ästhetischen Gründen sind nicht vorgesehen, aber wenn ein Bild völlig nutzlos für alle Projekte ist, kann es gelöscht werden.

Das Bild von der Motte ist nicht besonders. Aber wenn's dir nicht gefällt, ignoriere es doch. Warum stört es dich? Die meisten Beiträge von Monedula sehen übrigens durchaus brauchbar aus. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 22:36, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wobei "nicht besonders" noch geschmeichelt ist. Es geht auch nicht darum, dass es mir nicht gefällt, sondern dass es schlicht nutzlos ist. Weil erstens maximal die Famile sicher bestimmbar ist (Geometridae) und zweitens in der Kategorie der Familie category:Geometridae - wenn man also einen Familienartikel illustrieren möchte - inzwischen 60 verschiedene Arten mit geschätzt 100 guten bis sehr guten Fotos existieren. Reicht diese Argumentation als Löschgrund? Viele Grüße, --Olei 10:08, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

COM:VP#Deprecate the PD tag!

[edit]

I rather thought that my comment was an objection... pfctdayelise 00:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did not understand it as an objection policy-whise. What I did noes not require manual work right now (the tag is still valid, it just says it#s deprecated). It basically tells people to be more specific.

Some people will always just choose a random tag for stuff they find on the web - that can't be helped. I'm rather targetting "careles" people (including myself, i just fixed 5 of my uploads that where tagged as PD), and those that don't klnow better.

Also, re-tagging the 13000 images with PD tags would be nice, but is not critical. I'm also prepared to help with that, for instance by providing lists of pages that can probably be tagged with a specific template.

I'm sorry if you feel i ignored your comment. I didn't... It just does not really seem to impact the question if the template should be deprecated, but rather how to handle re-tagging. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 01:25, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unterkategorien

[edit]

Wir führen auf Template_talk:Viollet-le-Duc gerade eine Diskussion und ich kann nicht verstehen warum die Category:Viollet-le-Duc/Abacus in ihrer Oberkategorie Category:Viollet-le-Duc nicht angezeigt wird.

Anfangs stand für die Subkategorien im Template folgendes: [[Category:Viollet-le-Duc{{{1}}}]] das funktionierte anfangs gut, nun aber nicht mehr. Schade. Irgend eine Idee? Wird die Tabelle Category_links in Echtzeit erstellt? Gibt es irgendwelche Probleme mit "/" oder "-" Zeichen? Danke. Kolossos 13:22, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving deletion requests

[edit]

Hi - uh, this was not intended, was it? The request was only filed a few hours ago, so why archive it? -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 01:27, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed it had a red link and that it was already deleted. -- WB 06:09, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, hm, I didn't notice that... anyway, I don't think it's a good idea to archive requests immediately after they have been dealt with. Give it a few days, especially if the request is young. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 12:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll archive the obvious ones like name errors and outright copyright violation immediately, but leave the (potentially) controversial ones. -- WB 04:24, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sounds good - those shouldn't be on the deletion request anyway. But maybe we should have a template that could be used in such cases, like "please use copyvio/redundant/deletebacause" or something like that, so people don't clutter that page with "trivial" deletions. If we do that, that message should stay there for a couple of days... -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 13:48, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(very late) But pictures in redundant hasn't been cleared out for a long time. I should probably work on those if I am lucky enought to become an admin. haha. -- WB 08:38, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bitte um Verschieben / Dateiname umbennen

[edit]

moien, ich habe leider irgendwie einen doppelten dateianhang bei Image:TV-Normen europaeisch (Bildaufloesungen) TV-standards european (image-resolutions).png.PNG gemacht. magst du mal bitte das letzte PNG raus nehmen? danke im vorraus, --Andreas -horn- Hornig 20:40, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bitte lade die Datei nochmal mit korrektem namen rauf, und setze dann {{db|bad name, see [[:Image:TV-Normen europaeisch (Bildaufloesungen) TV-standards european (image-resolutions).png]]}} in die Beschreibungsseite des alten rein.

Was anderes als nochmal hochladen kann ich auch nicht machen. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 22:02, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

moien, alles klar, wird gemacht. hatte gedacht, dass es sowas wie eine verschiebenfunktion hier auch gäbe. grüsse, --Andreas -horn- Hornig 22:20, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Artikel kann man verschieben, Bilder nicht. Ist auch in der Wikipedia so. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 23:15, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About San Cristobal de Las Casas images

[edit]

I put the PD-self tag on the images.--[[Agguizar|User:Agguizar, [[User Talk:Agguizar|(Answer me)]]]] 22:26, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Detail

[edit]

Thanks for the suggestion, one of the two images was useless.

I have however a different question: the image Image:Akey.jpg is a detail of the public domain image Image:Swedish_keyboard_20050614.jpg I have tagged it PD-self, but I am not quite convinced this qualfies as "self-made". Should I tag it as {{PD-user|username}}? Thanks! Paolo Liberatore 20:21, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, since all you did was crop it, PD-user would probably be better - as long as you credit source and author, and say you cropped it, it does not matter much, i belive. Btw: you can create links to image description pages using a ":" in front: [[:Image:Swedish_keyboard_20050614.jpg]] renders as Image:Swedish_keyboard_20050614.jpg. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 21:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Thanks. Paolo Liberatore 12:40, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

[edit]

Thanks for fixing the image I uploaded Image:XOR perceptron net.png. I am new here and I do mistakes. I am sorry. Anyway, thanks for the explanation and to take care of Wikimedia Commons.

Image and category

[edit]

Hi. I uploaded a new image (Norcia). Can you see if I have inserted the image in the just category? Thank you. --Starlight 09:31, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Betr: User:4ojos

[edit]

Hi Duesentrieb! Ich musste bei allem Bildern des genannten Users den unknownlizenzbaustein setzen. Jetzt hat er mich auf meiner benutzerseite danach gefragt:

Hi. I don´t know why you´ve selected the set of old pharmaceutical advertising I´ve just uploaded as "may cointain copyrigthed material" as they are from long dissapeared brands. I don´t see who can hold the copy rights of these ads from the fifties. Would you mind sending me a message with an explanation? thanks

Da ich dem Jungen keinen Schrecken durch mein schlechtes Englisch geben will, ihm womöglich noch mißverständlich die Sache darlege, könntest du ihm darauf antworten? gruß--Factumquintus 17:49, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

erledigt, schau's dir mal an. Du kannst übrigens auch {{Please tag images}} verwenden ;) -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 19:00, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Super! Danke dir, auch für den Hinweis. gruß--Factumquintus 20:40, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Patent

[edit]

I'm sorry for uploading wrong files, I thought that their distribution was free, so please appologize me. Now I will only upload multimedia of my creation if I'm not sure of the validity of the patent I declare. Thanks. Kasiber

Patent2

[edit]

Hi, thanks for the information you gave me, I wasn't sure about the meaning of Patent. I want to ask you something, I've just translated Virgin Records from english to the spanish wikipedia and I wanted to put in the Virgin logo I found on the english one. But, I've seen that it has a special autorisation for using it, so if you can say me what I have to do, or put the Virgin logo on the spanish version of Virgin Records. I wish I 've explained myself correctly. Thanks again. --Kasiber 20:49, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PD-Art

[edit]

Hi. no I wanted put the template on the bigin of the category. But if you thouhht that is a mistake, you make good to change. Sorry for my horrible english. --RED DEVIL 666 07:02, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ok, good. I come frome the itwiki lines and I use thoose. Sorry :-) --RED DEVIL 666 20:35, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check usage script

[edit]

FANTASTIC script! The best I've seen yet! Bas ^parler _voir 00:16, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I looks good, but it seems to run forever. I'm searching for about 20minutes on one picture now. That can't be right, can it? --Boris23 18:06, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be an Opera-issue. Running Firefox works fine. Opera seems to load the page over and over again. But with Firefox the tool is really amazing! --Boris23 18:10, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, works fine with opera here... anyway, it may indeed take some time to run, especially if no one has used it for an hour or so - then all the databases need to be loaded into the cache. The next wuery will then be much faster. It also makes a difference how often the image is used - for much used images, it takes longer.

Oh... I just noticed that Opera somtimes just gives up wile loading the page. But no repeated reloading here. Anyway, use Firefox, it rocks;) -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 21:59, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pfff. Opera rocks my Box from a 3.x, no chance to evangelize me ;) (Although I really like plugin-system from Firefox).

I just let a friend of mine test it with [1] and it reloads there after 100% too. So it's not an issue with my Alpha-Version of Opera :) --Boris23 17:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you haven't changed anything it seems, that Opera 9 TP2 fixes this issue. Anyway, the tool works really great now. --Boris23 17:51, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, I havn't changed it. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 19:10, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Einladung

[edit]

Hallo Duesentrieb,

Ich mochte dir gern einladen zu Commons:WikiProject Tree of Life

TeunSpaans 20:06, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, thanks, but i don't know anything about biology, and i'm not much good at photographing either ;) If I can help tools, etc, let me know. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 21:51, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eine Bitte

[edit]

Danke für die Richtigstellung wg Template:Deletion_requests#Image:Thermen_.28Wei.C3.9Fenburg_in_Bayern.29.jpg. Die Wahl der unglücklichen Begründung Panoramafreiheit hat leider Leute auf den Plan gerufen, mit denen ich wirklich nichts zu tun haben will. Ich möchte, wie Du ja geschrieben hast, einem eventuellen Risiko aus dem Weg gehen, so wichtig ist mir das Bild nämlich nicht. Kannst Du -- als Admin -- meinen Löscheintrag im Auge behalten? Vielen Dank & Gruß --Brego 20:55, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mein Bild ist noch drin. Könntest Du das Löschen übernehmen? Gruß --Brego 22:35, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bastique hat's gelöscht. Ich wollte das nur ungern machen, da ich ja an der Diskussion beteiligt war. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 19:10, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

de:Kategorie:Bigfoto

[edit]

You might want to have the images in de:Kategorie:Bigfoto deleted. See Template talk:Image-Bigfoto. User:dbenbenn 03:06, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

filed a VfD, thanks for the hint! -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 16:41, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Move request

[edit]

Hi, I am sorry if this is the wrong place to ask for I have no idea where the rename request article is over here, but could you assist me in renaming Category:Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore) station as Category:Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore) stations? Thank you! ;)--Huaiwei 17:56, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, ask at the Commons:Village pump, or someone who runs a bot (I don't). But in this case, there's just one image in the cat, so there's no problem... create the new category (by putting it into parent categories), change the link in the image description to the new category, put {{db|renamed to Category:Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore) stations}} into the old category. That's it. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 18:09, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, wait! the Parent category, Category:Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore), is nearly empty too. Creating subcategories makes no sense unless you are going to put lots of pictures into them very soon. Please use generic categories if there are only a few pictures for a topic. We don't need special categories for everything, that just makes the mess worse. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 18:16, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh actually I am creating a hieracy of categories to start filling in the photos which are currently strewn all over the place. I stopped adding the rest after noting the error in the category name. Anyway I was looking at Village pump, but I have no idea where to start since there is nothing specifically aimed at rename requests. Will be glad if you may guide me to it? Meanwhile will do as you suggest above. Thanks! ;)--Huaiwei 10:43, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are only very few specialized places for request on the commons. Just ask at the pump. I deleted the misnamed category. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 12:31, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks! ;)--Huaiwei 14:10, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

German user welcomes

[edit]

Do you mind if I leave you names of new users who need to be welcomed? I only ask when it's not clear that the user knows English but their German is evident. See new user User_talk:Bennyberger based on Image:Wappen Stadt Zoerbig.JPG

— Cary "Bastique" Bass ^parler _voir 14:14, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively, if you supply the verbage, I can write "welcomes" for you and supply yours (or some other German administrator) name on the welcome. Thanks. Cary "Bastique" Bass ^parler _voir 14:15, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm... well... sure, you can point people to me, as long as it's clear that I didn't leave the message myself. Also, I wouldn't like to be linked "per default" from a template or some such - a generic page like Category:User_de-N would be better for that (maybe we should have a cat/page for german speaking admins).

A german boiler plate welcome text meight also be handle, although people that don't speak english at all are going to have a hard time at the commons anyway. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 14:19, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: template

[edit]

today I am speaking with datrio, and we saw that the templates of PD must be leveled. For this I modified all PD template. But I saw that the <includeonly> was only in 2 or 3 template, in a total of 25-30. I thought that if it is only in a few templates isn't necessary, but if you say me that is important, I'm going to rollback myself. Sorry for the problem and for my horrlible english. --RED DEVIL 666 23:46, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Madden

[edit]

Follow up to my comment at Help Desk... of course, any sarcasm may be a tad bit justified. He puts himself down for {{User en-3}} on his user page. :) Cary "Bastique" Bass ^parler _voir 17:14, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Permission Request

[edit]

I have suggested (without any reaction!!) on the German Commons:Forum that my suggestion at the German WP for a new permission request should be translated into English. Rights holders should simply send the suggested declaration/licence back. Formulated in the form of a subjective declaration (the following is only a stub of the full text): I declare hereby that I am the rights holder of ... I put the work ... under the ... license (or PD etc.). I am aware of the fact that this license is only referring on copyright not on rights of other nature (trademark laws, personality laws ...) I am aware of the fact that third parties can use the picture commercially and can make derivative works. I am aware of the fact that Commons has no liability to host the picture forever (it could be deleted for some reasons of if the Wikimedia projects are finished ...) This would avoid some trouble --Historiograf 18:18, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

checkusage

[edit]

Hello,

Look at this result : http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daniel/WikiSense/CheckUsage.php?i=Image%3AJingumae-fumikiri1.jpg&w=_160&m=#end

« 160 wikis searched. Jingumae-fumikiri1.jpg is not used anywhere! »

But the picture is available on the Japanese Wikipedia :

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%94%BB%E5%83%8F:Jingumae-fumikiri1.jpg

Is that a bug? Or is the statement « database is up to date » wrong, or partially wrong ? --Teofilo 08:37, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, strange - the imagelinks table of the japanese wikipedia does not have an entry for that file (or at least, the copy on the toolserver does not - maybe replication is broken?).

 SQL daniel@sql:jawiki_p> select * from imagelinks where il_to = "Jingumae-fumikiri1.jpg";
 Empty set (0.00 sec)

I don't know what I can do about it - if it's not in the database, I can't find it. Strangely enough, the use does show on the japanes image description page. Which probably means it *is* in the database there. I'll try to investigate, but I may not have much time in the next days. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 16:30, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daniel/WikiSense/CheckUsage.php?i=LouvrePyramide.jpg&w=_100000&m=#end

Obwohl ich beide japanische Bilder gelöscht habe, bleiben noch diese zwei Suchergebnisse. --Teofilo 10:42, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ich werde versuchen, herauszubekommen, was da schief läuft. Das kann aber etwas dauern, da ich keinen direkten Zugriff auf die "echte" Datenbank habe. Bei dem Problem oben war es so, dass die Einträge wirklich in der Datenbank fehlten - die Frage ist nun, warum, und warum die Angaben auf der Bildbeschreibungsseite trotzdem stimmen. In diesem neuen Fall ist es grundsätzlich genauso. Ich frage mich, ob das direkt etwas mit der japanischen Wikipedia, bzw. mit japanischen Zeichen zu tun hat, oder evtl mit Goss/Kleinschreibung am Anfang des Namens oder sowas. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 11:12, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Forward a list

[edit]

Thank you for tagging my images. Send me the urls and I will enter the source.Thank you again. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 01:46, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will review the images. Most come from a photo archive in which I hold any implied copyright and I am releasing them into the public domain, or they were published in the USA prior to 1923, or were released into the public domain for publicity by their creator.

Creative Commons

[edit]

Perhaps I am reading the license wrong, but the license is issued by the "Licensor" not the "Original Author"

"Licensor" means the individual or entity that offers the Work under the terms of this License.
"Original Author" means the individual or entity who created the Work.

In US law the "Licensor" is the one that owns the rights to the work not the "Original Author". Anyone can sell their original work and transfer the rights to someone else. Paul McCartney may be the author of say "Let it Be", but he is not the owner, Michael Jackson bought the rights and owns the song (Sony has claims on it now). Paul McCartney must be mentioned as the author. The CC contract states that the "original author" must always be mentioned as the creator.

So, even if I did not create the image, I can release it into the public domain if I choose to, or license it via CC, so long as I claim the implied copyright. So let me know if your reading is different. Cheers --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 04:11, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you own the full copyright of the image, with all rights attached, you can probably license the image, if the license text does not explicitely require the "author" or "creator" to do it. However, note that in many countries (most of the EU, for instance), such a complete transfer of copyright is not possible. There, you can only transfer usage rights, and only for types of use known at the time of the transfer. Thus, if an author transfered usage rights to an image to a publishing house in the 50s, they can not publich it online now, because that form of publication was not known at the time, and was thus the right to do it was not transferred. The only way to transfer all rights is to inherit them after the death of the author.

So, depending on where the images where created and published, it may or may not be possible for someone owning (some) usage rights to relicense the image. Afaik, this is possible in en:common law countries mainly.

In any case, you can not license an image that is in the public domain, because per definition the copyright has expired and you don't have any more rights to the image than I do. Trying to impose terms of use on PD material is known as copyfraud. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 11:24, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Once, again you have to research case law, which is alway changing here in the USA. In the USA Ted Turner was able to receive a new copyright to public domain films that he colorized. In this case the derivative work of the original was now eligable forcopyright. Its very complex. If I made an error on a public domain image (US Government or pre 1923 publication), I will fix it. No fraud is intended.

If you modified PD work in a substantial, creative way, you indeed hold a copyright to the result. In that case, you should make clear what modifications you made. However, if you do not insist on maintaining that copyright, it would be simplest to just release the results as PD too. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 11:57, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In any case, if you claim copyright to a work you did not create yourself, you should document clearly how you came by this copyright. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 11:39, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again in case law in the US a person has an implied copyright as the possessor of the image unless the material has been shown to be previously published, or somone else can prove a claim of copyright. Even Tommy Lee and Pamela Anderson couldn't claim they held the copyright for video footage stolen from them, they won the first round on a "right to privacy". [2] So how does someone prove they are the copyright holder at the time of publication. Its easy for music, not easy for images. How do you want me to show that I have that right? What wording do you want to see that would satisfy you?

In case the pictures are PD, label them accordingly, choosing a tag that sais why they are PD. If they are not PD, but you own the full copyright, a simple, clear statement how you optained it would be enough for me - something along the lines of these images where donated to me my the hires of the photographer XYZ in 1234 or something like that. Note that the photographer is crucial, not the people shown on the pictures.

Note that if you use a license that requires attribution, like CC-by or GFDL, you must know and name the actual creator; otherwise, the license makes no sense. In case you don't know the creator, you probably can also not be sure to own the copyright...

The right to privacy and other personality rights must be respected, but are separate from copyright/license issues.

You also said a person has an implied copyright as the possessor of the image unless the material has been shown to be previously published - that's interresting, I was under the impression that this is explicitely not the case. Can you point to (case) law regarding that? -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 11:57, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All this being said, I ask you to consider the arguments on the village pump discussion: using commons as a place to collect and maintain pages (i.e. text) that is really intended for another project and does not fit the missin of the commons is a bad idea. Places like WikiCities would be much better suited. If images for that project can and should be on the commons is also a matter of argument - personally I feel they are OK if all the licensing stuff is taken care of, but some people mey feel differently, arguing that the images are not useful to any existing Wikimedia projects. Also, if you start a people wiki at wikicities, you'll need the pictures there, you can not access commons images from WikiCities (I think).

PS: please sign your contributions on discussion pages with ~~~~. That makes it much easier to see who said what, when. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 11:57, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Policy proposal:No deletion of improved versions of images

[edit]

Hi Duesentrieb. You may be interested in this: Commons:Village pump/Policy proposal:No deletion of improved versions of images. pfctdayelise (translate?) 00:56, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

de:Wikipedia:Bildertutorial/3

[edit]

Habe in diese Seite eingetragen, was ich dort schwerst vermisste. Kannst Du bitte checken, ob das OK ist, bevor jemand, der mehr seinen Claim verteidigt als zur Benutzerführung beiträgt, drin rumwütet? Wenn die Seiten endlich das enthalten, was einer braucht, um sein Bilderl zu spenden ohne sich quer durch die WP lesen zu müssen, sollte man sie IMVHO schützen. Danke. Wolfgang 05:51, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:Picture-Upload Decision Y or N.gif Findest du da drin noch Bugs? Betrifft de:Wikipedia:Bildertutorial/2 Danke, best/amitiés/lg:WolfgangW. 16:13, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Sieht gut aus - allerdings sollten die verbindungslinien mit "ja" bzw "nein" beschriftet sein. Wäre auch gut, das als SVG zu haben, auch weil man's dann leichter übersetzen kann. Schriften sind in SVG aber ein bisschen blöd... naja, kannst es ja mal probieren. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 17:13, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SVG ist nicht, wird's meinerseits wohl auch nie. Momentan ist erste Priorität die juristische Korrektheit - habe bei Historiograf und BerlinJurist angefragt, aber bisher keine gesicherte Auskunft. Wenn Du da was anleiern könntest, bittebittebitte, ich schließ' dich dafür in mein Nachtgebet ein. Sonst gibt's nämlich ewige Diskussiönchen wo welcher Pfeil vielleicht eigentlich hin müsste/könnte/sollte. An zweiter Stelle kommt das Layout - bisher wurden fehlende Pfeile bemängelt (die ich heute nachreiche) und Dir zuliebe wird auch eine Version mit Beschriftung j/n, aber die hatte ich bereits, und gestern früh wieder verworfen, da sie das Bild unruhig machte und ich rot/grün für selbsterklärend hielt. Dann sollte bald eine Entscheidung fallen, das bisherige grässliche Bild ähnlichen Inhalts fallen zu lassen. Bis gegen heute 15:00 möchte ich die genannten Update-Versionen hochladen, damit wir nicht über "Schnee von gestern" reden. Ich bin hier EOD, Diskussion bitte bis auf weiteres auf de:Wikipedia Diskussion:Bildertutorial/1#Entscheidungsbaum-Grafik Danke, mit Gruß, WolfgangW. 08:01, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Orphans

[edit]

Hi - I just noticed that all of the insignia you uploaded lately are orphans. Please remember that images on the commons are only useful if they can be found by topic, i.e. if they are in a category and/or on a (categorized) gallery page. Please make galleries for those images! Thanks -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 12:21, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sure. give me a sec. :) --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 14:21, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done, Starfleet ranks and insignia. I am trying to get the missing images released to the public domain (others were designed by wikipedians). Once thats done those will also be avalible in the public domain. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 15:18, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks. I found a few more untagged images, btw -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 23:35, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All of them were tagged. However I retagged some. Many of those images are used on my userpage as well as en wikipedia articles. Some of them are tagged with german GNU tags. I did not want to change the tag so I copied the one from german wikipedia. Those images are used in meta wiki for wikipedicolism...--Cool Cat^Talk|@ 13:39, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Edgar varese.jpg

[edit]

Could you take a look at Image talk:Edgar varese.jpg? Looks like a rather spurious PD claim on that image. Lupo 19:30, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I have bigin!! (Ya he comenzado a formar la galeria de imagenes, gracias por el consejo) --Alfredobi 05:08, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check usage Probleme

[edit]

1) Für Japanische Bilder ist aber Avatars check-usage ganz fein : http://www.juelich.de/avatar/check-usage/check-usage.php?saved=gIY345Mpkc ; http://www.juelich.de/avatar/check-usage/check-usage.php?saved=f1FM7SUP0l

2) Mit Internet Explorer funtzt der "Check usage" Knopf nicht ("bulk mode/normal mode" wird geschaltet und kein Suchergebnis wird gegeben). Mit Firefox gibt es kein Problem mit diesem Knopf.

Teofilo 09:36, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zu 1) warum die DB für die jap. WP nicht mit dem übereinstimmt, was die Webpage sagt, verstehe ich wirklich nicht. Avatars tool guckt sich halt das HTML an, ich die Datenbank. Eigentlich muss das das gleiche sein... isses aber anscheinend nicht. Vielleicht hängt es mit sowas wie der Auto-Grosschreibung zusammen... evtl ist die in der jap WP ausgeschaltet? Irgendwie sowas muss es sein - ich versteh's aber noch nicht ganz.

Zu 2) ist repariert (zumindest bei mir tut's jetzt in Firefox, IE, Opera und Konqueror). Ich hab' auch gleich noch ein problem mit Opera behoben. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 11:58, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zu 1) Ähnliches Verhalten kann ich ab und zu auch in der koreanischen Wiki beobachten. Eventuell hängt es auch mit Lags in der Datenbank zusammen obwohl keiner angezeigt wird. Laufen die beiden Wikis über den gleichen Server wie die Mehrheit der Wikis? --Denniss 12:17, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm... interessanter Punkt... soweit ich weiss, läuft die japanische und koreanische WP im Yahoo-Cluster (in Korea, glaube ich). Es könnte evtl am lag zwischen Yahoo und Florda liegen... der Lag würde nicht angezeigt. Zwar schaltet die DB ab 30 sekunden lag automatisch auf read-only, aber das betrifft wohl nur master/slave Lag, nicht den Lag zwischen Korea und Florida. Mal Tim fragen... -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 12:24, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flags usage

[edit]

Hi. I spent past few weeks replacing PNG flags with new SVG. I believe I worked systematicaly, but I am not sure, if I get rid of all the PNG images. The CheckUsage tool is handsome, but I can't use it in this case since I am not interested in specific image (identified by its name), but in whole category of images (i.e. National flags). I'd acclaim ANY tool, that should show me, if I forgot any PNG flag. Thanks --Zirland 19:24, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - the new version of CheckUsage (online since three days ago) supports bulk-checking multiple images. You would have to create a list of the images you are interrested in first - you can easily do that using my CatScan tool (check the CSV box next to the submit button to get machine-readable output). -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 11:02, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

vorschlag für ein neues tool

[edit]

Hi Duesentrieb! Ich hätte da eine Idee für ein neues tool, mir fehlt aber das technische know-how. Vielleicht hast du es?!?! Es läßt sich eigentlich relativ leicht beschreiben: Es geht darum, dass es listet, wann ein Bild das letzte Mal geändert wurde. Das würde die Arbeit bei Template:Deleted duplicate unheimlich vereinfachen, weil es bei den Bildern in der Category:Deleted duplicates nur noch darum geht, dass sie ihre Zeit absitzen. Was hälst du davon? Schaengel89 20:40, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Du willst also für alle Bilder in einer bestimmten Kategorie (oder die ein bestimmtes Template enthalten) das Datum der letzten änderung sehen? Bzw. diese Liste sortiert nach Änderungsdatum?

Es sollte recht einfach sein, CatScan so zu erweitern... obwohl, das mit dem sortieren ist no so einfach. mal gucken. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 11:04, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wäre echt klasse! Schaengel89 20:27, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A tiny translation request

[edit]

Hallo Duesentrieb, could you do Commons a small favour and translate to German a comment I left on User:ArtMechanic's talkpage, here. I mean the second comment that concerns the removing of deletion tags. I didn't notice before that he doesn't speak English. Thanks. --Lumijaguaari (моє обговорення) 21:57, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

done -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 22:04, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vielen Dank. --Lumijaguaari (моє обговорення) 23:44, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Multilinguistical

[edit]

Hi. I don't know if this is standard procedure, but I added two more languages to Template:Idw. The template is just useless to the people who don't understand the language. Don't you agree? Fred Chess 21:22, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greate idea, thank you! But i'd propose to use template:idw/de instead of template:idw-de to be consistent with MediaWiki messages. Maybe some day we get internationalized templates supported by the software, and using a consistent naming scheme will hopefully make the transition seamles. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 23:01, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conversion of Fermat Point images to svg done

[edit]

After scribus made a window version, I tried it and after some more configuring, I finally managed to convert Image:Fermat_Points.png, Image:Fermat_Points_Proof.png, and Image:Fermat_Points_Derivation.png to their corresponding svg version, and the result is satisfactory-the converted image looks virtually the same as the original. However, now the size of the svg is even bigger then the png version(!!). Also, maybe the instruction section on the image page can be cleaned-up a bit. Thanks, especially to the scribus and ghostscript team! --Lemontea 10:42, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, I don't know why you are telling me that, but the SVG files look good to me, too. However, they seem to be composed of complex pathes, instead of simple shapes (circles), which makes the files big and harder to edit. Did you compose the SVG version by hand, or did you use some type of automatic conversion (tracing)? -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 18:31, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've already put up the source file and the detailed steps for converting the source to the final svg file(at least, that's the steps I use to make those files) at their respective description page, say, for instance, Image:Fermat_Point.svg#Instruction. So, yes, it's done by a convertor(ghostscript-not tracer because as far as I know, eps is already a vector format). Of course it would be nice to cut down the size and use circle, simple paths instead of those it is now, but that's the best I can do on my window machine. I've seen users that use eukleides on linux and maybe they can do this converting job better?(Say, user Gustavb) And the list in that instruction page is broken, can someone help fix it? --Lemontea 10:34, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NB-after checking his file, it seems this is a limitation of ghostscript itself-his file are composed of complex path instead of simple shape also. (Opps, forgot to sign in) --Lemontea 08:10, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transferring images

[edit]

Hi there. I just want to ask how is it possible to transfer images who apporve the WP:Commons criterions from WP to WP:C ? Amir85 11:07, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By hand. Download and re-upload. Please make sure to copy all relevant information, especially license, source/creator and uploader. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 21:30, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check usage doesn't find links from English Wiktionary!

[edit]

I ran CheckUsage on Image:En-us-omnipotence.ogg: [3]. It finds no links, but look at Wiktionary:Image:en-us-omnipotence.ogg! The problem is arguably a bug in MediaWiki, for compare to Wiktionary:Image:En-us-omnipotence.ogg. I reported the problem as bugzilla:5269, but in the mean time, perhaps you could add a workaround to CheckUsage? Thanks, User:dbenbenn 14:09, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Urgh :( I have no idea how to work around that... -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 14:36, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When checking links for Image:Foo in case-sensitive wikis, just check both Image:Foo and Image:foo. (For extra credit, deal with the case where there's a local duplicate of Image:foo, but not of Image:Foo.) User:dbenbenn 00:44, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, maybe... not that simple database-wise... also, I can't see from the DB which wikis are case-sensitive. But I could simply do it for all wiktionaries. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 10:45, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CommonSense

[edit]

Nachdem ich ja schon seit einiger Zeit mich immer mal wieder bemüht hatte Bilder ein die kategorien einzuordnen und auch mal Bilder aus dem Deutschen Wiki nach dem Commons zu üebrtrag hatte ich nun das Tool entdeckt. Gegenüber "Blindflug" und "handbetrieb" schon sehr komfortabel. Dickes Lob für so ein Tool -- skINMATE 13:52, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Löschung ohne grosses Prozedere

[edit]

Moin, ich hab heute morgen aus Versehen die Kategorie Category:Dinosaur National Monuments angelegt (Plural s bei Monuments), kannst du die mal eben wieder rauskicken? Waere nett. Danke. --Huebi 05:36, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

done. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 11:48, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Spacewar1.png

[edit]

Hello, sorry for sending you an entry on your talk page. There are a {{copyvio}} tag on this image, and i would like to know how can i remove it (the tag) properly ? I dont find meta page helping me. Thanks. ~ bayo or talk 12:55, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

uh, I don't exactly understand your problem - as far as I see, you have supplied sufficient info to support your claim to PD, so you can simply remove the tag. When in doupt, talk to the user who has put it there. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 13:56, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would just know if it exists a page like "Commons:Deletion requests". Thanks for your message. ~ bayo or talk 14:54, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

well, yes, it exists, I simply liked the title you guessed :) but copyvios are not listed there, they can be deleted 7 days after tagging without discussion. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 16:45, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Murner.Nerrenbeschwerung.kind.jpg

[edit]

Muss Narrenbeschwerung heissen, bitte Dateinamen ändern und User:Felistoria Bescheid geben, Danke --Historiograf 01:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Au mann, irgendwann drehe ich dir den Hals um: gerade hab ich an Düsentrieb geschrieben - und schon wieder "Bearbeitungskonflikt" - und wieder warst du das! (Ach, du bist einfach zu schnell für mich...) Herzlich --Felistoria 01:40, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Duesentrieb, das ist für Historigraf gewesen :-), ich bin irgendwie nicht auf der Höhe... Herzlichen Gruß und bitte nichts für ungut --Felistoria 01:49, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Beneath a Steel Sky.png

[edit]

Hello, yes its me one more time :/ i dont do harassing, i just need help. I upload this screenshot of the computer game en:Beneath a Steel Sky, after seeing [4] . In all over sources we see Beneath a Steel Sky is a freeware.

Maybe its like a copyrighted free use content. Allow copies, derivatives and commercial use. Can we have this screenshot on Commons ? If yes, how do the page-setting for this license. Thanks a lot, and sorry for my poor english. ~ bayo or talk 15:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, "freeware" (free as in beer) would not be enough, but from what I see, it's in fact free software (free as in speach), so screenshots should be OK. use {{free screenshot|[5]}} to tag it, and add an appropriate license for your own contributions to the screenshot (I would suggest {{PD-self}}). That should be sufficient.

It would be even better to ask the programmers what license they prefer for their artwork, and if they would like to provide screenshots under PD or some copyleft license. Their license only talks about the code. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 11:27, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but, warning, i exists en:Vores Øl :D ~ bayo or talk 12:52, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Copyright

[edit]

The country where something is first published is relevant to the length of copyright term in some jurisdictions, so it is relevant to whether something can be uploaded to Commons, but not always. It is only relevant in countries which have a rule of shorter term. That is an optional part of the Berne Convention which only some places have adopted. I know that EU countries have had it in their copyright laws since 1995, and it applies to anything made after 1995 there, but many countries, including the US, do not have it in their copyright laws.

What I have written is correct so far as I know. I am not a copyright lawyer so it cannot be definitive, but what was there before my edit and what is there now, thanks to your revert (assuming somebody else hasn't edited it in the meantime) is complete nonsense. If I upload something that is public domain in the UK, say a work by someone who died in 1935, where that work was published in their lifetime, but after 1923, then I would not be doing anything illegal in the UK, but I would be breaking copyright law in the US. That's what I was trying to get across and that is what it is critical for people uploading to Commons to understand. David Newton 18:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You and I seem to be talking at cross purposes so I'll define terms as I mean:

Country of first publication - the country or countries where the work was first published, with a country qualifying for joint status of first publication with either simultaneous publication or publication within 30 days of the first issuing to the public. This is important in the EU for determining whether something comes under the duration rules of the rule of shorter term.
Rule of shorter term - an optional part of the Berne Convention which means that if a work is first published in a foreign jurisdiction and the copyright term in that foreign jurisdiction is shorter that the copyright term of the foreign jurisdiction will apply in the country with the rule of shorter term. This is particularly applicable to the copyright of US-made television programs in Europe. They tend to get shown in the US first and nowhere else for 30 days. That means the country of first publication would be the US and the copyright term for the television program would be that of the US. It is also relevant for feature films, although less so due to the increasing harmonisation of world release dates.
Country of origin - a term that does not really mean anything in international copyright law, except possibly when talking about foreign-published works coming back into copyright in the US as the countries of origin of those works come into the international copyright regime.

The rule of shorter term only applies in those nations which have made it part of their copyright law. As I said to you in my previous post it applies in the EU now. For those countries which were part of the EU in 1995 when it came into EU law it applies to those works published in or after 1995, and only those works. I know the US does not have the rule of shorter term in its copyright, but elsewhere I am not sure.

Does it matter where the servers are located? Yes it does. The country where the servers are physically located has legal jurisdiction over those servers and consequently the copyright laws of that country are applicable to the servers. The laws of the US apply to the Commons servers since they are physically located in the US. The laws of the UK apply to servers physically located in the UK, the laws of Russia apply to servers physically located in Russia etc., etc.

Does it matter where the uploader is located? Yes it does. The country where the uploader is physically located has legal jurisdiction over the uploader and consequently the copyright laws of the country are applicable to the uploader.

Regarding US Government works, that really is an interesting question which has not, to my knowledge, been definitively answered. Inside the US the position is clear thanks to the US Code. US Government websites are also clear since when they say that information is public information and is freely usable since the websites are accessible worldwide that declaration applies worldwide. In the EU for materials only published in the United States after 1995 the position is clear since materials only published in the United States would have the United States as the country of first publication and the laws of the United States for copyright duration would apply, ie the works would be public domain. It's US Government works that are published outside the US but not on the internet since 1995, and those published prior to 1995 (at least in the EU) that are the interesting ones. I strongly suspect the US Government would have a hard time enforcing copyright on those works in many jurisdictions.

We had a similar situation with respect to Crown copyright materials until recently. In the UK the situation was clear, but outside the UK the situation was a complete morass and nightmare. However a senior person in OPSI which administers Crown copyright for the British Government has stated quite clearly that they view the expiration of copyright in the UK as also applying worldwide. I wish we could get a similar statement from someone in the US Government, but I don't think an equivalent single authority on the matter exists.

International copyright law is a real morass, and that morass has been considerably worse by the internet and its cross-jurisdiction applications. It will probably take decades to sort out. To give you an example of this, in the UK up until November 2003 it was technically a violation of copyright law to run a web caching service. There was no fair dealing exception to copyright to cover that situation. We now have a rule covering transient copies of something that are of no independent economic value, but for nearly 10 years those running web caching servers were potentially very vulnerable to litigation. That's a relatively trivial example from a jurisdictional point of view but it does show the sort of problems that fast moving technological progress is casusing for the international intellectual property law corpus. David Newton 10:49, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion moved to Commons_talk:Licensing#Which_copyright_law_applies? -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 11:20, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lizenz?

[edit]

Moin, du beschäftigst dich doch mit Lizenzen, oder? In Category:Maps of Germany habe ich dies gefunden. Ist das wirklich ok? Es gibt in der Kategorie wohl übrigens noch mehr Rhein-Teilstücke aus derselben Karte... Greets, --Begw 02:44, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm... soweit ich weiss erlischt das Urheberrecht an Gemeinschaftswerken 70 Jahre nach Veröffentlichung - das wäre also ende 2005. Ab das so stimmt, und ob das hier zutrifft, da bin ich mir nicht sicher. Frag abesten den Uploader. Übrigens sollte der Lizenzbaustein dann entsprechend geändert werden, auf {{PD-old}} oder besser auf {{PD-because}}. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 10:32, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bad user pages

[edit]

That was a great idea, making a list of bad user pages. If it's not too much trouble, could you please give me a list for English Wikipedia? Thanks, User:dbenbenn 15:33, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

done. look at your talk page at en. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 18:42, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Your list has discovered a problem in the database. The first line on your list, w:User:Anarres apparently doesn't exist (no "User contributions" link in the toolbox), but the user has contributions. I suppose some old user accounts got lost in the past. Do you think this is a known issue? User:dbenbenn 00:39, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea. Please ask devs on IRc and/or file a bug report on MediaZilla. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 13:26, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please ENABLE SUPPORT for Macromedia / FLASH

[edit]

This would allow way smoother animations, that are faster loading and would allow technical interactive animations. See my profile on wikipedia 'Slicky'. Thanks in advance. Regards,Slicker 23:11, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eine Überbrückungslösung für das To[o|l]lserver-Problem

[edit]

already at meta:User_talk:Duesentrieb/CheckUsage ;) --^grm_wnr (^home_wiki) 15:54, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commons: template:deutsch

[edit]

Hallo, Duesentrieb, ich habe deine letzte Änderung in commons bei "template:deutsch" mal rückgängig gemacht, da bei sehr vielen Artikel im botanischen und zoologischen Bereich der landesspezifische deutsche Name von Pflanzen und Tiere nicht mehr brauchbar war. Gruß Orchi 22:10, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ja, sorry, hatte versehentlich einen Zeilenumbruch eingeführt, wo vorher keiner war - hatte ich wegen dem dicken Warnblock übersehen. Ich hab' die Kategorien wieder reingenommen, sollte jetzt OK aussehen. -- Duesentrieb^(?!)

Pages that use template syntax for categories

[edit]

here you go -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 17:30, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Could you run that query again, please? Apparently many have been fixed. Actually, it might be better if you had it give all transcluded pages other than Template and Creator pages. User:dbenbenn 03:37, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

for checkusage, while the Toolserver has en.wp lag...

[edit]

Do you think it would be a good idea to put a manual link on CheckUsage to the en.wp page (or the "fake" page) for any given image? Then we can at take one more click, and see if there's anything in the "what links here". I'm a bit concerned about this lag... pfctdayelise (translate?) 11:08, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm more concerned about the fact that the en db is not only lagged, it's also corrupt (the toolserver copy, that is, not the master). It will be a few days until we get a fresh dump. Also, lag for the japanese wikipedia et.al. is now up to 6 moths :(

I'll think about adding a marker for databases with broken replication. The problem is not really to show it in checkusage, but to maintain the info which databases are lagged or broken. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 11:12, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. I still can't believe in that time we've never had a Japanese, Thai or Korean person (I think they're the three on there) come to the Commons to complain. Either we've been really lucky, or the language barrier is too much, or they just really don't complain as much as Europeans. ;) pfctdayelise (translate?) 22:51, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just for Info: How many Wiki, Wikisource, Wikinews etc are currently located at the Yahoo cluster and affected by the problem ? --Denniss 23:22, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Afaik, only for projects: wikipedias for ja, th, ms and ko. And en.wikipedia is out of sync for otehr reasons. Stuff like wiktionary etc should not be effected.

A warning and an option for manual checking is in the dev version and will go live wehn i update (have been meaning to do that for weeks... maybe tomorrow). -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 01:06, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Complaining Asian users. Maybe, we should ask those who speak those languages and are active on the relevant Wikipedias to post a message about it on their local Village pumps? / Fred Chess 19:45, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, why not? But anway: as of yesterday night, a new version of CheckUsage is live, which implements your idea - users are now warned about"broken" databases, and can check manually by clicking the project name. TRy it out :) -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 20:03, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work! Very scary red warning. :) pfctdayelise (translate?) 10:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! DaB. is working to make the warning go away... -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 11:04, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Asias Wikipedia notification. Look like our most recent admin user:LERK took care of it, see User talk:LERK.

Btw thanks for correcting me on the German word Rekursiv. All these false friends.... / Fred Chess 16:53, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

database query to find out # of users/lang speakers

[edit]

Hey Duesentrieb... I was thinking, would it be possible to run a query to get some data on how many editors are language categories/# of whatlinkshere for Babel templates? It might give us an idea of what language communities have large numbers here. This could help us to

encourage the large communities to improve their translations here
try and figure out why communities that (according to the size of their wikipedia) should have a lot of users here, don't

It would not be wholly accurate because many people don't use the templates, of course, and XX-1 and XX-2 speakers will probably distort the results a bit, but maybe it will be interesting. We don't really have any data like this.

No rush, of course, but if it's not too difficult, let me know how you go. Thanks! pfctdayelise (translate?) 03:25, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, I can make such a list - it would be easier however if the babel templates would be categorized according to Commons:Tag categories. They should probably have their own category... what do you think? would you help with that? -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 11:10, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, guess I volunteered myself for that one :) The templates seem to go quite naturally in the category with users, but if you think so... Category:Babel templates? Category:User templates? (this might cover the odd weird one like {{User admin}}) I will help, but not in any rush... let me know which you think is best. (PS - thanks! interesting data) pfctdayelise (translate?) 12:00, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you use IRC? I will be in the commons room for the next half-hour or so, it might be easier to discuss there. pfctdayelise (translate?) 12:20, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, i'm a regular on IRC - mostly #mediawiki and #wikimedia-toolserver, though. I'm usually online later in the day, but i'll join now :) -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 12:53, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Nazi symbol/de

[edit]

Hi, in de haben wir die entsprechende Vorlage mal erstellt. Dabei habe ich Template:Nazi symbol/de Kopie auf Commons durch den neuen deutschen Inhalt ersetzt. Sollte die en-Vorlage entsprechend angepasst werden? Gruß --Steschke 08:51, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, die neue Fassung scheint mir ausführlicher und präzieser - allerdings evtl auch schwerer verständlich für den Laien... und eine Übersetzung ist wohl entsprechen schwierig. Für die Commons wäre es auch gut, zu wissen, wie die Rechtlage in anderen Ländern ist. Aber wie dem auch sei: sei mutig! -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 10:32, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ich? Englisch? LOL ;-) --Steschke 18:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Link templates

[edit]

Sure thing. I've always wanted to categorize this somehow, so thanks for doing it! In the meantime, I categorized its relatives, {{Coor dm}}, {{Coor dms}}, and {{Location}} as well. —UED77 23:36, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cool, thanks! -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 23:58, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Open coffin.jpg

[edit]

Please explain your reversion of my edits to the Open coffin image. Articles are preferable to Categories as they contain more information. Your edits run contrary to that. Rklawton 18:36, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your patient explanation. Rklawton 22:14, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ein kleines Problem mit Gallery

[edit]

already at meta:User_talk:Duesentrieb/Gallery ;) --^grm_wnr (^home_wiki) 22:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adding preferable interface language to CheckUsage

[edit]

Is it possible to add option to choose interface language (with adding ?uselang=code) for opened links in CheckUsage?

As for me, it'll be more easy to read English text then Japanese, Korean and so on :-)

EugeneZelenko 14:56, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heh - pretty cool idea... I'll add it soon :)

But it'll only really make sense when users are able to choose an interface language for CheckUsage itself -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 15:56, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kann ich die Bilder verwenden?

[edit]

Hallo Duesentrieb! Es wurden schon sehr viele Bilder von flickr auf commons hochgeladen und unter {{Cc-by-2.0}} gestellt. Kann ich dort einfach die Bilder entnehmen oder braucht es dafür immer die dazugehörige Einverständnis des Urhebers? Die haben nämlich so schöne Bilder wie dieses hier Yellow-rumped Warbler ;-). So ganz blicke ich da nicht durch, die einen haben eine Erlaubnis, andere laden anscheinend einfach hoch, natürlich mit der entsprechenden Lizenz. Oder ist das auch wieder eine nicht ganz ausgegorene Geschichte, dann lasse ich lieber die Finger davon. Kennst du dich da aus und kannst mir sagen, inwiefern die Bilder nutzbar wären? grüße--Factumquintus 22:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CC-by-sa ist eine freie Lizenz, du brauchst keine Erlaubnis. Allerdings gibt es auf flicker auch bilder unter CC-by-sa-nc/nd - die dürfen nicht auf Commons oder in die Wikipedia. Ein weiteres Problem ist es, dass Flickr-User die Lizenz ihrer Bilder einfach ändern können, ohne dass das dokumentiert wird - dadurch wird ide alte Lizenz zwar nicht ungültig (die kann man nicht einfach zurücknehmen), aber sie ist nicht mehr nachvollziehbar. Das ist ärgerlich.

Eine mail von Urheber ist also immer gut, und vermeidet missverständnisse - aber grundsätzlich brauchst du keine Genehmigung, um etwas zu verwenden, das unter einer freien Lizenz steht - sonst wäre es ja nicht "frei". -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 00:43, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, danke dir. Ich bleibe trotzdem vorsichtig und werde nach einer Erlaubnis nachfragen. Mich hat nur die Some rights reserved- Anmerkung immer wieder irritiert. Das sah für mich nicht frei aus. Aber langsam werde ich auch, wenn nur unzureichend, eine kleine Fachfrau in diesem Gebiet. Erst vor zwei Monaten habe ich mitbekommen, dass ein Bild von einem Gebäude oder weiteres nicht von einem anderen Gebäude, dass nicht frei zu Verfügung steht, aus fotografiert werden darf, wenn es keine Erlaubnis des Eigentümers gibt. Oh, man, wen wundert es, wenn so viele aus Nichtwissen, keiner klaren Richtlinie und keiner klaren Hinweisung Urheberrechtsverletzungen begehen. Nochmals danke und gruß--Factumquintus 01:59, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ROFLMAO. I put this conversation into Google's translator, and I find out "Duesentrieb" means "nozzle impulse". :D As well as this fantastic line: But I become slow also, if only insufficient, a small specialized woman in this area. Hehe. Anyway...could you please ask this user to use {{en|template-style language captions}} rather than '''en:''' manually-written language captions? I think they are not aware of the advantages of this style and have been changing them to manually-written (eg here). Thanks, pfctdayelise (translate?) 15:25, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe - to find out what my nick means, you should use the image search :)

It's German Donald Duck? :) pfctdayelise (translate?) 23:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, Donald is the same in German - it's this guy :) -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 00:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletions

[edit]

Hi - when deleting duplicates, please make sure the imagesyou delete are not used anywhere - you deleted Image:Arm muscles front superficial.png and Image:Bmi.dienstsiegel.kennz.JPG today; both where used on the german wikipedia: I have fixed that, nut they may still be linked to elsewhere.

We really have to make sure we do not needlessly disrupt other projects - it's annoying if images just vanish without a good reason. Copyvios etc can be speedied even if used, cleanup is in the responsibility of the "offending" uploader, or the people using images without checking the license info. Duplicates, on the other hand, or no ones fault - so it's our responsibility as admins to make sure not to disturbe anything when we remove them. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 01:20, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry; it is totally my fault, but I'll be sure not to do that again, and get into the habit of using your CheckUsage more. In the meantime, I was considering that there be a separate category for copyvio speedies and redundant speedies, but this incident, other than making me realize my mistake, prompted me to pursue that idea further. What do you think about it? —UED77 01:32, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm... yes, that would probably be a good idea - "delete when ready" (dupe) as opposed to "delete imediately" (copyvio). -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 01:46, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OrphanImages != orphans in Gallery?

[edit]

For example, this lists just one orphan, whereas several are clearly visible on the Gallery. I thought they would be the same? pfctdayelise (translate?) 13:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, they are not quite the same: Gallery counts categories given explicitely on the description page only. OrphanImages, in contrast, counts all categories for page, including those that are defined by a template, but expluding all categories matching a list of known license-categories. Since Category:Australian public domain photographs is missing in that list, OrphanImages counts images in that categorie as "categorized" - but Gallery sees it as "orphan", because it has no explicite categorization.

I hope to remove this inconsistency in teh future. To make this possible, I would need to tag license-categories in some way - basically the reverse of Commons:Tag categories: category tags. I'm not sure yet how and when that will be implemented. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 14:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regions of Spain

[edit]

Hi Duesentrieb, thanks for your comment. Maybe I'm too habituated to the Wikipedia, where you can change everything that you think that you could improve... I was adapting those images at the spanish wikipedia most common format, but I didn't know that there is a galician wikipedia project that used them. However, I think that the question is now resolved: I had upload the files with a new name, and my improper changes had been reverted. I apologize for the caused problems. Have a nice day :) Leoplus » 23:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing help

[edit]

I've been running around here trying to find someone who can help me before my image gets deleted.......and everyone seems to be unable to help or inactive. Anyway, I've uploaded Image:Study proverb.PNG and I don't know what the license is. It's a bit complicated, if you read my summary. I've read the pages about licensing and I still don't know what to do. Can you help?--ɪkiɾɔɪd | talk 23:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

please provide the writing on a plain (or even transparent) background. The background may or may not be a copyright porblem - but it's always a good idea to make a "pure" version available so others can work with it. It you want a version with background, I'm sure you'll find someone who can put it in using a totally and undouptadly free background image.

Fonts can generally not be copyrighted - at least not if you don't copy the files that define the font to a computer program. If I write a text and print it, I can publish it under any license, I don't have to ask permission from whoever may own rights to the font as such.

So, If you provide a plain version, and assuming the prover is PD because of age, you are free to license the image any way you want. If you feel you have contributed anough originality to be contributed, i'd suggest using the latest CC-BY-SA license and GFDL. If you don't care, put it under PD-self (or better, PD-user - but that's only a matter of templates). -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 23:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the help. In that case, I'll just put it under GFDL or whatever once I fix it.--ɪkiɾɔɪd | talk 22:03, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Untagged Images

[edit]

Benutze seit einiger Zeit das Tool um bei den Bildern ohne Copyright Vermerk mit aufzuräumen. wie auf der Seite beschrieben setze ich {{subst:nld}} und dann wird ja auch alles nett in die passenden Kategorien eingefügt. habe heute bemerkt, dass es ein neues Template Template:Untagged gibt. Die damit markierten Bilder werden natürlich vom Tool trotzdem angezeigt. Ausserdem sind die Tageskategorien nicht angelgt. Offensichtlich läuft da etwas nebeneinander her. aber vielleicht kannst du ja bei der Klärung mithelfen. -- Rüdiger Wölk 21:55, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arg, nicht noch ein template dafür :( Wie dem auch sei: meine Tolls werden nach und nach auf Commons:Tag categories umgestellt, dann wird viele besser. Bisher muss ich die Listen von Templates per Hand nachführen... -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 22:16, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also weiter das Tool nutzen und mit {{subst:nld}} markieren? -- Rüdiger Wölk 22:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ja - und sich an der Diskussion beteiligen: Commons:Village_pump#Tags_for_images_missing_info - danke für die Anregung :P -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 22:26, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What really means "orphan"?

[edit]

Hi. Sorry if this is a stupid question, but I can't find in Commons a place or policy talking about it. Orphan images are those without category or without "category or categorized gallery"? I was surprised because in Commons:Categories saids "To allow this, each file must be put into a category directly, and/or put on a gallery page which is categorized". I believed that an image that is in a categorized gallery but not in a category it's not useful. In fact it's hard to find it. But the sentence can be read as "you must categorize the image and you can (also) put it in a categorized gallery" or maybe "you can choose between categorize the image or put it in a categorized gallery". Regards, --Colegota 10:36, 19 May 2006 (UTC) PD I know you are not responsible of every page in Commons, it's just you are more used to orphans. :)[reply]

Galleries are considered equivalent to categories on commons - which is more useful is a matter of debate. Galleries are commonly used to show a "best of" collection from a category, or to present images in a more structured manner than is possible in a category. An orphan is a file that is not used on a gallery page (i.e. a page in the main namespace) and not in any topic category. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 12:42, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the problem is that the debate is not public. When I started to upload images I've read this votation and I agree with the most voted option. So I have been working both creating documented and structured galleries and categorizing images/files. As I know that many people does. But now some people that does not like the solution are removing categories from images that are in galleries and the effort to have an efficient category system crashes. :( Regards, --Colegota 21:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gallerygenerator and templates in templates

[edit]

Hi Duesentrieb, I used your Gallery tool on my images. Unfortunately, it does not always recognize the license templates inside the information template. I would like to provide machine-readable licence data. I do not know about programming. Shall I provide extra licence templates at the bottom (outside) of the information template, or do you have another suggestion what to do? Besides your tool helps greatly with updating information to the files. Greetings, Longbow4u 11:57, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO, the license tag should be outside the information template - the "permission" field is intended to point to a place where ther license / terms of use of a third party image can be found. For self made images, it should be blank or say something like "self made", or name the license.

OTOH, my tools should recognize license tags even if they are nested inside other templates - and they will as soon as they have been changed to use Commons:Tag categories. So, this will be solved in the next few weeks. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 12:46, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comic images

[edit]

I have seen images uploaded directly out of comics before, espeically on wookiepedia, so how does one license them? Vastu 11:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks, I thought the commons was the same thing as wikipedia to be honest - as pictures from here are displayed there... Vastu 12:37, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Adolf Hitler.jpg

[edit]

This image you have uploaded has been proposed for deletion. The US-PD has to be incorrect, i can not imagine any way how this licensing should apply. Maybe you can tell us something about the source of this picture. Greetings/Gruß :-) --Wiggum 17:38, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just transfered it from the german WP. I have no idea about the original source. Side note: this was in my early commons days - i'm a bit mor concious of these things today :) -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 17:45, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aber wirklich nur ein bißchen :-( --Historiograf 03:37, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

one last idea for CheckUsage

[edit]

While en.wp is still down, perhaps your CheckUsage could somehow pull the result from Avatar's checkusage? His works off the live wp, doesn't it? It would make it a bit slower, but complete... it's also a hell of a lot handier for bulk checking. (just en.wp I mean) Just an idea, pfctdayelise (translate?) 07:56, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would take a while to implent that - and I hope by that time, we will have a clean en database again. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 10:59, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alignment & Thanks

[edit]

First of all, thanks for your professionallity. Just to be alligned. There was a photo, Image:Dettaglio Ghirlandaio.jpg, under cat firenze. I create a new page, ospedale degli innocenti under firenze, were i put the photo. I linked also the new page to the main page of florence; after that i remove the category firenze from the immage and put the one for the painter. I hope that how I've operated is in the spirit of wiki. --mac 14:16, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that looks quite good, thank you! Some suggestions to make it perfect: It would be even better if you would also categorise Ospedale degli Innocenti by architectonal style / art period (I don't know - Category:Renaissance architecture, perhaps?) An english heading (one sentence) / link to the english wikipedia would also be nice (if there's an article about that building there - i dind't find one). As to categorizing the image: it could also be useful to categorize by what the painting shows - if you know what it is, and you can find a good category for it, it would be nice to add it.

But anyway - thanks for contributing! -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 14:26, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Enchiladas 1.jpg

[edit]

Eben gerade die Diskussion um das Enchiladas Bild auf Village pump entdeckt. Ich bins gewesen. Klar habe ich gecheckt, ob das Bild irgendwo verwendet wurde. Und auch festgestellt, dass es im englischen Wiktionary verwendet wurde. Bevor ich das Bild gelöscht habe, dort aus dem Artikel gelöscht. [7] Da einfach mal die Frage an den Spezialisten "Irgendwas ändern an meinem Verhalten?" -- Rüdiger Wölk 14:29, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ich find die Löschung völlig OK. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 19:05, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nun ja, man will ja auch nichts unrechtes tun. Danke für Deine Meinung. -- Rüdiger Wölk 19:20, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Taormina

[edit]

Hi Dues, I've asked so many time the sense to have the same photo under the cat and a page in the same cat and nobody as answered me. The admin is complaining on a silly thing, but he didn't see that I've created a new category, with tematic and organized pages. I belive in intelligence and I was always got frustraded when a priest told me it's so and you can't discuss it. So, I had a discussion with you yeasterday and I belived that we found a common agreement. If Devil has something to say why can't he discuss it witout having a priest behaviour? Thanks for your patience, --mac 07:17, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will take the occasion to clarify the matter, this why I've created a page and uncat the photo Image:Arsago seprio - SM in monticello.jpg (I see that the Cites in Geramny adopt the same behaviour); I've also write a message in the italian pump, to allow anybody to discuss. I hope this is in the spirit of commons. --mac 07:44, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Größere Version wird nicht übernommen

[edit]

Hallo Duesentrieb! Ich habe über das Bild --> Image:Calopteryx splendens 3.jpg eine größere Version hochgeladen, doch sie wird nicht übernommen. Es kam selten vor dass die Größe nicht übernommen wurde, hat bei den Fällen immer im zweiten Anlauf geklappt. Doch bei diesem Bild ist es auch im zweiten Anlauf gescheitert. Weißt du was da los sein kann? grüße --Factumquintus 21:03, 23 May 2006 (UTC) Das selbe Problem habe ich jetzt auch bei der zuvor hochgeladene überschriebene Version -->Image:Calopteryx splendens 2.jpg bemerkt. --Factumquintus 21:05, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Das Bild wird übernommen (die Grösse steht unter dem Bild...). Dass du es nicht gleich siehst, liegt daran, dass dein Browser noch die alte version im cache hat. Ctrl-R oder Shift-F5 (oder was auch imemr das bei deinem browser is) hilft. Notfalls in den Einstellungen den Cache leeren. Nicht das Bild nochmal hochladen. Kann ich die beiden zusätzlichen Versionen bei Image:Calopteryx splendens 3.jpg löschen? -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 21:27, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Äääähh... warte... das ist komisch. Muß doch nochmal nachhaken, sorry :/ -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 21:33, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, wollte gerade schon mein okay dazu geben zur Löschung der überflüssigen Versionen. Dann warte ich mal--Factumquintus 21:36, 23 May 2006 (UTC) Die Größe sehe ich auch unter dem Bild. Doch wenn ich den Download anklicke ist es die kleinere Version, sieht man ja über die Image properties. Eilt jetzt nicht, ich wollte nur die Lizenzen von Holger Gröschl berichtigen, da die falsch waren, das in die neue Formvorlage bringen für Beschreibung, Quelle, Fotograf und Lizenz und bei der Gelegenheit eine größere Version darüberbügeln.--Factumquintus 21:45, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sorry für meine voreilige Antwort. Bilder werden sei einigen Tagen im Cluster in Amsterdamm zwischengespeichert. Anscheinend bekommen die Server dort nicht (immer?!) mit, wenn ein Bild ersetzt wird. Ist ziemlich ärgerlich. Ich hab' Brion drauf angesprochen, er hat versprochen es sich bald anzusehen. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 21:50, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Ordnung. Die beiden überflüssigen Versionen kannst du ja dann bei Image:Calopteryx splendens 3.jpg löschen. gru0 --Factumquintus 21:59, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

done. Ich hoffe, das mit dem cache ist bald behoben. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 22:09, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Der Fehler ist behoben, siehe bugzilla:6074. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 22:45, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah super;-). Danke dir und natürlich an Brion Vibber falls du ihn mal wieder "triffst". --Factumquintus 02:01, 25 May 2006 (UTC) Könntest du bitte checken beim nächsten online hier ob das auch bei Bild Image:Calopteryx splendens 2.jpg der Fall ist? Beim ersten Bild Image:Calopteryx splendens 3.jpg ist jetzt alles in Ordnung. Doch bei dem zweiten ist trotz cacheleerung der gleiche Zustand. Wenn es bei dir in Ordnung ist, muss ich bei mir schauen was da los ist. --Factumquintus 02:13, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, bei mir funktioniert das - versuch mal diesen Link: [8]. Wenn der geht, liegt's an deinem Browser-Cache. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 07:34, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Policies about galleries

[edit]

Hi. I'm looking around for some policy, best practice, hint... about creating and filling galleries. Most help guidelines when talk about "pages" means "image/file pages". There is help and information about categories. But I can't find nothing about what to put and how to struct a galery/article page but some good pages given as examples (that I try to follow). Do you know some link about it? Thanks, --Colegota 13:01, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's anything official - it would be cool if you could write it :)

Things that can/should be on a gallery page (besides images), off the top of my hat:

short description of the topic, in several languages. The first sentence from the repective wikipedia article is usually OK.
interlanguage links, i.e. links to the respective topic in local wikipedias.
Sister-Project links to Wikisource, etc, where applicable.
Cross-Links (see also); Should be in the top section, IMHO
The page must be categorized, of course
External weblinks should be used sparingly, if at all. I'd only use them to point to large and well organized media collections for the topic at hand.

Images on the page can be subdivided into sections, according to whatever pleases you. That's about it, I guess. Oh, in a general guideline, it should be made clear that the purpose of a gallery page is to present and organize images. Pages consisting mostly of text are not a good idea and will probably be deleted soon.

HTH -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 15:46, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. This is the way I work (you can see Machu Picchu or Xinjiang). The question was if there was something already written, but I like to agree with you. I'm trying to prepare a draft or even more serious docummentation in order to clarify guidelines and as a base for the open debate about categorization we talked about. It will depend on my disponibility on next days but I'll try it. Regards, --Colegota 16:05, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. A little doubt... When you said "Cross links" you mean like in Machu Picchu where it saids "Machu Picchu is located above the Urubamba Valley in Peru" in descriptions? Maybe to the link to Inca trail on see also section? Both?

You'd like to have "See also" section as the first section in top of page before image sections? It seems that information we are looking for should be first and related information later... Regards, --Colegota 14:27, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Sorry, I think you forgot answer to this little question, thanks, --Colegota 12:40, 3 June 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Yea, sorry, i'm a bit busy with CommonsTicker right now...

I'm a bit undecided if "inline" links in the description text should point to a commons page or to wikipedia... maybe get some input from someone else on that. I kind of like links to wp there (they explain a term people may not know), but others may be confused by that (they are looking for images, and end up on another project).

I like "see also" in the first block, so all the "meta info" (description and cross-references) are in one place. This is also consistent with the layout of category pages. See also sections at the end tend to be forgotten. But that's just my personal taste, I guess.

HTH -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 12:45, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dateitypen

[edit]

Hallo Duesentrieb! Weißt du, wie es möglich ist, zusätzliche Dateitypen zum Upload zuzulassen? Es geht mir konkret um Commons:Forum#DjVu. Die Leute von de.wikisource wie unter anderem Frank bräuchten wohl in Zukunft häufiger das DjVu-Format, da es besonders für Digitalisierungen geeignet und in dem Bereich auch ziemlich verbreitet ist. Wer legt die zugelassenen Format fest? --Danke und Gruß Crux 20:56, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Habe dort geantwortet. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 13:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Licence statement

[edit]

Hi Duesentrieb !

Remember we met on Image:GRX Alhambra gazelleR 8973.jpg a while ago ?

I was wondering what licence in Commons should take the following statement on the source site :

«It all holds the copyright (C) 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 to the original artists - Permission is granted for any non-commercial use, including display on websites, and including "cropped" or otherwise "manipulated" versions. All the artists have informed the website it is their hope these and future donations will refresh and increase the related images available to the fan community.»

Maybe that's not a sufficient statement for Commons ?

Tell me if I'd rather put the pics in my country-related encyclopedic environment.

Yours,

Holycharly 19:58, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not compatible with commons policy: commercial use must be allowed. Please make sure such an image would be allowed on your local project - afaik, all require commercial use of images to be allowed. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 21:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Urv Bilder

[edit]

Hallo Duesentrieb. Schaue doch mal auf der Diskussionsseite vorbei User talk:Killahcam. Der Benutzer hat, wie es aussieht, urheberrechtliche Bilder hochgeladen. Ich hätte sie gerne so schnell wie möglich gelöscht bevor sie sich verteilen und die Urheber darauf aufmerksam werden. Eines landete schon in der spanischen wikipedia. Bei zwei Bilder forsche ich noch nach, sind aber auch vermutlich URV. Drei Bilder habe ich schon aus dem Artikel de:Nasir Jones herausgenommen. Ich muss jetzt aber ins Heiabettchen. Ich wusste gar nicht, dass sich so ein Rattenschwanz rausbildet;-)--Factumquintus 02:00, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hat sich erledigt. Raymond hat sich dem angebommen. grüße --Factumquintus 15:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok - sorry, war einfach noch nicht dazu gekommen; hab' gerade viel mit dem CommonsTicker zu tun. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 16:01, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Bugs

[edit]

Hello, maybe you have some more to add...? --pfctdayelise (translate?) 14:42, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Benutzer existiert nicht

[edit]

Jetzt muss ich dich schon wieder mal nach was fragen. Ich habe gerade das Bild Image:Hevia2003.jpg hochgeladen. Das Orginalbild stammt aus der en wikipedia siehe en:Image:Hevia2003.jpg. Wenn ich aber auf den benutzeraccount gehe (also beim Bild), dann existiert der nicht. Wie kommt das? Ich habe gedacht, es können keine accounts gelöscht werden, wie kann das dann nachträglich nachgewiesen werden, dass das Bild von ihm stammt. Die Verlinkung ist dann natürlich irreführend. --Factumquintus 18:13, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Doch, der Benutzer existiert, siehe [9]. Er hat halt keine Benutzerseite angelegt. Versuch's mal per mail [10]. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 19:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bin schon ganz bedusselt;-). Nein ich meinte, wenn du bei der englischen Kopie auf den Benutzernamen klickst, kommt http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Maelor&action=edit. Ist wohl ein Bug. --Factumquintus 19:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nein, kein Bug, das ist ganz normal: die Seite existiert nicht. Der Benutzer an sich schon... Wenn das passiert, achte auf den Link "user contributions" links in der Toolbox - der ist nur da wenn es den Benutzer gibt (das gleiche gilt für "E-Mail this user"). -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 19:55, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, das andere ist mir schon bekannt, war nur irritiert, als ich bei der englischen Kopie auf den uploader klickte. grüßle --Factumquintus 20:25, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bild bitte gleich löschen.

[edit]

Es geht um dieses Bild Image:Hk ump.JPG. Benutzer Sanandros hatte es von der niederländischen Wiki hier hochgeladen mit angeblicher Lizenz unter GNU-FDL. Die niederländische gab selber als Quelle die polnische Wiki an und dort stand das Foto unter Status unknow (siehe Spiegelung der pl Wiki. Mittlerweile ist das Bild in der pl gelöscht, da ja jetzt auf Commons. Auf jeden Fall kann Sanandros keine gültige Lizenz nachreichen. Da es mittlerweile schon in der französichen Wiki ist kannst du es gleich löschen ehe es noch mehr verbreitet wird. Mfg --Sonaz 11:29, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

done -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 14:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Danke, bist ein guter Junge. :) --Sonaz 16:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The G®iffen tags

[edit]

Thanks for re-catting my template {{By G®iffen}} - I partly didn't understend, partly forgot to learn. Sorry! I hope it meets the required standards now? G®iffen 12:49, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seems fine now :) -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 12:59, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weather Images

[edit]

Hi - thanks for getting rid of all the pesky weather images. However, it would have been nice if you would have announced this on the mailing list a few days in advance - tools that rely on the log are swamped by this... For example, CommonsTicker will check for usage of each image that was deleted, I will have to implement a filter so it's not bogged down by your mass deletion.

Idealy, you should be on IRC in #wikimedia-commons during massive bot runs, so you can get imediate feedback. Anything massive like this needs to be coordinated. Perhaps throttle to bot to a few hundred deletions per day for now? I'll implement a filter for COmmonsTicker, so there's no big problem for me, but Special:Log/delete is pretty much unusable at the moment...

Regards -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 18:25, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The bot automatically stopped as soon as you posted, having deleted 2284 of about 25000 WeatherBot images. Sorry, I wasn't aware of CommonsTicker (and you're right, I should have asked on the mailing list first). I tried to give myself bot status with Special:Makebot, but MediaWiki doesn't let administrators become bots. Perhaps you could encourage this bug to be fixed? That would help with Special:Recentchanges (though probably not with the delete log).

Anyway, I posted on the mailing list, and I'll wait for feedback before starting again (not before June 10). Throttling to a few hundred per day isn't really feasible: at that rate, it'll take 2 months, and the bot does require a little supervision. User:dbenbenn 19:01, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. I guess if people are aware that this is going to happen, it's OK.

I think it's correct that MediaWiki does not allow admin and bot-status at once. A bot with admin rights is dangerous, and people should watch it. It's annying in this case, sure, but it wouldn't help with the deletion log anyway.

Throtteling is probably not such a good idea anyway... better to be bothered once for a day or two then every day for a few hours...

Thanks again for your effort, and I hope you can continue (and finish) the job soon. CommonsTicker will ignore all such deletions, as long as you don't change the comment the bot generates. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 19:52, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the deletion summary. It's now

Old User:WeatherBot map, see Commons:Deletion requests/Archives09#Image:Aus C 10Apr2005at0411UTC.jpg

I've stopped the bot; let me know when you've got CommonsTicker updated so I can start again. User:dbenbenn 20:07, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

wikt:WT:CT

[edit]

from User talk:Connel MacKenzie

I am looking forward to seeing how it goes (especially in English ;)). I think it can be especially useful for a smaller project like wiktionary, and hopefully will just need a glance every few days rather than obsessive maintenance. User:Duesentrieb will be very open to suggestions and improvements. It would be cool if you could give us (or at least, me :)) a small report on how it's going after a couple of weeks. e.g. if other people in the community find it useful, if you find there's many things that seriously affect your project that you weren't aware of before, etc. cheers, pfctdayelise (translate?) 07:17, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, now that it has been going for a little while...

This is so wonderful! I have no idea how we survived without it! So far, on the small project (English Wiktionary,) we've seen one image deleted about every other day. Or rather, one image tagged for deletiong. As I've notified users that their image is on the chopping block, they've simply taken care of it quietly. A far cry from sysops running to Commons, screaming, after-the-fact!

I at first started the process to have en:wikt:User:CommonsTicker flagged as a bot. However, the instructions I think should say never to do that. On small sites, seeing the edits once a day, or once every three hours is crucial. On large sites, it won't matter anyhow.

On behalf of En.Wiktionary, THANK YOU User:Duesentrieb for allowing us to pilot this! --Connel MacKenzie 18:04, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aufzählungen unter {{de}}

[edit]

Hallo Duesentrieb,
zur mehrsprachigen Bildbeschreibung nutze ih üblicherweise die Form: ...Information = {{de|*Zeile1 *Zeile2}}{{en|*Line1 *Line2}}... - siehe z.B. Image:DVB Solaris Urbino18.jpg
Seit deiner letzten Modifikation an {{de}} tritt hier aber ein Fehler auf: (Wenn es in {{Description Information= }} eingesetzt wird.) Beim ersten Absatz wird der Anstrich als Text dargestellt (*), und nicht als Anstrich...
Mir ist nicht ganz klar, woran das liegen könnte, bei {{en}} tritt es nicht auf (auch wenn ich es an erste Stelle sezte) - Vielleicht kannst du das klären... Danke --burts ∞ 12:17, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sprachprobleme zwischen mir und User:Cotinis

[edit]

Hallo Duesentrieb! Tja, und schon wieder muss ich dich mal um Hilfe bitten. Könntest du dem Benutzer mal erklären, unter welchen Bedingungen ich Templates zustimmen würde-->siehe dazu auch meine Antwort auf deine Frage User talk:Factumquintus#Bildbeschreibung. Ich habe es einfach satt auch hier reverten zu müssen (die Arbeit bei der deutschen reicht mir schon) und es dem Benutzer nicht erklärbar zu machen aufgrund der Spachprobleme bzw, hier wohl den Schreibproblemen. Ich werde mir die Templates nicht aufzwingen lassen. Wie bei meiner Antwort sollten dann Lösungen her. Sollte das nicht machtbar sein, werde ich meine Arbeit hier einschränken und nur noch die Bilder, die ich in der Kategorie:NowCommons bearbeite, hier richtig in Form setzen und die Lebenswesenbilder nur noch grob einordnen. Seiten würde ich dazu dann nicht mehr erstellen. Ich bin seit Dezember 2004 dabei und habe mit anderen eine gut sortierte Struktur bei den Lebewesen reingebracht. Das fiel leider nach und nach zusammen. Somit werde ich mich dabei auch nicht mehr miteinander auseinander setzen. Aus der Systematik habe ich mich schon zurückgezogen, da ist Hopfen und Malz verloren. Sorry, bin etwas angefressen, da kannst du nichts dafür. Ich bitte nur um eine Übersetzungshilfe bzw. eine Erklärung auf englisch wie ich das meine. Danke. Eventuell sollte ich einfach alle machen lassen wie sie wollen. Das Chaos ist leider schon seit Anfang da und wird nicht besser. Ich gehe mal tief Luft holen;-) grüße --Factumquintus 16:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ich bin jetzt (wohl) mit Mühe mit dem Benutzer in einen Dialog getreten. Es ist natürlich fürchterlich für mich, das dem Benutzer nicht erklären zu können ohne Mißverständnisse. Auch ich wünsche natürlich keinen Editwar und so --> Sayornis phoebe sieht es natürlich unschön aus. Mir geht es natürlich nur darum, Cortini zu sagen, dass es nebeneinander platzsparend ist bzw. nicht eine ellenlange Liste erzeugt bis zu den Bildern wie bei meiner Antwort auf meiner Diskussionsseite als Beispiel angegeben. Vielleicht kann sich da auch jemand mal um die Templates kümmern, die es erlaubt alles nebeneinander zu setzen. Sorry, dass ich so Umstände mache, aber ich weiß mir keine andere Hilfe um das Problem zu klären. --Factumquintus 21:50, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

database query

[edit]

Hello Duesentrieb, I was wondering if it would be possible to get a list of administrators here and the number of deletions they did last month? Preferably just image deletions. Thanks (no rush), pfctdayelise (translate?) 04:55, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Love parade

[edit]

Hi,

I answered you at my Discuss page.

Have a good day,

Holycharly 16:56, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated for deletion

[edit]

Hi Duesentrieb. I nominated User:Duesentrieb/Pages by number of images for deletion. Of course, I would rather want you to update the page instead of deleting it. / Fred Chess 20:10, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CommonsTicker

[edit]

Hello again, Duesentrieb. The undeletion-feature now requires the CommonsTicker to reflect this correctly. Currently it says that a restored image is GONE when in fact it should say RESTORED.

Fred Chess 09:33, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. will be fixed in the next version. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 21:27, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commons-l subscription

[edit]

Hello Duesentrieb/Archive 06-12,

as per Commons talk:Administrators, I am asking all admins to subscribe to commons-l, a mailing list for Wikimedia Commons policy and project discussion. Since many admins are only on Commons infrequently, this is a good way to alert people about important happenings. The mailing list is nominally multilingual, but predominantly English.

If you are already subscribed to commons-l, I apologize for bothering you, and you are free to ignore this message. If you don't want to use your regular e-mail account, feel free to leave me a message, and I can send you a GMail invite. Traffic on the mailing list is relatively low, and we do not expect admins to read all messages to the list, but it would be nice if you could check on it at least every few weeks. Thanks for your time,--Eloquence 22:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal alert

[edit]

Could you please block this user and summarily revert his edits (minus the first one). 67.86.88.191? Thanks, Longbow4u 19:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rename images

[edit]

Hello Duesentrieb, I need to know if rename image will be allow soon (?), at least by admins, and when (?). [I ask this because I have some difficulties in the Chinese stroke order project...]. Thanks >0<y Yug (talk) 14:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a matter of being allowed, but of being possible. If someone implements it, it will be possible - probably for admins only, at least on commons. Renaming an image on commosn can have devestating effects for many projects - just as deleting would. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 23:29, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Block

[edit]

William On Owls is begging for a block... :-) Lupo 14:30, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto Arofol Sockpuppet 1. Looks like someone should watch RC. Lupo 14:37, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for input

[edit]

re: Actually - I suggest you just ask for advice/feedback from User:Duesentrieb. He is extremely experienced with the category system and general Commons organisation. He will listen to you fairly. --pfctdayelise 13:46, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi! Brianna says to get your input, and that's exactly a right thing to my mind at this stage. We've got a lengthy dialog going on my talk (for two days) which has some false starts... but I think is clear enough in counter point for you to take in and digest. I'm inviting a few others to join in as well as it's 'past time' this is either evolved into a formal wikiProject, or abandoned without further effort, which I think would be a mistake of large magnitude.

In a brief overview, I hooked up with some people hard at work over here revising your Maps categories, and signed on to help them a bit over a month ago. But running into the same 'history related' categories and parents on both sisters, and the recurring need to interwiki navigate to check this or that datum made me think of interconnecting the en.wp and the commons, so I devised a set of templates on both sister projects to accomplish that and concurrently to adiminister the category reconciliation of maps on both sisters.

The system is very general though, and I think should be utilized whenever and wherever the categories match on the sisters, and one template in the two complimentary families (The templates used on e.wp have different names, equivilent functions—one links to commons from en.wp, the other from en.wp to the commons. Logical.) is designed be used to tag a non-match.

The overall sets provide three levels of administrative auto-categorization:
   (A) 'Category Done-- or 'equalized' (parents and sub-categories of both have same members and same names)';
   (B) 'Category needs more work-- or 'matching by name' but not adjusted or not fully vetted (parents and sub-categories need some adjustments, image contents need moved, etc. Essentially a backlog 'To-Do' list of sorts).
   (C) 'Category has no match'--which can be used to navigate to each for diverse rechecks, reconsiderations, and other maintenance tasks. More to the point, having each cat tagged appropiately means a visible signal is present that it's been incorporated into the system. Note, this outlined usage will eventually then include all 'working' categories as a mutually exclusive set. A non-adminsitrative category will be in one of the three sets, and none of the others.

Be warned that Brianna focused much too much in our early dialog about a picyune technicality--the names I chose for my draft efforts of putting together the templates, which were trial efforts... in short, the names made sense to me at the time. Towards the end of the second round of dialog answers and comments, I put together a table with somewhat better names. So do avoid that triviality. Do key in on the fact that the system is a Work in Progress that has passed initial testing and is essentially debugged. It has also been reviewed by a large number of en.wp admins on the Cfd/Tfd defense of some of it's pieces (Ahhhh, WikiPolitics and WikiEfficiency!), and was also posted in an notice on the Wikipedia Notice to Administrators page (Some categories were successfully showing images from here, but showing 'zero pages' there, which qualifies as a speedy-delete criteria. Four needed resurected. so the notice on en.wp Adminstrators Noticeboard where any one active would have seen it.) final form all these things take on is as is common on Wiki's that of consensus choice.

Lastly, I believe strongly that this interconnection will help recruit talent pool to this sister project, as the complimentary set of templates on the en.wp has survived both a Cfd and Tfd formal process, so there will be no issue over there placing them to connect to categories here. The templates are modeled on what I believe is a Metawiki standard interwiki connection box. The whole pantheon is viewable here with annotations. Like much of the above, that's redundant to what you can read on: User_talk:Fabartus#Templates_and_Wikipedia.

Thanks! // FrankB 06:32, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic wiki

[edit]

The ticker pages are ready in ar.wiki. All steps are done, with standard names, except the main ticker page. Sorry for delay. --Tarawneh 18:35, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the bot is working fine. I am just lost in RTL conversion. I lost the color coding from the page. All in all, the bot is fine.--Tarawneh 22:28, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am Spanish

[edit]

I'm not speak English. Spanish only. Iliberri 17:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uploads by Mahlum

[edit]

I've explained the situation to user Mahlum why he should not upload new images on top of other images, even if some of them isn't what he thinks is good enough. I think he now understands the problems and why it should not be done. — John Erling Blad (no) 08:59, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Dng

[edit]

Hallo Düsentrieb, ich werde etwas müde mit diesem Nutzer – quasi alles, was er hochlädt, muss sofort als copyvio oder nsd/nld getaggt werden. Auf Hinweise auf seiner Diskussionsseite reagiert er nicht. Was macht man da am besten? Einem Admin melden (so wie ich jetzt)? Um temporäre Sperre bitten? Auf einer URV-Liste eintragen? Wie, was, wo? Gruß, --Wikipeder 12:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ein Tag Denkpause. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 14:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Das hat ihn nicht sonderlich beeindruckt. Nach ein paar Ausfälligkeiten auf seiner Diskussionsseite (inzwischen gelöscht) hat er nach der Sperre erneut vier Bilder hochgeladen, die allesamt offensichtlich copyvios sind. --Wikipeder 08:08, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ich hab' ihn nochmal für 'nen tag gesperrt - seit der letzten sperre hat er ja "nur" vier bilder hochgeladen. Nächstes mal ist die Sperre länger. Ich hab' User:Lmbuga gebeten mit Dng zu reden - auf spanisch funktioniert das hoffentlich besser. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 09:26, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Deletion_requests#Image:Split-arrows.gif

[edit]

Hallo Düsentrieb!

Ich habe zufällig gesehen, dass Du das Bild Image:Split-arrows.gif wiederhergestellt hast, obwohl das Ergebnis der Abstimmung für das Löschen war. Ich habe daher die Diskussion wieder eröffnet und möchte Dich bitten unter Template:Deletion_requests#Image:Split-arrows.gif hierzu Stellung zu nehmen, damit wir das Verfahren bald abschließen können. Danke! --ALE! 09:24, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

done -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 09:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Dng

[edit]

I'm speaking with Dng. He is portuguese or Brazilian. A warm greeting --Lmbuga ^{gl, pt, es: contacta comigo} 12:41, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :) -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 13:11, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category name list

[edit]

I can write a bot to walk the cat tree and dump the category name list, but I wonder if there isn't a text file laying around somewhere that has the information. Your cat tools are nice, but wipe out due to the category depths I require.

I don't need the structure information, but if it is there, that's fine. I don't care if it is encoded some way- just give me a hint about what the format is and I will write something to decode it.

My purpose is to clean up any straggler adjectival categories not caught in the first pass of the placename conversion. -Mak 19:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not spider the category tree for information that could be attained in 20 sec by a trivial database query. You can get the page-to-category relation from the official download page. To get a full category structure you have to combine it with the page metadata dump. Look at http://download.wikimedia.org/commonswiki/latest/ for "categorylinks.sql.gz" and "page.sql.gz"; I also have a (private) tool that can dump teh category structure as an XML tree - that'S a bit heavy though, because many things appear more than once, and retrieving a heirarchical structure from a relational database requires one query per node. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 20:45, 21 July 2006 (UTC):[reply]

Thanks for the location. all I need is the cl_to strings for now. Dang that table takes a long time to load into mysql. It must have been a half hour since it started. It IS a utf-8 file right? I guess i better give bigger time slices to the server service. cheers -Mak 00:28, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jeez. 12 hours and still only half loaded (6.8meg of 13.3 processed). Wow, I have no idea what Mysql5.0 is doing with all that time. Everything I have done prior has been pretty fast, but those are toy wikis compared to Commons and wikipedia. Does that load time make sense to you on a fairly recent Intel consumer computer (2.2 ghz, reasonable speed hard drives running xp)? Maybe I should be running 4.0 or 4.1 instead? I am inclined to let it run since I am in no hurry, and having it in this form will allow me to do several other things.-Mak 18:42, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Systems level talent

[edit]

I've befriended a systems level programming guru recently on en.wp and asked about automating transfering images appropriately tagged and categorized from the wikipedias to the commons. Her response was along the lines of it should be childplay. I suggested she (User:Ste4k) contact you to see how to get into systems level support. She's been around since the old days of mainframes with lots of ancillery expertise, though is a new editor on en.wp.

Also have a few questions for you on [User talk:Fabartus/Templates and Wikipedia your last]. Regards, // FrankB 18:09, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Most programming tasks are simple in principle, but get complicated by the environment you must fit them into. A while back I submitted bugzilla:6071 as an official feature request for image-transwiki, it would be a good place to start. It does not however adress the problem of proper categorization - which is always messy. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 20:18, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Dng

[edit]

He uploaded copyvios consciously. See Image:Luisesparteiro.JPG. and http://www.artistasunidos.pt/luis_esparteiro.htm. I blocked him for two weeks. A warm greeting--Lmbuga ^{gl, pt, es: contacta comigo} 00:23, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted all the images (+40 images) with tag {{no source since|month=July|day=14|year=2006}} --Lmbuga ^{gl, pt, es: contacta comigo} 01:56, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

strange edit of mine

[edit]

Strange is the word for it. I remember looking at the deletions request page, but I don't remember making any edits to it. I certainly had no reason to edit the page let alone make the edits that most clearly appear under my name. I'll do what I can to restore them, but it may take awhile. I'm going to guess there's a bug in the system somewhere, but I can't imagine what would do that all in one edit. Rklawton 16:00, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I can fix this using my browser. The article size is too long, and I don't think my browser can handle it. In short, my trying to fix it might make it worse. Rklawton 16:10, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Is this permitted?" cont'd

[edit]

Hi, this is a follow up of discussion in Village Pump Commons:Village_pump#Is_this_permitted.3F. I have not been able to verify to 100% that the image referred to, image:nfpony.jpg, was created by the original uploader, since there is no contact information available, I am only assuming this in good faith. I have in the process found other GFDL images attached to Wiki articles but missing creator data, which of course makes me even more confused about what's OK and not. In any case, please let me know if my image will be tagged for deletion, in which case I shall find a different image that displays more complete copyright info. If you like, you can email me, contact info on my User page. Regards, --Wilma Sweden 20:10, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to tag it for deletion, but someone else might. YOu should be notified on your commons account if that happens, and CommonsTicker will also mention it if you have one for your wiki.

Generally, the english wikipedia (and many others) is far less strict about licensing info. "Assuming self made" is common there, because for a long time, people didn't put any info into the image description. Commons is, among other things, a fresh start in that respect: here, detailed info is required. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 23:43, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion has been followed up on my user page by User:Pfctdayelise! You can let it go! Thanks for all your help! --Wilma Sweden 17:40, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikisource images

[edit]

Sorry it's taken me a few days to get back to this; I've responded with some new questions at Commons:Village_pump#Wikisoure:Image_use_policy. Thanks for all your help with this! --Spangineer^en ws (háblame) 22:28, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Running for bureaucrat/checkuser?

[edit]

It looks like Commons lacks bureaucrats (and checkusers) again. I think you could be a great one. --EugeneZelenko 03:04, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletions per administrator

[edit]

I recall pfctdayelise asking you about this at some time, but I don't remember if you answered. Could it be possible to create a list of deletion at Commons per administrator?

/ Fred

Fred Chess 23:04, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

download commons

[edit]

Hi!!

Few weeks ago, I post a question about downloading the commons pictures and you begun to answer me...

i will be more clear

I'm a computer technician for a school board, in Quebec. The system (a portal) I'm working on will soon have the possibility for kids (and teacher) to easilly insert images in their documents, through the portal database. It's very easy. I need to find image bank, ideally free. Majority of image company will charge us (a lots!) for their image database. And i think that the commmons database is beautiful!

In fact, i need the easiest way to give students and teachers access to the commons database. And the mediawiki search engine is not good, i think.

Do you know how could I resolve this problem?

thank you very much!

Bestter Discussion 01:26, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I copied your message to the original thread and replied there. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 12:31, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ÄnderungsCharts

[edit]

Sehr geehrter Meister Duesentrieb, mich würde interessieren, ob sich in ihrem Labor ein Tool befindet (oder ob Ihnen eines bekannt ist) mit dem die am häufigsten bearbeiteten Artikel (sagen wir der letzten 48/24/12 Stunden) aufgelistet werden. Vielen Dank -- 195.93.60.33 11:51, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, würde sich wohl machen lassen. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 12:31, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wäre echt schön, dann weiß man was gerade die heißen Themen der Wikipedianer sind - oder welcher Kerl den Vorschaubutton nicht kennt ;-) .. (Dann nur für solche Artikel mit mehr als drei verschiedenen Autoren in der Zeit)-- 195.93.60.33 16:09, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiSense Gallery

[edit]

Just stumbled across this. Looks very cool. Don't know how new it is, but I think I can make great use of this since it is easier to cluster images by user- seeing them allows me to identify likely clusters that likely would share the same license (if missing) or same cats (if orphan status).

I can imagine the difficulty of identifying whether a page has a category due to transclusion from a template. Your tool mistakenly identifies many of my images as orphans when in fact they have valid category tags. I recognize my helper template is a rarity. Would it be helpful if I put these in a category of "Templates that a guaranteed to generate a category tag"? If so drop a note on my talk page.

Thank you for your hard work on your tools. This one in particular will help churning through the ever growing mountain of unprepped image pages.

Regards, -Mak 16:36, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I activated an experimental fix for this, for commons. The problem is indeed to ignore license categories when searching for orphans. Per default, I do this by anaylzing the description text and only considering categories that are applied directly. For commons, I have now created a db table listing all "ignorable" categories - this should be more accurate, but i have to update it (semi-)manually from time to time. And it would have to be done for each wiki, eventually...

I thought about a "category tagging" sheme to solve this, but it seemed unpractical, since there are so many. A tag-category that guarantees that a tag also categorizes the image would indeed also be a possibility. I'll keep it in mind. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 11:46, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. If there is anything I can do to help on this or other issues, (including solutions requiring bot runs), don't hesitate to let me know. I think this particular tool will be found to be exceptionally useful. -Mak 16:06, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CheckUsage

[edit]

Hey, looks like you have got CheckUsage working with the English Wikipedia database once again. Well done. -- Solipsist 21:10, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, using query.php for enwiki now. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 22:14, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ubuntu_logo.svg deleted

[edit]

I have deleted this image, because it is trademarked and has a restrictive use policy, see http://www.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/TrademarkPolicy/ - sorry about this. Note that trademarked logos are generally problematic - even if they belong to free software projects. Even the logos of the Wikimedia Foundation are (sadly) not free. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 08:53, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even though the file I uploaded was explicitly licensed under the GNU GPL? --Fibonacci 15:30, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - with the strict trademark restrictions in place, the GPL is effectively worthles. The policy page i linked above forbids any modification, and als restricts use very much. Also note that often, the people that draw icons and release them under GPL don't really think about it - only the original designer of the logo has the right to do that. There are dozens of supposedly GPL icons of, say, the Acrobat logo - but those license claims are void if the original design is copyrighted. There's a strong bias against trademarked logos on commons.

It's ironic that many open source projects have non-free logos - either restricted by trademark, or directly using copyright (like wikimedia does). This appears to be the case because open content licenses don't directly address the case of logos - as they should, IMHO. Ideally, Logos would be free to use, except to express association or endorsement. That would be fine with me. But we sadly don't have that. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 18:52, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So this PD claim is also void, and therefore, the image is not allowed here. Does it qualify for a speedy too? --Fibonacci 21:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed - the creator of that logo doesn't have rights to the original design, so he can't make it PD. It's derivative work. That he doesn't claim copyright to his contribution does not help - in fact, it's a direct violation of the terms of use of the ubuntu trademark. I'm afraid we have a lot more of those "but i have drawn it myself" type of derivative work under false licenses... -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 09:55, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any special template I should apply to those images so they can be deleted upon sight by an admin? Or should I list each one separately at Commons:Deletion requests? (you might want to check the images on Ubuntu Linux - I think two of those are not allowed here and you could avoid them going through the lengthy deletion process). --Fibonacci 09:03, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Frage zu nicht mehr vorhandenem Bild

[edit]

Hallo! Ich kenne mich auf Commons kaum aus, deswegen möchte ich dich als Admin einfach mal fragen, was in einem solchen Falle wie hier [11] zu machen/nicht zu machen ist. Das Bild existiert ja nun nicht mehr, die Seite existiert aber noch. Wie soll ich das verstehen? Muss da nun ein LA hin oder nicht? --Franczeska 17:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ich sehe da immer noch ein Bild. --Steschke 19:13, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Du siehst ein Bild? Oh, also ich nicht und in dem Artikel, in dem es verlinkt war, auch nicht. Das ist jetzt aber komisch. --Franczeska 16:19, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin news

[edit]

Hello,

If you consent for statistics to be published about your actions as an administrator, please sign here: Commons:Administrator permission for statistics. (I expect that most people will not have a problem with it unless you are especially concerned with privacy.)

Also, please be aware that we now have a Commons:Administrators' noticeboard. Please put it on your watchlist, if you haven't already!

cheers, pfctdayelise (translate?) 05:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin news

[edit]

Hello,

Also, please be aware that we now have a Commons:Administrators' noticeboard. Please put it on your watchlist, if you haven't already!

cheers, pfctdayelise (translate?) 05:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC) P.S.: Pardon if this is a repeat (bot debugging...)[reply]

Images in a category - still orphans?

[edit]

Hi. I've get really confused what is and what is not an orphan. Either after I've red some discussion about the topic on your discussion page. In my gallery, almost every image has got the "orphan!" label (probably after a bot parsed it), although each one has at least one category (topic relevant, not only licencing). Could you get me a hint what is wrong with it, please? Thank you very much.
--MaBe 19:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Kategorien

[edit]

Hier waren mal Kategoriestrukturen in Deutsch zu finden. sie sind von Dir gelöscht worden. Sind die woanders hin verschoben worden? Muß ich mich jetzt wieder mit dem Englisch herumschlagen? mit freundlichen Grüßen --Ronaldino 09:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Was ich gelöscht habe war so alt, davon hat wirklich nichts mehr gestimmt. Eine deutsche Struktur gibt es nicht, mehrsprachigkeit wird von Kategorien leider noch nicht unterstützt (ich hatte da mal was gebastelt, wenn ich Zeit habe, schreib ichs vielleicht bald zuende). Du kannst aber mein externes CategoryTree Tool benutzen, das blended anhand der Interwiki-Links auch Übersetzungen ein. Z.B. so. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 23:37, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CommonsTicker

[edit]

Hello! In response to Fred Chess talking about your CommonsTicker but not sure if we need to unlink images anymore when I just met him from Commons_talk:Deletion_guidelines, do we still have to unlink images from other Wiki sites to Commons when deleting problem images?--Jusjih 17:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

last time i checked the policy was that unlinking is nice, but only required for non-urgent deletions. I.e. if you delete an image without good source/license info, you do not have to unlink; but if you delete a duplicate, you have to fix all places that use it.

If you delete an image that is used a lot or in exposed places, its a good idea to unlink and/or to drop a note to local admins (that'S hard in foreign wikis, i know, especially if they use right-to-left text). CommonsTicker helps to keep them informed, but its not a substitute for direct communitcation. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 16:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it is important to relink duplicate images. / Fred Chess 16:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category refinements needed

[edit]

Hi. I was just looking for a Category:mechanical devices category, or the like (similar to Category:electrical devices), to replace a redlinked image that was deleted on the en.wp; there seems to be no easy 'natural' language category which fits the need for collections of devices, mechanical concepts, and the like. (for example: Image:Epicyclic gear ratios.png, which I did add to Category:Mechanics which is applicable enough in a very but albeit 'too general' of a way— mechanics being a somewhat overloaded word in English with related but differing technical and colloquial meanings which don't always agree.

In any event, since you were so protective of the category system, I thought you should be made aware of the need for some 'device' AND 'device images' (i.e. many illustrations) category that are generally a component part of 'Machinery' such as vehicles' engine, transmission, suspension, differential, et.al, ad nauseum. w:Category:Auto parts is used to collect many such names and devices on en.wp, but Category:Auto parts is extremely limited in comparison.

Note the redlinked category (Transmission or 'gear reduction' systems) in the example image, could be taken a representative of a family of thousands of possible images. Were that to become a category, it and engines, scissors, and mufflers, axles and wheels, and loads of other terms all need some appropriate parent category outside technical science and mechanical engineering, but nonetheless in the field of applied technology. Category:Machines, Category:Machinery, or perhaps Category:Machinery devices (An awkward 'sounding' but correct English usage!) in sum need some rational scheme to define what is meant in each category. (See example text annotations: w:Category:Mechanics)

I'm not available just now to lend a lot of time to any wiki, but I can give it some time and in a month or so much more; I'd be glad to help clean this up a bit. Best regards // FrankB 22:06, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Google Images search

[edit]

Hello. Any progress on this one (VP archive)? Either on our side or on theirs? Because it still doesn't work. ~~helix84 23:18, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

languages for categories?

[edit]

hello Duesentrieb,

I have a question? apparently is only English used for categories, or are categories allowed in other languages? I posted the question on Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#Languages_of_categories maybe you care to comment? Thank you. Gryffindor 19:41, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hilfe Gallery-Zugang geblockt

[edit]

Bitte kannst du mit helfen, ich habe wahrscheinlich irgend etwas falsch geklickt. Das war wohl dieses: 09:36, 9 September 2006 Berkan (Talk | contribs) New user (Talk | contribs | block). Will ich nun meine Wikimedia Gallery (gilt auch für orphans, untagged) öffnen, dann erscheint: Permission error From Wikimedia Commons Jump to: navigation, search The action you have requested is limited to users in the group "Sysops". Return to Main Page. Database Error: Lost connection to MySQL server during query (zedler.ts-local) - failed to connect to log database - failed to log script start! Ich bin da wohl abgemeldet oder geblockt, brauche aber die Sicht auf meine thumbs in der Gallery dringend. Kannst du mir bitte helfen oder was soll ich tun, um den Zugang wieder zu öffnen? Liebe Grüße --Berkan 16:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check Usage broken??

[edit]

Sir or madam: for the past week or more, I get a "The page cannot be displayed" page when I try to Check Usage. Is this just my computer? Is someone trying to fix the problem?? Please help. Madman2001 14:12, 20 December 2006 (UTC)