Commons:Village pump
This page is used for discussions of the operations, technical issues, and policies of Wikimedia Commons. Recent sections with no replies for 7 days and sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=--~~~~}} may be archived; for old discussions, see the archives; the latest archive is Commons:Village pump/Archive/2023/12. Please note:
Purposes which do not meet the scope of this page:
Search archives: |
Legend |
---|
|
|
|
|
|
Manual settings |
When exceptions occur, please check the setting first. |
|
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 7 days. | |
November 26[edit]
We now have 2,544 uncategorized (parentless) categories, down from about 8,000 in the beginning of September. At this point, most of the "low-hanging fruit" is taken care of. User:Billinghurst and I have done the bulk of the cleanup, although a few others have also helped in various degrees. We could definintely use more help, most of which does not require an admin as such.
- Most of the remaining listings are legitimate categories, with content, but lacking parent categories. They need parent categories and they need incoming interwiki links from any relevant Wikidata item.
- A disproportionate number of these would best be handled by someone who knows Hungarian or Estonian.
- Some categories just need to be turned into cat redirects ({{Cat redirect}} and have their content moved accordingly.
- A few categories listed here will prove to be fine as they stand; the tool messed up and put them in the list because it didn't correctly understand that a template had correctly given them parent categories. Many of these are right near the front of the (alphabetical) list, and involve dates.
- Some categories probably either call for obvious renaming or should be nominated for COM:CFD discussions.
- Some empty categories (not a lot of those left, but new ones happen all the time) need to be deleted.
- At the end of the alphabetical listing (5th and 6th page) are about 75 categories that have names in non-Latin alphabets. It would be great if people who read the relevant writing systems could help with these. Probably most of these are candidates for renaming.
Thanks in advance for any help you can give. - Jmabel ! talk 03:21, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
- I'm a bit confused about something @Jmabel: I checked the page and some of the categories on there are for example Category:April 2016 in Bourgogne-Franche-Comté (through 2023), but these were created years ago in some instances and already had parent categories from the start. How do categories like that end up there? ReneeWrites (talk) 02:09, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- @ReneeWrites: Insufficient follow-through and patrolling, combined with out of control back end processes. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 02:48, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- @ReneeWrites: Actually, in this case this appears to be some sort of flaw in the software that creates the Special page. As I wrote a couple of days ago, "A few categories listed here will prove to be fine as they stand; the tool messed up and put them in the list because it didn't correctly understand that a template had correctly given them parent categories. Many of these are right near the front of the (alphabetical) list, and involve dates." It looks like today's run added a bunch of these false positives and that (unlike the previous bunch) they are more scattered through the list. I believe all of the 100+ files that use Template:Month by year in Bourgogne-Franche-Comté are on today's list; none of these were there three days earlier. That probably has something to do with User:Birdie's edits to yesterday to Template:Month by year in Bourgogne-Franche-Comté; those are complicated enough that I have no idea what in particular might have confused the software. The categories still look fine from a normal user point of view, but the software that creates Special:UncategorizedCategoriesn is somehow confused.
- Other than that: we're a couple of hundred fixed or deleted categories closer to where we'd want to be, compared to a couple of days ago. - Jmabel ! talk 04:23, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- Server-purges should fix this but apparently it doesn't. Some categories that didn't appear last time after purging the cache have disappeared now so I'm more confused as to what the problem could be since the iirc the refresh time was after some pages were updated (it has problems when pages get all their categories from a template). There should probably be a phrabricator issue about this, albeit it's possible things work fine once there are always just a small number of cats there which seems increasingly feasible. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:35, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Jeff G., could you explain what "... out of control back end processes" means, so I can understand your comment? --Ooligan (talk) 16:54, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Ooligan: As I understand it, there are processes that run on WMF servers that run too long or get caught up in race conditions or whatever, and that get terminated after running too long. I think updating this special page may be one such process, sometimes. Certainly, updating the read / not read status of stuff on my watchlist seems that way, especially when using this new reply tool. Turning off the big orange bar before displaying my user talk page would be helpful, too. <end rant> — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 19:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Jeff G., could you explain what "... out of control back end processes" means, so I can understand your comment? --Ooligan (talk) 16:54, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- Server-purges should fix this but apparently it doesn't. Some categories that didn't appear last time after purging the cache have disappeared now so I'm more confused as to what the problem could be since the iirc the refresh time was after some pages were updated (it has problems when pages get all their categories from a template). There should probably be a phrabricator issue about this, albeit it's possible things work fine once there are always just a small number of cats there which seems increasingly feasible. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:35, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- @ReneeWrites: Insufficient follow-through and patrolling, combined with out of control back end processes. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 02:48, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Even with those 100 or so "Bourgogne-Franche-Comté" false positives, we are now down to 2079. Again, we could really use help from people who know languages with non-Latin scripts, all of which are grouped toward the end of the list. Also, Hungarian and Estonian, scattered throughout. - Jmabel ! talk 23:08, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
Now down to 1905, again including 100+ false positives. Still really need help from people who read Estonian, Hungarian, or languages with non-Latin scripts. - Jmabel ! talk 21:58, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
And now to 1701, again with the same number of false positives and still with the same need for help from people who read Estonian, Hungarian, or languages with non-Latin scripts. Those are probably now the languages for about half of the remaining categories. - Jmabel ! talk 00:23, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Now 1471, with the same provisos and the same needs for help. - Jmabel ! talk 18:42, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
We are making major progress. As of today, we are down to 1031 (and seem to be rid of the false positives, so maybe the progress looks more dramatic than it is, but it's still nice). Only a few left in non-Latin alphabets. Still need a bunch of help with Estonian and Hungarian.
Thanks to whoever fixed the "false positives" thing. - Jmabel ! talk 21:36, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
As of today, we are (amazingly) under 1000, with only two remaining in non-Latin alphabets. 947 as of today. I suspect that anyone who speaks languages from Central and Eastern Europe could still help out considerably here. - Jmabel ! talk 20:22, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- BTW, we are still getting some false positives, e.g. Category:Letters with "e" as diacritic above and other similar categories. This makes me guess we are also getting some false negatives (parentless categories that don't show up in the report). - Jmabel ! talk 20:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for pointing this out. While many uncategorized categories are useless ones that should be deleted, there is indeed some low-hanging fruit in there, including ones that can be linked to an article on a Wikipedia. – b_jonas 18:49, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Progress continues. We are at 777. - Jmabel ! talk 20:43, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- i think we could deploy a bot to monitor this page, send reminders to users who create uncategorised cat pages and add the uncat cats to a maintenance cat.--RZuo (talk) 11:16, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- @RZuo: We have {{subst:Please link images}} for the reminder. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jeff G.: That's really about categories on images, though, not categories on categories. FWIW, a lot of these happen in one of two ways:
- a small number of users create a fair number of categories and, as far as I can tell, can't be bothered to learn to do it right, or don't care that they leave a ton of work for others. They are not unaware of the situation: they've been told, but they keep doing it. I could name some names, but I'd rather not.
- a lot of people seem to think the correct way to get rid of an unused empty category is just to blank it, which of course leaves a parentless category. This group is generally "educable", and for that purpose we have {{How to delete empty categories}}. - Jmabel ! talk 21:05, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jeff G.: That's really about categories on images, though, not categories on categories. FWIW, a lot of these happen in one of two ways:
- @RZuo: We have {{subst:Please link images}} for the reminder. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
As of the start of the year we are down to 680; probably 100 of these have been dealt with in the last couple of days but others have doubtless come into this state. The vast majority of these are appropriate categories (mostly for individual people) that just need appropriate parent categories and, in some cases, should be attached to a Wikidata item or have one created. You don't need to be an admin to help out, just good at categorization. - Jmabel ! talk 21:09, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
December 25[edit]
Category renaming (move)[edit]
Nearly a year ago Delta Air Lines re-purchased the naming rights for the main arena in Salt Lake City, Utah (most recently knows as the Vivint Smart Home Arena) to become effective July 1, 2023. Accordingly, since this appears a "non controversial name change", an attempt was made by this editor to move the former category to the category reflecting the current name (Delta Center). However, the target category already existed, as this was the original name of the area (1991), so the category move is not allowed. Therefore, in September of this year this editor added the Move template to the Vivint Smart Home Arena category requesting administrative approval of said move. Understanding, that there is a backlog of move requests, the rapid approval of said request was not expected. Notwithstanding, with the requested move still not having been approved, this editor is wondering if the correct process has been followed to get said category renamed. An Errant Knight (talk) 13:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- @An Errant Knight: I tagged it {{SD|G6}} to put it back in this edit. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 14:03, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- Suppose that is one way to allow make it work. Thanks for the assistance. An Errant Knight (talk) 19:38, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- @An Errant Knight: You're welcome. Johnj1995 modified it in this later edit. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 19:47, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- Deletion done. Someone else can take it from there. - Jmabel ! talk 21:22, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- @An Errant Knight and Jmabel: Cat moved and cleaned; members moved; Wikidata connection is not working yet. :( — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:36, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Mike Peel: Please help. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:45, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Jeff G. and An Errant Knight: I think Pi bot automatically fixed this - the trick is to use the sitelinks (under 'Multilingual sites'), not Commons category (P373). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 06:47, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Mike Peel: Thanks! — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 07:06, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks all for the assistance! An Errant Knight (talk) 16:00, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Mike Peel: Thanks! — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 07:06, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Jeff G. and An Errant Knight: I think Pi bot automatically fixed this - the trick is to use the sitelinks (under 'Multilingual sites'), not Commons category (P373). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 06:47, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Mike Peel: Please help. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:45, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- @An Errant Knight and Jmabel: Cat moved and cleaned; members moved; Wikidata connection is not working yet. :( — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:36, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- Deletion done. Someone else can take it from there. - Jmabel ! talk 21:22, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- @An Errant Knight: You're welcome. Johnj1995 modified it in this later edit. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 19:47, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- Suppose that is one way to allow make it work. Thanks for the assistance. An Errant Knight (talk) 19:38, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- Whats wrong with using the original name of a stadium if applicable. I mean the name it would have, if a sponsor stepped away. We could then cover the temporary names with re-directs, which obviously would be left in place as new sponsors arrive on the scene. --Broichmore (talk) 16:43, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
What's the name of this gesture ?[edit]
Hi,
I've searched for about an hour on Google and asked to ChatGPT about the gesture at the right, but I found nothing. Someone know how we call that gesture ? - Simon Villeneuve 21:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Simon Villeneuve: Wide goalposts for paper football? Regular goalposts involve outstreched index fingers, rather than pinkies. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 22:03, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- I think you speak about the gesture done vertically. Usually, in my culture, we use this gesture horizontally between men to talk about a pretty women hips or bottom who can "enter" in the zone delimited by the little fingers.
I know it's kind of horny, but I think it should be documented. - Simon Villeneuve 22:07, 25 December 2023 (UTC)- I asked the question to two old friends yesterday. They had a nervous laughter. They didn't know either the name of this.
So, here, else nobody know the name of this (we don't know if this gesture is known outside our province), else nobody want to discuss seriously about this. - Simon Villeneuve 08:15, 27 December 2023 (UTC)- One wonders, if this is a secret code; known only to three close acquaintances. LOL. --Broichmore (talk) 17:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
No. I confirm that the gesture is well known in our culture, but nobody with who I speak from now know the name of it. So I proposed the "tight gesture" to designate the "tight zone".
Can't believe that I'll be know by futures generations to have coined this gesture. Feminists will print my portrait to burn it in public or play darts on it. - Simon Villeneuve 17:51, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- One wonders, if this is a secret code; known only to three close acquaintances. LOL. --Broichmore (talk) 17:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- I asked the question to two old friends yesterday. They had a nervous laughter. They didn't know either the name of this.
- I think you speak about the gesture done vertically. Usually, in my culture, we use this gesture horizontally between men to talk about a pretty women hips or bottom who can "enter" in the zone delimited by the little fingers.
December 27[edit]
Problems with Kit body universitario23e.png[edit]
Hello, had uploaded an image that is part of a football kit, the problem is that when I go to the description page I get that nothing has been uploaded, and when I try to upload it again, it does not leave the page, indicating that it has already been uploaded. has risen. If it is as soon as possible I would appreciate it. IBryanDP (talk) 00:10, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
- Looks fine form here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:49, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
Goulotte (alpinisme)[edit]
Hi, What's the proper English term for fr:Goulotte (alpinisme)? There is no article on English WP, and no category on Commons yet. Thanks, Yann (talk) 17:34, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
- I'm pretty sure this is going to have to be answered by someone who "really knows," because (unless I'm very mistaken) "goulotte" can also mean a very steep, narrow passage. You might ask at en:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Climbing. - Jmabel ! talk 19:32, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
- A direct translation might be “gutter”, or perhaps “chute” for steeper examples, but I didn’t find those in any of the mountaineering glossaries I looked at. I did find a few uses of goulotte elsewhere borrowed directly into English, e.g. this piece about Chamonix. (Admittedly it seems to appear most often in the names of specific features or routes.) In this context I certainly see terms like col and couloir very often in English, apparently used in preference to more ordinary ‘native’ words, so this may be a similar case. (Not a climber myself, and I agree with Jmabel above.)—Odysseus1479 (talk) 21:31, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
- "Couloir" is commonly used by American climbers. I agree with Jmabel that you should ask at WikiProject Climbing. -- Ooligan (talk) 20:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks to Odysseus for the link above. Yes, but as explained in the French article, "couloir" is something different. It seems the English term is "gully". Yann (talk) 21:29, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Just to be clear, I wasn’t suggesting it as equivalent, rather adducing it as an example while pointing out that borrowings from French seem especially frequent in the fields of mountaineering & alpine geology. (OTOH there are also quite a few from German.)—Odysseus1479 (talk) 22:07, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Yann: I'm not saying you are wrong (no idea on climbers' technical usage), but in common usage a "gully" isn't necessarily even sloped, let alone steep. Well, I guess going up the side of a gully is necessarily steep, but going along it can be quite flat. Is that what we mean here? (was I wrong in thinking from the French that the path itself has to be steep?) and/or do climbers use the term differently from other people? - Jmabel ! talk 22:27, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- This translation french disambiguation page https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goulotte
- "In mountaineering, a chute is a formation of snow or ice forming in rocky dihedra or chimneys. This formation is not wide enough and too steep to be skied, which distinguishes it from the corridor. The progression in a chute requires the techniques of ice and rock cascade."
- The English word "corridor" in this translation is "couloir" in French. Couloir is also used by English speaking mountain or rock climbers.
- It appears that a "goulotte" is a "chute"- and chute is a part of a couloir that cannot be skied. -- Ooligan (talk) 05:52, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Compare that with Category:Ravines, Category:Canyons, Category:Fissures, Category:Chasms, Category:Mountain passes, and lowly Category:Ditches. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 18:55, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks to Odysseus for the link above. Yes, but as explained in the French article, "couloir" is something different. It seems the English term is "gully". Yann (talk) 21:29, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- "Couloir" is commonly used by American climbers. I agree with Jmabel that you should ask at WikiProject Climbing. -- Ooligan (talk) 20:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
December 28[edit]
Cover versions of songs[edit]
Are cover versions of copyrighted songs derivative works? If somebody record own cover version of famous pop song under free licence, will it be OK for Commons? 185.172.241.184 10:08, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, they are derivative works. Why would they not be? — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:23, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- The performances, as opposed to the original composed work, are copyrighted, surely. Think that's the OE's question here? --Broichmore (talk) 16:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Unless released into the public domain, there will be copyright for the musical composition, the lyrics and the recording of any performances. As the IP editor wants to record a cover of a "famous pop song," they would likely breach copyright in the composition and lyrics. From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:15, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Obviously. The performances, as opposed to the original PD composed work, are copyrighted, surely. Think that's the OE's question here? Think that's the OE's question here? Broichmore (talk) 17:28, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- The IP refers to making a derivative of a copyrighted "pop song." I doubt that many pop songs are PD and the IP user makes no reference to PD. If you want to give an answer to something the IP didn't ask about then that is up to you; hopefully it is useful to the IP or another reader. From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Correct! Thanks... Broichmore (talk) 18:06, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- The IP refers to making a derivative of a copyrighted "pop song." I doubt that many pop songs are PD and the IP user makes no reference to PD. If you want to give an answer to something the IP didn't ask about then that is up to you; hopefully it is useful to the IP or another reader. From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Obviously. The performances, as opposed to the original PD composed work, are copyrighted, surely. Think that's the OE's question here? Think that's the OE's question here? Broichmore (talk) 17:28, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Unless released into the public domain, there will be copyright for the musical composition, the lyrics and the recording of any performances. As the IP editor wants to record a cover of a "famous pop song," they would likely breach copyright in the composition and lyrics. From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:15, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- The performances, as opposed to the original composed work, are copyrighted, surely. Think that's the OE's question here? --Broichmore (talk) 16:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Best practice for category for ebooks?[edit]
Category:孫子 contains various versions of ebooks (often pdf but sometimes also djvu) of The Art of War, which should all be put into Category:The Art of War by Sun Tzu.
but, to separate the ebooks from other media (photos, derivative works, etc.) related to the topic, a subcategory is certainly better.
because each version has very few files, it's unrealistic to create a subcat for each version.
a title of "scanned copies of The Art of War" is not good because they might not be scanned. a title of "The Art of War in PDF" is also not good because that separates pdf from djvu.
how should i name a category, that is for ebook-format files of a book? RZuo (talk) 13:37, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- @RZuo: Category:The Art of War ebooks by Sun Tzu. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 14:11, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Sun Tzu never made ebooks. Category:The Art of War by Sun Tzu - ebooks would be better. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:35, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- between "ebooks of <title>" and "<title> - ebooks", i'm going to use the latter format because then all cats are automatically sorted in alphabetical order in cat:ebooks by title. RZuo (talk) 10:21, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Sun Tzu never made ebooks. Category:The Art of War by Sun Tzu - ebooks would be better. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:35, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Is this really necessary? Shouldn't file types be a category of their own? We should encourage people to use search to ascertain available e-books by Sun Tzu, rather than this micro management, that will be a chore to maintain.
- Books are not defined by file type. Added to which their will be many types conjured up in the future.
- The category in question has only 30 objects, is it really so difficult to scan the thumbnails, to filter out what file type you need and want? --Broichmore (talk) 16:53, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- how about
- Category:A Christmas Carol
- Category:Ramayana
- Category:Robinson Crusoe
- Category:Alice in Wonderland
- ...? RZuo (talk) 19:55, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Project scope policy needs an update due to admin deletion practices outside WMC policy bounds[edit]
You are invited to join the discussion at Commons talk:Project scope#Outdated (does not reflect current admin practices): policy amendment for in-scope exceptions. --Prototyperspective (talk) 14:20, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Prototyperspective: The placa for proposals is COM:VPP. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 14:31, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Tricky sortkeys[edit]
sort South Korea by s or k? maybe you have more examples of these tricky names? can we summarise conventions and common practices? RZuo (talk) 21:18, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
December 29[edit]
Laws of Malaysia publications' copyright[edit]
I read at COM:CRT/Malaysia and 010113_Act 332_final.pdf about section 3 of Copyright Act 1987 that “literary work” does not include official texts of the Government or statutory bodies of a legislative or regulatory nature, thus not eligible for copyright under section 7. But few of the publication have copyright statement within the document.
Example: Akta 846 BI.pdf at page 2, uploaded at File:Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023.pdf.
This contradiction concerns me about the copyright status of these publications and the permission to upload these files. I guess maybe the 'expression' of work such as the layout of the content are copyrighted? Ong Kai Jin (talk) 15:35, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- It is not uncommon for publishers to claim copyright to something that is in public domain. So, the law ought to prevail. Ruslik (talk) 19:53, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
UK law clarified[edit]
Court of Appeal ruling will prevent UK museums from charging reproduction fees—at last. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:53, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Finally! Very good news, thanks for the link. Do we need to modify some Commons pages accordingly? I think there are warnings in some places that in the UK (unlike the US and the EU) there might be claims to reproduction rights for public domain art. Gestumblindi (talk) 21:27, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- And there might be some UK-specific templates that need changes, too... ? Gestumblindi (talk) 21:33, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- I can't see any that need changing. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:23, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Good news indeed. Commons:Reuse of PD-Art photographs#United Kingdom / UK will probably need to be updated. --Rosenzweig τ 21:57, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- I've done that one, and COM:UK. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:19, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Gestumblindi, @Pigsonthewing, @Rosenzweig- are there any opportunities at institutions or websites, where files can now be uploaded? --Ooligan (talk) 23:22, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- We've generally been uploading images anyway, where they're available to download. Hopefully this will encourage institutions to be less obstructive when it comes to allowing downloads, but may take some time to have that effect. Also, there should be less of a chilling effect on volunteers who might otherwise do uploads, but have been put off. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:52, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Excellent news indeed, I was also delighted to read about this. Thank you for sharing, @Pigsonthewing! Gnom (talk) 14:02, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- We've generally been uploading images anyway, where they're available to download. Hopefully this will encourage institutions to be less obstructive when it comes to allowing downloads, but may take some time to have that effect. Also, there should be less of a chilling effect on volunteers who might otherwise do uploads, but have been put off. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:52, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Gestumblindi, @Pigsonthewing, @Rosenzweig- are there any opportunities at institutions or websites, where files can now be uploaded? --Ooligan (talk) 23:22, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- I've done that one, and COM:UK. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:19, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- And there might be some UK-specific templates that need changes, too... ? Gestumblindi (talk) 21:33, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
December 31[edit]
About uploading a last radio broadcast[edit]
Hi, I recently recorded the last broadcast of DR Langbølge wanted to upload it onto commons either as Public Domain or CC-BY (just want attribution). This was the last longwave transmitter that was commercial in Scandinavia. When I tried to upload it, it threw this warning saying it's not allowed to upload .mp3 to commons. This is a historical recording, recorded on own equipment in Norway. Is it okay to post it on commons I can just remove the music, by trimming it to 30mins and until the last interval signal is broadcast. Alternatively I can just upload it to my own site or some offlabel site then then cite it as external link in the transmitter's wikipage Cheers and a happy New Year Koltinn (talk) 19:10, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Koltinn: (1) Why would this be in the public domain? (2) You can cite a broadcast whether a copy is online or not, though I agree that archiving a copy somewhere would be good in case your citation is disputed. (3) For audio formats, see Commons:Audio. - Jmabel ! talk 19:43, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- Can't you just use a different audio format? Trade (talk) 21:01, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- There is no other option, it's shut down.
- Why would this be in the public domain? The prompt refered to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Project_scope and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_content
- What I meant was I the recorder of the audio file would like to place the copy of the broadcast in either public domain or cc-by.
- As for other formats, I do not know the size limit of uploads, the full recording is 375 megs (going to remove all music from it though) recorded at 8 bit mono pcm wav. I try not overload filehosts etc as common courtesy and .mp3's are easily played though lossy.
- Koltinn (talk) 22:22, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- I think there is a slight confusion here as "recorder of the audio file," can have two meanings. First, you could be a representative of the radio station who had the right to make an official recording and release the official content under a suitable licence (or release into the public domain). Second, you may be a listener of the radio station who has made a private recording; while you own the copyright of the recording, you have no control over the rights of those who were recorded.
- In the second scenario, we would need to understand the basis on which you have the right to release the contributors' work into the public domain. From Hill To Shore (talk) 01:34, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Also: the station being shut down does not prevent you from converting the format of the audio file. - Jmabel ! talk 03:17, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Help with mass renamer[edit]
Hi all, I've added User:Jeff G./massrename.js to my common.js file, but where is the link meant to appear? I can't seem to get this to work... any ideas what I've done wrong? - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 19:37, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Chris.sherlock2: Should be on the horizontal nav for categories. - Jmabel ! talk 03:18, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Chris.sherlock2: Right, look for a portlet link named "MassRename" (or "massrename" on Monobook) on a category page once you are a filemover+ (until then, please ask me or someone else experienced with it). Doc is at User:Jeff G./massrename. Please feel free to document your experiences at User talk:Jeff G./massrename.js. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 07:10, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oh… how do I know if I have FileMover+ privileges? - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 07:53, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- If you don't have at the privilege to rename files, obviously you can't mass rename them! - Jmabel ! talk 18:16, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, I figured that. I didn’t know, however, if the issue was with a lack of rights or if I had not installed the gadget properly. Given I do request a lot of renames, is there a way I could request access to this bit? - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 21:13, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Chris.sherlock2: See Commons:Requests for rights. From Hill To Shore (talk) 21:20, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- More specifically Commons:Requests for rights#Filemover. Chris, I'm sure you know better than I how often your requests are granted vs. rejected. If in the last year you've been running close to 100%, you should get this. If not, not. - Jmabel ! talk 22:31, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, I got the permissions :-) However, I would not have been upset had I not, I would have just accepted community consensus and asked someone to help me with the moves. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 01:05, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- More specifically Commons:Requests for rights#Filemover. Chris, I'm sure you know better than I how often your requests are granted vs. rejected. If in the last year you've been running close to 100%, you should get this. If not, not. - Jmabel ! talk 22:31, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Chris.sherlock2: See Commons:Requests for rights. From Hill To Shore (talk) 21:20, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, I figured that. I didn’t know, however, if the issue was with a lack of rights or if I had not installed the gadget properly. Given I do request a lot of renames, is there a way I could request access to this bit? - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 21:13, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- If you don't have at the privilege to rename files, obviously you can't mass rename them! - Jmabel ! talk 18:16, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oh… how do I know if I have FileMover+ privileges? - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 07:53, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
This incorrectly named category, created today, already has 4620 categories in it. Apparently it is populated by the Wikidata infoboxes. The category with the correct English name is Category:Men of France by name, which has existed since 2015. "the France" seems to be a too literal translation of the French name "la France". Does anyone have a clue how to tweak the Wikidata Infobox code to use the correct category name? --Rosenzweig τ 20:08, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- The code that adds this category looks to be on Module:Wikidata Infobox#L-1274, and it will prefer "Men of the [country] by name" over "Men of [country] by name". IMO the easiest way to solve this would be to delete the incorrect category without a redirect. Clay (talk) 22:31, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- Done. --A.Savin 23:25, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've protected the page against recreation. --Rosenzweig τ 06:25, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Wow. Instead of looking up a table to check weather a given country takes the article in its English name (which I would expect to be a property of English country names already in WD itself), Module:Wikidata Infobox uses a crude kludge like that? It just does an
#ifexist
to Commons cats and if "Category:Something of the Country" exists, prefers it over "Category:Something of Country", not even checking whether the former is a redirect?! - Okay, so, explain me again how Modules and LUA and SD and Wikidata itself is all sleek and professional, made by Real Developpers, while manual categorization, wikitext, and templates made by lowly “power users” is the wrong way to go… Because this kind of kludge is only justified when there’s no better way to do it, and when you have actual database query access and are backed with a lion’s share of WMF’s piggy bank, you are expected to do better than that.
- -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:01, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Two more Mickey Mouse films going PD this year[edit]
Anybody got plans to upload Plane Crazy and The Gallopin' Gaucho soon? These are going into the public domain in 2024 as well. As the person who will probably be here to transcribe them both, I'm anxiously awaiting their arrival at Commons. PseudoSkull (talk) 21:04, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- Will do. — Racconish 💬 21:32, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- Are you gonna undelete the images that were deleted for being copyvio of Mickey Mouse? Trade (talk) 03:02, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Most images of Mickey Mouse will still be copyrighted in 2024. - Jmabel ! talk 03:19, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, we need to be very careful. We can only include the original version (Steamboat Willie) of Mickey Mouse - the others are still cooyrighted. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 08:19, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Most images of Mickey Mouse will still be copyrighted in 2024. - Jmabel ! talk 03:19, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Are you gonna undelete the images that were deleted for being copyvio of Mickey Mouse? Trade (talk) 03:02, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
January 01[edit]
Commons Gazette 2024-01[edit]
- Currently, there are 186 sysops.
- Please take part in Commons:Requests for comment/Technical needs survey to share your thoughts about Wikimedia Commons.
Commons Gazette is a monthly newsletter of the latest important news about Wikimedia Commons, edited by volunteers. You can also help with editing! --RZuo (talk) 09:12, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Flickr2Commons stalled?[edit]
I just set up a batch of 100+ files to upload with Flickr2Commons, and hit the upload button. The first five files were highlighted blue, as expected... and then nothing. NO files have been uploaded, and no error message has been displayed. Anyone else having issues? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:56, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Several others have reported issues. - Jmabel ! talk 22:32, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Right, see Commons talk:Video2commons#Requested format is not available. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 03:27, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- That's reported as being blocked by YouTube? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:05, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- Right, see Commons talk:Video2commons#Requested format is not available. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 03:27, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- Glamorgan is also not working. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:05, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Usage of files with link to file removed[edit]
Do we allow the removal of the link to the file if it is used on a page on Commons? If you use a file on a page it always has a link to the file page with the author and license information. But it is possible to remove this link. Do we allows this to be done for not public domain files? With the link removed we requirements of the license are violated. GPSLeo (talk) 16:25, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- @GPSLeo: I can't make sense of that. "the link to the file" meaning what exactly? Can you give an example? - Jmabel ! talk 22:34, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel: I think GPSLeo means using "link=" (that is, no link) in file display wikitext as per the last paragraph of en:H:PIC#Links. We should not allow this to be done for not public domain files unless the link would be obvious from the context. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 03:25, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds reasonable. I'm just wondering if it may be an issue sometimes for images used as part of a template. Or do we confine that to PD & CC-zero for that purpose? Again: is there an example of an actual place where this has been a problem? - Jmabel ! talk 03:30, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- For more context see my edit in https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?diff=836599240 explicitly setting
link=
to no value (because if we talked about HTML pages there would be no sense in linking a purely decorative embedded image which would be noisy in screenreader software). This conversation would definitely benefit from input by folks regularly using screenreader software. I personally see a tradeoff between accessibility practices versus interpretation of license requirements (and I'd love to be proven wrong). --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 06:35, 2 January 2024 (UTC)- I am not sure how you can talk about "interpretation of licence requirements" as if there is some aspect of ambiguity. One example from your edit, File:PICOL icon Statistics.svg, has a clear instruction in the licence saying, "You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner." Your edit fails all 3 of the requirements in the first line. If this causes problems for screen readers then we may need to consider this issue as a wiki-wide problem - why is it just your one page that is impacted and not every instance of an image being used in a wiki? From Hill To Shore (talk) 09:26, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- @From Hill To Shore: Well, there is "some aspect of ambiguity" as enforcing laws (and thus licenses) relies on human interpretation of requirements to fulfil. Would you say that "You may do so in any reasonable manner" is not ambiguous? In this case, my personal interpretation is that whether linked or not, an image currently does not provide a (direct) link to its license anyway. My edit fails all 3 requirements and in my interpretation all 3 requirements failed already beforehand. You may disagree here if you consider the link to the file page as "in any reasonable manner", and maybe you are right if that is your point of view. Anyway, no strong feelings and just trying to explain my point of view so please feel very welcome to revert my edit. Though I'm wondering if keeping the
<span role="presentation">
around and removing thelink=
could be sufficient for screenreader software and that is why I wrote that this conversation would really benefit from folks regularly using screenreader software. I hope there's a way to both cover license requirements and throwing less unhelpful noise at people who reply on screenreaders to read that wiki page. --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 16:35, 3 January 2024 (UTC)- @AKlapper (WMF): Thank you for the clarification. The image link to the file details page (containing information on the licence, author and date) is the mechanism chosen by the wiki software developers (and endorsed by the consensus of wikimedia contributors at previous related discussions) to meet the "in any reasonable manner" requirement. The presence of the image link can be debated on whether it meets the reasonableness test; removal of the image link and not providing an alternative link clearly fails the test.
- As you are not sure which part of your edit may impact screen readers, it would definitely be of benefit to get some additional view points on this. I'll see if I can track down any groups interested in accessibility issues on other wikis I frequent, to see if they are willing to provide input. From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:15, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- I have asked at en:Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Advice on impact of image links on screen readers. From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:32, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @From Hill To Shore: Well, there is "some aspect of ambiguity" as enforcing laws (and thus licenses) relies on human interpretation of requirements to fulfil. Would you say that "You may do so in any reasonable manner" is not ambiguous? In this case, my personal interpretation is that whether linked or not, an image currently does not provide a (direct) link to its license anyway. My edit fails all 3 requirements and in my interpretation all 3 requirements failed already beforehand. You may disagree here if you consider the link to the file page as "in any reasonable manner", and maybe you are right if that is your point of view. Anyway, no strong feelings and just trying to explain my point of view so please feel very welcome to revert my edit. Though I'm wondering if keeping the
- I am not sure how you can talk about "interpretation of licence requirements" as if there is some aspect of ambiguity. One example from your edit, File:PICOL icon Statistics.svg, has a clear instruction in the licence saying, "You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner." Your edit fails all 3 of the requirements in the first line. If this causes problems for screen readers then we may need to consider this issue as a wiki-wide problem - why is it just your one page that is impacted and not every instance of an image being used in a wiki? From Hill To Shore (talk) 09:26, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- For more context see my edit in https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?diff=836599240 explicitly setting
- Sounds reasonable. I'm just wondering if it may be an issue sometimes for images used as part of a template. Or do we confine that to PD & CC-zero for that purpose? Again: is there an example of an actual place where this has been a problem? - Jmabel ! talk 03:30, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel: I think GPSLeo means using "link=" (that is, no link) in file display wikitext as per the last paragraph of en:H:PIC#Links. We should not allow this to be done for not public domain files unless the link would be obvious from the context. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 03:25, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- some pd design can be made to replace these files, while an investigation into commons' compatibility with screen readers is carried out.--RZuo (talk) 11:16, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- @AKlapper (WMF) and From Hill To Shore: I'm a screen reader user. On my home project of the English Wikipedia, we actually have guidelines about this very topic as part of the alt text guideline. When an icon image needs attribution, alt text like "About icon" is just as good an option (from a screen reader perspective) as no image link at all. Graham87 (talk) 12:24, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
January 02[edit]
Dutch east indies birth cert[edit]
i have a question about this cert. the date in the lower right corner is 1955 right? then the question is, did the indonesian govt or the dutch govt issue this cert?--RZuo (talk) 11:16, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- There are in fact three dates visible in this birth certificate. (1) The certificate states that Tjiong Joen Foeng (a girl) was born on 26 October 1934; (2) the excerpt is dated 27 Nov. 1948 (date of issue); (3) and legalized ("gezien voor legalisatie") on 25 March 1955. The third date indicates that an Indonesian official legalized this birth certificate in 1955. Vysotsky (talk) 12:39, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- thx a lot. i'm surprised by the document being written still in dutch (using old spelling bandoeng etc.) a few years after the independence. i have no knowledge of the legal customs there, so i was confused. RZuo (talk) 12:45, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- The original document dates from 1948. It was legalised later, in 1955 (using a different typewriter). My guess is that several Chinese citizens of Bandung tried to get out of Indonesia in 1948, and needed official documents to be able to travel. See this photograph, in which Chinese representatives from the city talk to nine Dutch officials in Bandung, June 1948. Sukarno and Hatta declared Indonesia independent on 17 August 1945, but Dutch officials were in Indonesia until December 1949. Vysotsky (talk) 16:53, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- True; major cities on Java remained under Dutch control for most of the independence conflict in 1945-1949 and Bandung was one of them. Perhaps there was no landrechter available for the second signature when the ambtenaar van den burgerlijken stand created the certificate. Considering the situation at the time, I am not too surprised. Then Tjiong Joen Foeng apparently had to wait until 1955 for the signature of the Indonesian successor to the landrechter (ketua pengadilan negeri, handwritten). Fun fact: while most of it is Dutch, there are two typewritten parts in Indonesian: Ongkos Rp. 1.50 (looks like you had to pay 1.50 rupiahs to get this excerpt) and 23 Maret 1955. --HyperGaruda (talk) 20:52, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- thx a lot. that clears up my doubt. i dont understand dutch or indonesian, so i thought someone was still writing in dutch in 1955.
- the story behind this is the girl and her father went back to gwongdung, but the father fled to indonesia again after the communists came and purged anyone with a bit of money, but the girl stayed in gwongdung coz she was engaged and then married. the cert was sent to her by her elder siblings. this paper could be an escape ticket coz situation in gwongdung turned really grim since 1950s. RZuo (talk) 03:09, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- True; major cities on Java remained under Dutch control for most of the independence conflict in 1945-1949 and Bandung was one of them. Perhaps there was no landrechter available for the second signature when the ambtenaar van den burgerlijken stand created the certificate. Considering the situation at the time, I am not too surprised. Then Tjiong Joen Foeng apparently had to wait until 1955 for the signature of the Indonesian successor to the landrechter (ketua pengadilan negeri, handwritten). Fun fact: while most of it is Dutch, there are two typewritten parts in Indonesian: Ongkos Rp. 1.50 (looks like you had to pay 1.50 rupiahs to get this excerpt) and 23 Maret 1955. --HyperGaruda (talk) 20:52, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- The original document dates from 1948. It was legalised later, in 1955 (using a different typewriter). My guess is that several Chinese citizens of Bandung tried to get out of Indonesia in 1948, and needed official documents to be able to travel. See this photograph, in which Chinese representatives from the city talk to nine Dutch officials in Bandung, June 1948. Sukarno and Hatta declared Indonesia independent on 17 August 1945, but Dutch officials were in Indonesia until December 1949. Vysotsky (talk) 16:53, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- thx a lot. i'm surprised by the document being written still in dutch (using old spelling bandoeng etc.) a few years after the independence. i have no knowledge of the legal customs there, so i was confused. RZuo (talk) 12:45, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Commons 2023 in numbers[edit]
The number of files increased from 89,715,735 files on 1st January 2023 to 101,839,339 files on 1st January 2024, which is an addition of 12,123,604 files in 2023, including the subtraction of deleted files in 2023. The amount of files grew by 13.5 % in 2023. The increase in 2022 was 9.917523 Mio. files.
The amount of data (excluding deleted and old version of files) increased from 417.461 terabytes (1st January 2023) to 532.934 terabytes (1st January 2024). This is an increase of 115.472 terabytes. The amount of data grew by 27.66 % in 2023. The biggest increase was in 11/2023 and 12/2023 with 44.26 terabytes. The increase in 2022 was approximately 71 terabytes large.
--PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 11:42, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Mass renaming of wrongly identified plants labelled as Nymphaea tetragona[edit]
Greetings, I recently noticed, that almost all images labelled as Nymphaea tetragona are not this species. But there are too many photographs and I am unwilling to write a file renaming request for each individual file. Is it possible to do a mass-rename of all the obviously falsely labelled images? Conan Wolff (talk) 14:53, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Conan Wolff: Sure, as long as there is some way for you to communicate which are misnamed, and what they should be renamed to. - Jmabel ! talk 19:34, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel Thank you for your reply! How should I do that? Should I just write a list of filenames here? I think it would be best to rename them to "Unknown Nymphaea species or hybrid 00", "Unknown Nymphaea species or hybrid 01", ...
Would that be alright? Conan Wolff (talk) 19:43, 2 January 2024 (UTC)- I don’t care for putting “Unknown“ in the filename: categorization and/or the description can communicate that. If someone identifies the species in future, the file(s) concerned will probably want moving again, which circumstance we can anticipate with a degree of vagueness in the names. How about simply replacing “tetragona” with “sp.”?—Odysseus1479 (talk) 20:09, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Conan Wolff: I'm inclined to go with Odysseus1479 here. Is Nymphaea tetragona => Nymphaea sp. or hybrid OK with you?
- Mass rename has to work with one category at a time, so while a list of filenames here would be fine, it would be best if you break it down to sub-lists in a category. OR, better, if you are good with either cat-a-lot or VFC, it would be even easier for you to add a temporary Category:Nymphaea rename 2023-01 to the relevant files, which would make it super-easy for me to do the mass rename (and then get rid of the temporary category). - Jmabel ! talk 20:51, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel @Odysseus1479 I'm fine with your naming suggestions. For me the main thing is to get rid of the false filenames. I would prefer the "sp. or hybrid" option, because the plants displayed are also likely to be artificial hybrids, and not species.
I don't know what cat-a-lot or VFC is. But I would be fine with adding a category like "Category:Nymphaea rename 2023-01" to mark the files in need of renaming. Conan Wolff (talk) 21:27, 2 January 2024 (UTC)- @Conan Wolff: OK. Add that however works for you, then ping me here and I can do the mass rename. - Jmabel ! talk 21:32, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel I have added the temporary category to 98 files, which should be renamed. Conan Wolff (talk) 11:51, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Conan Wolff: Helpful links: Cat-a-lot and VFC. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:29, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jeff G. Thanks! I wish I had used that tool instead of adding the category individually. That wasn't fun at all, but at least I'll know about it in future. Conan Wolff (talk) 16:40, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Conan Wolff: the bulk of these have now been moved. The rest apparently create collisions if we try to simply substitute Nymphaea sp. or hybrid, so we'd need to do something a little different. Probably Nymphaea sp. (or hybrid) would not cause a collision on these; would that be acceptable? - Jmabel ! talk 20:15, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel Thanks for the renaming. Yes, that sounds good. Conan Wolff (talk) 20:29, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Conan Wolff: Done. Could you please check Category:Nymphaea rename 2023-01, make sure that everything is as you want it, and if it is come back here and let me know to kill the maintenance category. Thanks. - Jmabel ! talk 20:55, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel The files "File:Nymphaea Tetragona 8.JPG", and "File:Nymphaea Tetragona 9.JPG" are still missing, but the rest is fine. Conan Wolff (talk) 21:27, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- Convenience links File:Nymphaea Tetragona 8.JPG, and File:Nymphaea Tetragona 9.JPG (please link files when referring to them). - Jmabel ! talk 21:30, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- Now did those two by hand. No idea why they failed before. @Conan Wolff: do you still want that maintenance category for a while, so you can easily find any descriptions that need editing? Or should I kill it? - Jmabel ! talk 21:36, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel Great, thank you for your help with this matter! I tried to link the files, but then it displayed the images here in the preview of the comment as images, not links.
- The temporary category can go. Thank you! Conan Wolff (talk) 21:40, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Conan Wolff: sounds like you were missing a colon in the syntax, after the two left square brackets: [[:<File:FILENAME.EXT]]. - Jmabel ! talk 22:25, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel Ah, thanks for the explanation! Conan Wolff (talk) 22:32, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Conan Wolff: sounds like you were missing a colon in the syntax, after the two left square brackets: [[:<File:FILENAME.EXT]]. - Jmabel ! talk 22:25, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel Thanks for the renaming. Yes, that sounds good. Conan Wolff (talk) 20:29, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Conan Wolff: the bulk of these have now been moved. The rest apparently create collisions if we try to simply substitute Nymphaea sp. or hybrid, so we'd need to do something a little different. Probably Nymphaea sp. (or hybrid) would not cause a collision on these; would that be acceptable? - Jmabel ! talk 20:15, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jeff G. Thanks! I wish I had used that tool instead of adding the category individually. That wasn't fun at all, but at least I'll know about it in future. Conan Wolff (talk) 16:40, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Conan Wolff: OK. Add that however works for you, then ping me here and I can do the mass rename. - Jmabel ! talk 21:32, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel @Odysseus1479 I'm fine with your naming suggestions. For me the main thing is to get rid of the false filenames. I would prefer the "sp. or hybrid" option, because the plants displayed are also likely to be artificial hybrids, and not species.
- I don’t care for putting “Unknown“ in the filename: categorization and/or the description can communicate that. If someone identifies the species in future, the file(s) concerned will probably want moving again, which circumstance we can anticipate with a degree of vagueness in the names. How about simply replacing “tetragona” with “sp.”?—Odysseus1479 (talk) 20:09, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel Thank you for your reply! How should I do that? Should I just write a list of filenames here? I think it would be best to rename them to "Unknown Nymphaea species or hybrid 00", "Unknown Nymphaea species or hybrid 01", ...
Revision deletion?[edit]
I accidentally uploaded a copy of Thure de Thulstrup's Battle of Shiloh instead of his Massacre at Rock Springs in the middle of a chain of uploads (I like to upload in-progress uploads of restorations ever since I had a file I had been working on for hours get corrupted a few years back). The bad upload is https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/7/7b/20240102005056%21Thure_de_Thulstrup_-_The_Massacre_of_the_Chinese_at_Rock_Springs.png - the main file link is File:Thure de Thulstrup - The Massacre of the Chinese at Rock Springs.png.
The mistaken upload is on Wikipedia already (File:Thure de Thulstrup - Battle of Shiloh.png) so no need to keep it.
I do apologise: I have to use the chunked upload for this as it's over 100MB, and that skips past some of the checks, like the preview and the duplicate warning. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:30, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Adam Cuerden: this describes in detail what you did, but not what you want someone to do. Are you asking for a revdel of the version from 23:41, 1 January 2024, or are you asking for something else? - Jmabel ! talk 19:37, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, if possible. Just want to get rid of the one upload of a different image. Unless it's agreed it doesn't matter. Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:07, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- I vote for “doesn’t matter”. We have zillions of old revisions that are “wrong” in some way or another, quite harmlessly.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 20:20, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- In this case it would be a good idea to delete the old revision. It will remove the temptation for someone to invoke COM:Overwrite to revert to the original upload in technical compliance with the guideline, which would restore a duplicate of another file we have stored elsewhere. From Hill To Shore (talk) 20:30, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- I vote for “doesn’t matter”. We have zillions of old revisions that are “wrong” in some way or another, quite harmlessly.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 20:20, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, if possible. Just want to get rid of the one upload of a different image. Unless it's agreed it doesn't matter. Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:07, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Video2commons still down?[edit]
Is Video2commons working? I can't seem to get it to work. SeichanGant (talk) 16:52, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- Me too. I had to download it and reupload it to V2C --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 18:27, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
January 03[edit]
Photo signature help[edit]
Can anyone make out the photographer's name at the lower left of the photo at File:The Town Crier, v.15, no.51, Dec. 18, 1920 - DPLA - 336742dee91f10f14dff73ed6052b2f7 (page 1).jpg? Seems to be hyphenated, so maybe a studio name. Last part is "Connelly", so I'm thinking James Hargis Connelly (right era & subject matter), but the only hyphenated studio name we have for him is "Hixon-Connelly", and that's not what this appears to say (nor does it look much like the mark/signature at File:Stage actress Mabel Bert (SAYRE 6602).jpg). Location isn't entirely clear either. Maybe "K.C." ("Kansas City", which would fit for him), but maybe not. Any help would be welcome. - Jmabel ! talk 02:54, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel: I would not be surprised if the beginning of the signature was cut off. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:26, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- I made a crop of just the photo and searched using TinEye and Google Images, but found no hits. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:12, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
Another medium-sized category (including a subcategory) consisting entirely of AI-generated images of a quality that might be (barely) acceptable for a children's book, but has no apparent relevance to Commons's scope. Category had no parent categories, which is how I ran across it. I'm certainly not going to do the research to put parent categories on what I consider junk. - Jmabel ! talk 06:08, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
Standardizing Setsumatsusha Categories[edit]
Looking at Category:Setsumatsusha I want to make the subcategories more standardized. Some of them are called "Sessha and Massha of X shrine" in various capitalizations. I think we should harmonize the names of the subcategories a bit. Maybe either rename it to Category:Sessha and Massha or rename the categories to "Setsumatsusha of X Shrine". My understanding from the English article is that they are effectively one thing now, and we do not need to distinguish between the two. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 09:56, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Immanuelle: I would (probably) start a multi-category CfD for this and (certainly) ping the people who've been working in this area. - Jmabel ! talk 19:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel how do I do that? Also is this more like the teahouse on enwiki or did I post in the wrong spot? Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 19:41, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Immanuelle: Commons doesn't have an exact analogue of the "Teahouse" (which is mainly oriented toward beginners). This project has about 10-20% as many active participants as en-wiki, so we have fewer specialized discussion areas. There's the "Help desk" (where this probably ideally would have gone) and the "Village pump" (here, and not a bad place to ask). The Village pump is usually more for items that might require broad discussion among multiple experienced users, but it can become a bit of a catchall and that is OK. There is also Commons:Village pump/Copyright (specific to copyright questions) and Commons:Graphic Lab for help with retouching, making maps, etc.
- Instructions for starting a discussion of a particular category or categories are at Commons:Categories_for_discussion; there's a section there specifically on listing multiple categories. I'm guessing you know how to look at histories, see who's involved, and ping them.
- Let me know if you need anything else. - Jmabel ! talk 20:04, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel I just started the discussion Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2024/01/Category:Setsumatsusha do you have something like AWB to use to add the template to all the pages? There's 64 categories for discussion so it is quite difficult to tag all of them properly. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 22:48, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Immanuelle: We have it -- Commons:AutoWikiBrowser -- but I've never used it.
- Could someone with AWB access (or some other relevant tool) possibly help this user to link the 64 relevant categories for this CfD? - Jmabel ! talk 00:26, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel and Immanuelle: Done. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:30, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel I just started the discussion Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2024/01/Category:Setsumatsusha do you have something like AWB to use to add the template to all the pages? There's 64 categories for discussion so it is quite difficult to tag all of them properly. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 22:48, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel how do I do that? Also is this more like the teahouse on enwiki or did I post in the wrong spot? Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 19:41, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Tesla den Hahn abdrehen, Blaues-Band-Aktion gegen Tesla, Grünheide Fangschleuse, Wasserschutz vor Profite! Fabrik-Eerweiterung verhindern! 01.jpg[edit]
Oooch Leute, nichts daran ist mehr lustisch. Da habe ich 33 Dateien, bei denen ich leider überall ein e zuviel im Dateinamen habe, die also einfach ent-e-t werden müssen und weil kein file mover das bemerkungen feld in der bewegen vorlage nicht ignoriert muss ich also 33 edits machen damit auch alle 33 dateien ent-e-t werden. und was sehe ich zufällig nach 3 tagen? eine datei wurde falsch verschoben, zweien wurde einfach die vorlage entzogen und die anderen wurden nicht bearbeitet. Informiert wurde ich darüber nicht. ja bei den bewege-anträgen ist mir ein fehler unterlaufen, der wäre durch den medienbeweger aber einfach zu entfehlern gewesen, oder alternativ mir "bescheid" sagen. aber nee, das wäre wohl alles zu einfach. --C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm - p7.ee/p) (talk) 15:33, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @C.Suthorn: I usually read German decently, but I'm afraid I don't follow that. Are you asking for someone to do something, complaining about an (unnamed?) tool not behaving correctly, or what? Is there some action you are requesting? - Jmabel ! talk 19:41, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- Among other things, "file mover" (in English): do you mean software or a person? "kein file mover das bemerkungen feld in der bewegen vorlage nicht ignoriert" seems to be "no file mover fails to ignore the comment field in the move template" which is awfully convoluted, and I assume means "all file moves ignore the comment field in the move template" but I still don't know what you mean. {{Move}} doesn't have a comment field (unless you mean the "reason" field) which I would expect any software to ignore. So are you complaining that people are ignoring your stated reason? or what?
- Feel free to answer in German, but please try to be a little more straightforward, provide links and examples, etc. - Jmabel ! talk
Mass rename requests[edit]
What to do with the 20,000 requests, a set (as far as I can see). I'm not going to rename that, it's weeks of work, or more. I don't even know if these requests are good. This is more for a bot, if it should be renamed, also if it should be declined. Grtz. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 16:35, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Richardkiwi: care to provide a link to whatever you are talking about? - Jmabel ! talk 19:38, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel: there is an awfully large amount of rename requests according to Category:Rename, in particular in Category:Media requiring renaming - rationale 4. I think that also explains one of C.Suthorn's complaints in the preceding section, about hardly anything having been done about his requests after three days. There are just not enough filemovers to deal with this flood. --HyperGaruda (talk) 20:11, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think anyone saw 20k rename requests coming when the requester got the advice in Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2023/12#staff situation. --HyperGaruda (talk) 20:20, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- Ah, all that Sanborn stuff. Didn't we say that if that was to go forward it should be done by a bot? - Jmabel ! talk 20:24, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- If the rename requests are valid, I won't oppose a bot-action but it is really a tough job to discern what is good and what is bad for a bot. However, since these Sanborn stuff requests are coming from a single user, I guess a few requests should be weighed in manually? If that's a good sign, let's get any bot to do this tedious job. ─ The Aafī (talk) 20:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- There are 196870 files that need renaming from the old format.
- And then there are a few ten thousand that need renaming from new format 1 to new format 2. This is due to a mistake i made during the initial upload.
- User:Nowakki/test2 illustrates why the old format is inferior. For 1885 and 1888 the Library of Congress sequence number happens to be the same as the plate number, for later years this is not the case. Internally these maps only use plate numbers. One would have to click on a few files first to find what they are looking for. I don't think many people use these maps as they are now.
- This is not a big deal. the Library of Congress provides the plate number for all files. This requires little manual intervention.
- User:SanbornMapBot/teststate is a preview of the state index, to be prepended to the top level categories. SanbornMapBot (talk) 20:54, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- Also I should note that the LoC metadata is very reliable. From my experience the error rate is less than 1% (haven't found one yet). The plate number, the year and the volume are also printed in big-ass letters on each plate. It is easy to verify that a random sample of new file names is correct. SanbornMapBot (talk) 21:05, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- Not everything that is wrong or is in an old format, has to be renamed. Like 10k, for example, it must be really necessary. Big requests must be done carefully or declined when not really necessary. For small amounts, it's not a big deal. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 21:11, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- I should have worked more slowly.
- On the other hand, i have dealt with 5 different bureaucrats already, who don't seem to talk to each other and you guys haven't even made up your mind whether you want any of this.
- The renames will be done in 2 or 3 days and they will eternally prevent headaches for each and every customer. SanbornMapBot (talk) 21:17, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- To summarize: sometimes requests have to be approved, sometimes they have to be declined. The number of files in general needs to be considered.
- At this point the above has to be applied to the present situation. SanbornMapBot (talk) 21:30, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- Not everything that is wrong or is in an old format, has to be renamed. Like 10k, for example, it must be really necessary. Big requests must be done carefully or declined when not really necessary. For small amounts, it's not a big deal. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 21:11, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- If the rename requests are valid, I won't oppose a bot-action but it is really a tough job to discern what is good and what is bad for a bot. However, since these Sanborn stuff requests are coming from a single user, I guess a few requests should be weighed in manually? If that's a good sign, let's get any bot to do this tedious job. ─ The Aafī (talk) 20:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- Ah, all that Sanborn stuff. Didn't we say that if that was to go forward it should be done by a bot? - Jmabel ! talk 20:24, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think anyone saw 20k rename requests coming when the requester got the advice in Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2023/12#staff situation. --HyperGaruda (talk) 20:20, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel: there is an awfully large amount of rename requests according to Category:Rename, in particular in Category:Media requiring renaming - rationale 4. I think that also explains one of C.Suthorn's complaints in the preceding section, about hardly anything having been done about his requests after three days. There are just not enough filemovers to deal with this flood. --HyperGaruda (talk) 20:11, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
Long-term file warring regarding scope of Asia[edit]
There's been over a decade of slow edit warring as to whether western New Guinea should be included in File:Asia (orthographic projection).svg, with it currently being included. I feel there needs to be some kind of discussion to settle the matter. In my opinion, we shouldn't include it, because it's geographically not part of Asia (see [1]), and we're not including Western Thrace as part of Asia on the map, which nobody seems to have issue with. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:51, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- Just my opinion, but it is part of Asia due to part of the island being Indonesia. But other people would disagree with that. So it really depends on who's definition your going by. --Adamant1 (talk) 21:56, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- But we're going off the geographical not geopolitical definition no? New Guinea forms part of the same landmass as Australia [2], and most sources I have seen do not consider it part of Asia. Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:00, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- I would say, not neatly either geographical or geopolitical. The purpose of categories is to help people find stuff. If people are likely to look there, it should be there. Categories are about navigation, not ontology. - 22:31, 3 January 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmabel (talk • contribs)
- This is not about categories, it's about whether a portion of a particular widely used orthographic map image should be coloured green or not. Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:59, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Hemiauchenia: got it. Sorry for commenting when I'd merely skimmed. - Jmabel ! talk 00:28, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
- This is why COM:OVERWRITE was created. They should be separate files and each user should be able to choose which one they want to use.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:01, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, which is why I created File:Asia (orthographic projection) without New Guinea.svg by forking off a previous file version. The question is, should the title of the original file be changed? Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:20, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- This is not about categories, it's about whether a portion of a particular widely used orthographic map image should be coloured green or not. Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:59, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- I would say, not neatly either geographical or geopolitical. The purpose of categories is to help people find stuff. If people are likely to look there, it should be there. Categories are about navigation, not ontology. - 22:31, 3 January 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmabel (talk • contribs)
- But we're going off the geographical not geopolitical definition no? New Guinea forms part of the same landmass as Australia [2], and most sources I have seen do not consider it part of Asia. Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:00, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
January 04[edit]
Hello.
This page Commons:Meet our photographers/People doesn't appear correctly on smartphone. --ComputerHotline (talk) 07:17, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Shaping the Future of the Community Wishlist Survey[edit]
Hello community,
Thank you for participating in the Community Wishlist Survey over the years.
We are also grateful for your feedback about the survey and your patience in waiting for a response.
We have reviewed your feedback and made preliminary decisions to share with you.
In summary, Community Tech would like to develop a new, continuous intake system for community technical requests that improves prioritization, resourcing, and communication around wishes. Until the new system is established, the Community Tech team will prioritize work from the recently audited backlog of wishes rather than run the survey in February 2024. We are also looking to involve more volunteer developers in the wishlist process, beginning with the first-ever community Wishathon in March 2024.
Please read the announcement in detail either on the Diff blog or MetaWiki, and give your feedback.
The new intake system will need your ideas and involvement, and we’ll reach out on this topic in the next few months.
We look forward to hearing from you. –– STei (WMF) (talk) 17:34, 4 January 2024 (UTC)