Commons:Village pump

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

Shortcut: COM:VP

Community portal
introduction
Help desk Village pump
copyrightproposals
Administrators' noticeboard
vandalismuser problemsblocks and protections
↓ Skip to table of contents ↓       ↓ Skip to discussions ↓       ↓ Skip to the last discussion ↓
Welcome to the 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.

Please note


  1. If you want to ask why unfree/non-commercial material is not allowed at Wikimedia Commons or if you want to suggest that allowing it would be a good thing, please do not comment here. It is probably pointless. One of Wikimedia Commons’ core principles is: "Only free content is allowed." This is a basic rule of the place, as inherent as the NPOV requirement on all Wikipedias.
  2. Have you read our FAQ?
  3. For changing the name of a file, see Commons:File renaming.
  4. Any answers you receive here are not legal advice and the responder cannot be held liable for them. If you have legal questions, we can try to help but our answers cannot replace those of a qualified professional (i.e. a lawyer).
  5. Your question will be answered here; please check back regularly. Please do not leave your email address or other contact information, as this page is widely visible across the internet and you are liable to receive spam.

Purposes which do not meet the scope of this page


Search archives


 

Village pump in Rzeszów, Poland [add]
Centralized discussion
See also: Village pump/Proposals • Archive

Template: View • Discuss  • Edit • Watch


April 23[edit]

Wiki Loves Food[edit]

Curd Rice

Hello! After the successful pilot program by Wikimedia India in 2015, Wiki Loves Food (WLF) is happening again in 2018 and this year, we are going International. To make this event a grant success, your direction is key. Please sign up as a volunteer or sign up on behalf of your affiliate here.--Abhinav619 (talk) 08:46, 27 A

Where to place yard category for ships[edit]

We have categories for ships built in a specific ship yard, i.e. Ships built at Bergen Mekaniske Verksted, Bergen. There seem to be no consistance about includinging the IMO categories in these categories, or the subcategory with the ship name(s). One ship can have pictures stored in 5 different subcategories as it has changed name, but the IMO category will be unique and never change as the IMO number follows the hull. We should agree about a standard here and then try to get a bot to implement this standard for all existing categories. --Cavernia (talk) 20:20, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

I partly agree. For the categories for ships built in a specific ship yard, and possibly some other things (?), it makes logically more sense to include the IMO categories in them, than the categories for the names of the ships, for the reason you mention. I am still not absolutely keen on it, though, because even though I know how the IMO number works, it kind of feels more "abstract" (for lack of a better word) to me to find the number IMO 9377016 than the name Fugro Saltire (ship, 2008) in Ships built at Bergen Mekaniske Verksted, Bergen. Don't know if that makes sense to anyone else than me... It is true that we lack consistance about this, and I probably won't protest too much if most others prefer to categorize the IMO numbers rather than the ship names in those cases. Blue Elf (talk) 21:14, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
I would also opt for placing the IMO numbers into a yard category for the reasons presented by Cavernia. The IMO categories are already used as a container for the various name categories of a ship, so it wouldn't make sense to place each name category into the same category. De728631 (talk) 21:02, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Remember that the categories will always then be a mix of numbers and names as IMO numbers have only recently been adopted and are also not required for all vessels. Rmhermen (talk) 04:27, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
I understand the arguments from both sides, and I'm not sure what is the best solution, but it's obvious that the current categori structure is a confusing mix. --Cavernia (talk) 09:48, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
For non-experts looking at the yard category, the IMO numbers give no information. You have to click each to find the ships you are interested in. Instead (on in addition) having the names gets the same ship listed several times. I do not know which problem is bigger. --LPfi (talk) 12:09, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

May 17[edit]

City archive of Kiel[edit]

To this theme I question in the German COM:FORUM#Stadtarchiv Kiel, but nobody answerd me. So I question here: Should we import them? Habitator terrae (talk) 15:08, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Could I write them, that in the future they could upload their pictures directly to Commons? Habitator terrae (talk) 16:51, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

I request for a batch upload: COM:BATCH#Kieler Stadtarchiv Habitator terrae (talk) 17:23, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Crop tool down?[edit]

It’s just me or https://tools.wmflabs.org/croptool/ is giving everybody 502 Bad Gateway error? -- Tuválkin 15:52, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

I have just tried to reach it several times, unsuccessfully. :-( --GRuban (talk) 16:01, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
@Tuvalkin, GRuban: Restarted.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 00:40, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Wrong MIME type in audio files[edit]

A fellow contributor has recorded two MP3 audio files. When we try to upload the to Commons, they generate "File extension ".mp3" does not match the detected MIME type of the file (video/mp4)." error messages. I can open them in Audacity and VLC.

What causes the problem, and how can it be a) fixed (without re-saving from Audacity) and b) avoided in future? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:58, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

May 21[edit]

Cetegorization lost[edit]

With this deletion, a few hundred images lost its nexus linking to the subtree Category:Black and white photographs. How is this a good idea? (@DarwIn: ping!) -- Tuválkin 01:20, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

@Tuvalkin: Hey, thanks for bringing this into the VP. I seem to recall from older threads here that only true "Black and white photographs" (intended to be black and white) should go under that tree, otherwise most of the 20th-century photographs (at least until the early 1970s) will fall there, which do not seem to contribute to the usability of those categories. Is that tree supposed to include *all* BW photographs? Even if it is, I can't see any use in including them into "BW photos of Portugal", then "BW photos of Portugal", as it just clutters those cats making them useless to someone trying to find photos intended to be BW (using that technique).-- Darwin Ahoy! 01:35, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
The lead of :Category:Black and white photographs says "This category and the subcategories are applied to all black-and-white photographs. This allows to identify easily B&W photos (as a media type)." Rmhermen (talk) 02:40, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
@DarwIn: all black and white photos (intentional or not) should be in a black and white (sub)category. I suppose a seperate category for intentional black and white photos makes more sense for what you speak about, as a subcategory of black and white photos. Wouldn't be surprised if it already exists. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 07:15, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
@Tuvalkin: @DarwIn: I put everything back in Category:20th-century black and white photographs of Lisbon. (when time passes this could become more difficult, so I did it now) I considered putting them in Category:20th-century black and white photographs of Portugal instead (which also contains nothing but old photographs that are not black and white on purpose), but failed to see the point. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 07:49, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
The ratelimit (which hasn't been reversed yet) FUCKED me. Please excuse me while I go scream at someone. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 07:54, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for clarifying that. I remember discussions from years ago where we should be avoiding placing "normal" photos under the BW tree, as it would simply duplicate the already existing tree (at least if subcats are used). But if this understanding has changed, that's perfectly OK with me. I'll start including that kind of cat in the (many) BW photos I use to upload.-- Darwin Ahoy! 12:12, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I still fear this kind of cats will be used as a kind of "visual bags" for easily collecting photos from more general cats, such as "Lisbon in the 20th-century", seriously damaging the proper curadory of those subjects. And once the photo has fallen there, if it has not been categorized before, to find it will be literally like finding needles in haystacks. I myself find this to be a too high risk for maintaining that kind of categories, especially when to me those BW subcats are basically useless. But if that's just me thinking this way, never mind.-- Darwin Ahoy! 12:18, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
@DarwIn: What is "curadory"? I don't think I completely understand the issue. Per Commons:Categories: "The page (file, category) should be put in the most specific category/categories that fit(s) the page (not directly to its parent categories)". As I said above, a specific category for black and white photos that are black and white on purpose is a good idea if it doesn't exist already. You can also add files to a subcategory of Category:Undercategorised files of that's your concern. If your issue is something else, please elaborate. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 12:45, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
@Alexis Jazz: I mean curation. If you have 200 images to be sorted out in "Lisbon in the 20th-century", and then someone comes there and moves 190 of them to its subcat "20th-century black and white photographs of Lisbon", because they are BW and it's something very easily to do visually, that person has seriously damaged the process of proper curation of that content, in exchange to some rather pointless subcat about the photos being black and white, which is something almost nobody would care when they are looking for 20th-century material about Lisbon. That's what I mean: "20th-century black and white photographs of Lisbon", more than pointless, it's an hindrance.-- Darwin Ahoy! 12:58, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Can somebody please add this watchlist notice?[edit]

Please add this watchlist notice. Thank you. Ping me back. Having fun! Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 04:38, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: Some questions:
  1. What is this
  2. Why
  3. How
  4. Who are you
  5. What's up with your sig
  6. ..no that's about it.
- Alexis Jazz ping plz 07:10, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

WARNING: CAT-A-LOT IS BROKEN.[edit]

Cat-a-lot is broken until further notice. Do not categorize more than 89 files per minute.

If you try to do any more, cat-a-lot will say it succeeded but it really didn't. More than 89 categorizations simply means anything over that will be silently dropped.

If you are not an admin or bureaucrat, everything you categorized over 89 files per minute during the last week has been dropped. Oops. You may want to take another look at everything you thought you had categorized.

I'm sorry I didn't find out sooner. Then again, finding out is in no way my responsibility. VisualFileChange seems to stall and force the user to go get a cup of coffee before it automatically continues. I haven't tested any other tools. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 08:58, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

By "silently dropped" you mean it simply removes the category, without moving it anywhere?-- Darwin Ahoy! 13:12, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

@DarwIn: Given that this is because of new limits for how many edits one can make in a given time and removing one category and adding another in Cat-A-Lot is typically one edit per file: No, "silently dropped" means just "nothing happens". --El Grafo (talk) 13:29, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
@El Grafo: Thanks, then it's not as bad as it could be. But still very annoying, indeed.-- Darwin Ahoy! 13:37, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Just FTR: should be fixed now with 900 edits per 3 minutes for autoconfirmed & 10500 per 3 minutes for Patrolled/autopatrolled/Image reviewer --El Grafo (talk) 07:44, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

External link archiving and back-up's on Wikimedia Commons[edit]

There is an ongoing discussion taking place to add bot-archiving to media files 📁 on Wikimedia Commons, as link rot is a serious issue I would like to invite everyone interested to give their 2¢.

Comments imported from the English Wikipedia.

"@Donald Trung: - my bot WaybackMedic can add archives (example). However, dead links need to be pre-marked, such as with a {{dead link}} template. The bot doesn't have a dead-link checker so it needs to know which link(s) on a page need saving. If Faebot can mark them, my bot can save them. -- GreenC 02:18, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

@GreenC: that sounds good, can I ping and continue this conversation at the village pump of Wikimedia Commons? --Donald Trung (talk) 06:17, 20 May 2018 (UTC)"

@GreenC:, I moved the discussion here so it could be discussed and scrutinised by the community of Wikimedia Commons and helpful suggestions could be given by people who work with external links 🔗 every day. @:, as you're one of the most technical users on this wiki and your bot might have to be used. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 09:24, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

I have tested for dead links, this is how Category:Uploads by Fæ with linkrot got populated (as a one-off) and it's how Category:Faebot analysed duplicates ready for review partly works to recommend which duplicate photos should be kept (runs every day). However it is read intensive as these either look at each image page's wikitext for urls, or use the pywikibot links query, which probably amounts to the same thing in processor or transaction times.
The obvious way to speed this up and make it apply across the whole of Commons, would be to use a local data dump of all wikitext pages from the files namespace, which then avoids lots of internet connections. A second step would be to "remember" which domains are returning 404 errors consistently, and skip checking these individually. This would save a huge amount of potential wait time, as returning 404 errors, or similar header messages, takes seconds each time.
Personally, I'm unsure about the case for this being a good use of bot-writing time. It also looks like the sort of "virtuous wikifairy behind-the-scenes" work that is worth getting a grant for, if only to help cover some obvious costs and avoid being personally out of pocket. Having a grant to contribute to, say, an additional terabyte drive, or cover a couple of months of higher broadband connection before migrating a working bot to the cloud, is somewhat more meaningful than a barnstar template or being mistaken for a paid WMF dev. -- (talk) 09:39, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
@: Just to be perfectly clear: I assume you are aware dumps are publicly available for download? I'm not sure if you are, because if you were it would seem odd to refer to it the way you did. But I'm probably wrong. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 09:51, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Yes. For a long time dumps were not running, but seem to be regular at the moment. Fortunately pywikibot is written to be able to handle dumps with reasonable ease, so what works live can be adjusted to work with local dumps. In terms of volunteer time, getting it to work well/smart is more complex that it may first appear, especially if this is going to become a useful housekeeping task that is alert for new links being added to the collection and will regularly look back over the entire collection. A ~100MB dump may not seem large, but it is large if someone on a home broadband connection is sucking down fresh daily dumps as soon as they come out. If this is a cloud task, it may be possible to work this entirely differently, but that would need investigation unless there is a best practice established from Wikipedia (I have no idea, as I don't follow those projects, life's too short). -- (talk) 10:01, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I don't really care about barnstarts or other things that "the community" sees as important, and I don't think that GreenC wants to do it to get money 💴. I personally care about content and how this content "ages" and a serious issue is future attribution and the discoverability of new content or context for future 🔮 historians. A major issue (with Flickr files at least) is that when licenses change other people might mistake free files for copyrighted. ArchiveBots preserve the source and remove any copyright ambiguity for future reference. I'm not sure how Wikipedia projects do it so it might be best to ping an actual Wikimedia employed developer and ask for their opinion on this, judging by many past posts on this page I'm well aware that the Wikimedia Commons village pump is on the watch list of at least a few dozen of them. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 10:43, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Well, three ways to retrieve wikitext: download the dump as mentioned (released about once monthly). Use the API (most common). Or connect to the database with SQL queries via a Tools account. The later is generally the fastest but requires running the program on WMF servers; not such a bad thing to be hosted on the same LAN and collocation as the Wikipedia servers. This is how IABot does it. IABot has a dead link checker (PHP) and it's available to download, but I can't say much about it as I don't PHP. You might ask Cyberpower678 about it if interested. Running a dead link checker on a regular basis is not trivial which is why I don't do it, there are a lot of issues to deal with (intermittent outages, paywalls, bot blockers, etc). -- GreenC (talk) 13:16, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

I checked with Cyberpower678 and the dead link checker is https://github.com/wikimedia/DeadlinkChecker it is standalone PHP .. though some of the fail safe logic is built into IABot so it's not out of the box. CP also said IABot will get to Commons eventually. -- GreenC (talk) 13:25, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for checking. As Cyberpower is paid for this work, there seems no point in asking unpaid volunteers to invest our time in it. I'll keep my focus on other projects. Thanks -- (talk) 19:54, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
yeah - the eventualism is charming. maybe we need a wishlist, or summer or code to motivate implementation. linkrot is especially bad for auction website images. we need to model good archiving to maintain provenance and history. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 02:40, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Just because you don't have an obvious COI doesn't mean that It's not worth your time, I mean uploading from data banks is a lot more important, but most uploads you do are from external sources and having a bot that automatically archives them would be very handy, just because some other editors get paid doesn't mean that the rest of us should feel discouraged. Maybe there are other volunteers other than Fæ who think that this is worth their free time, or maybe we should get a paid COI user, but a Wikimedia employee or the sorts. A lot of sources on Wikipedia from articles that haven't been edited by human users in almost a decade are still checkable because of bot-archiving, sometimes when I click on "random" and check the sources for some old pictures I can't find the source, in fact millions of files on Wikimedia Commons originated from Google's Panoramio service which is now closed, it's a shame to think that future editors won't be able to access the information, or is it already too late for websites like Google's Panoramio? --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 20:02, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Just to confirm, I have no conflicts of interest or any conflicts of loyalty for anything I do here. If I did, they would be declared on my user page. It is a simple question of logic to direct my unpaid volunteer time in something that neither I nor someone else gets paid for. I am not against funding; funding to reprioritize my projects, or to cover some of my ongoing expenses of my hobby, would be super, as an upgrade in my kit this year would make quite a difference to my contributions. -- (talk) 20:15, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Neither do I, but just a suggestion, wouldn't it be better for you to ask either the Wikimedia Foundation or the local chapter of the UK for a grant? Or maybe GreenC could get a grant for this project if it can't be fully done exclusively on the Wikimedia Foundation's servers. We're (almost) all volunteers here but there are (monetary) outlets willing to finance such endeavours. I would suggest otherwise asking GreenC to apply for a (minor) grant to help with his bot here on Wikimedia Commons. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 20:48, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
good luck with that. GWtool was not WMF funded, not vicuna nor pattypan. but by all means be project manager, and ask them to pay a stipend to GreenC (rapid grant less than 2000). you missed the window, starts up again June 30 m:Grants:Project/Rapid Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 02:44, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
ask them to pay a stipend to GreenC - to be clear, I am not requesting or seeking any monies from anybodies. -- GreenC (talk) 02:15, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
InternetArchiveBot is endorsed by the WMF, funded by Internet Archives, and part of a project both the WMF and Internet Archives have a vested interest in.—cyberpower ChatHello! 03:04, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
the Internet Archive people are very nice, maybe we can poke them about extending their tool to other language wiki and commons. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 23:45, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-21[edit]

17:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Undeletion requests[edit]

hi, I wanted to ask for the restoration of some files of commons, which I had deleted in the past. I tried in more ways to make a request to COM: UNDEL ,,, but I deleted the requests without even submit them to the vote of the administrators, the name of this user is Глинистый сланец--Manwe11 (talk) 19:46, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

So, you are User:Глинистый сланец? Ruslik (talk) 20:49, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
yes--Manwe11 (talk) 11:21, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

May 22[edit]

File:Cold War2-US+EU+allies vs Russia+China+allies.png[edit]

This map was removed from Wikipedia article w:Cold War II for content issues, like "original research". I would like to know what can be done about the map here. Thanks. --George Ho (talk) 10:51, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

  • Probably nothing, although you could tag it with {{Fact disputed}}. Commons doesn't have the same threshold against original research as the English-language Wikipedia. - Jmabel ! talk 16:16, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
i see they prefer File:Cold War Map 1980.svg don't see many references there either. meh, we have lots of superseded maps, it will make a good meta-history. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 23:53, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

May 23[edit]

Files with {{Creator}} in author/artist field fall into Category:Files with no machine-readable author[edit]

As above, e.g. File:Vincent Van Gogh 0010.jpg or File:Zayapa (Grapsus grapsus), Cerro Brujo, isla de San Cristóbal, islas Galápagos, Ecuador, 2015-07-24, DD 151.JPG. I do not know how to fix it. --jdx Re: 06:48, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Dating postcard[edit]

Gibraltar Eliott's monument.jpg
On the reverse of the non-posted postcard, there is the mention: Inland 1/2 d stamp, Foreign 1 d. I suppose this is one pence in the imperial money system. Does anyone know when these poststamp rates where applicable?Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:40, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
More information on Beanland Malin Vysotsky (talk) 11:55, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

I now have dated it as pre WW I. Manualy colouring in pictures was nearly always done before WW I. Also it seems unlikely that the postcard would have been printed in Germany after WW I. 1 pence poststamp could also have been before inflation took hold after WW I.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:06, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Category name needed[edit]

«The road is lo-o-o-ong…»

So this is not a boulevard, alright. What is it then? I’m sure there’s a lot of use for this concept, and it’s meaning is clear: A (usually paved) path / road / street / walkway inside a park or garden. What’s the English term for this? -- Tuválkin 11:49, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

  • Most commonly a mall; also (especially UK) an avenue. Of course, both of these also have other meanings, so no great suggestion for a category name. - Jmabel ! talk 14:58, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Perhaps a bit fashioned, but still used is a promenade. This is precisely used for a paved walkway, designed primarily for the enjoyment of those promenading (walkers). I think it's mostly British English, but it will probably be okay for North American English speakers. Avenue is a good alternative, but has far more diverse uses. -- (talk) 15:06, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
  • A promenade need not be tree-lined or linear (consider the one at Brooklyn Heights). - Jmabel ! talk 19:23, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

It's kind of a boulevard... It's paved, with trees at its sides. And if good old Catarino was right, the artillery even passed there at the time of the Peninsular War. In Portuguese we usually call this alameda, often translated to "boulevard", but which apparently also exists in English, and means precisely what this is. So maybe we should stick to alameda, at least for the categorization. For the name of the category, I believe [[Category:Western gate and palm avenue of Escola Politécnica de Lisboa]] could be a good option.-- Darwin Ahoy! 09:29, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Setting up InputBox to preload a page to create a simple to use photo essay for Wiki Loves competitions[edit]

Update: I managed to work it out, I will try and improve the instructions to where they are simpler to follow.

Hi all

I know that Wiki Loves Africa and others have had great success with photo essays, but I've heard from organisers that it is very very time consuming to set up. I've had an idea for creating a much easier way to create photo essays using InputBox with a preloaded page which includes a nicely formatted gallery. The whole thing should work in Visual Editor which will make it much easier for new people to take part.

However I've got stuck with trying to make the preloaded page work. The instructions are not very clear to me. Could someone please take a look? All I want to happen is when you start a page using the Inputbox on User:John Cummings/WLE photo essay template it preloads the text from User:John Cummings/Template:WLE photo essay template, I know you use the 'preloadparams[]=' field but I can't make it work. Transcluding below so its easier to see whats what:

Page with InputBox[edit]

  • Create your photo essay by typing the title into the box below and click Create page.
    • Please upload your images before creating your photo essay.
    • Your photo essay will not be saved until you press Publish changes.


A list of all photo essays submitted can be found here

Example photo essays[edit]

Zanzibar seaweeds

Zamzibar seaweeds by user:Rachelclarareed

The making of thatch

The Making of Thatch by User:Eric Atie

Information to be preloaded[edit]

Instructions[edit]

  1. If you see code click the pencil icon, OOjs UI icon edit-ltr.svg to switch to the Visual Editor).
  2. Click on the image below, and click edit
  3. Click Add new image
  4. Add an image by pasting the filename into the box
  5. Fill in the name description
  6. Click Apply changes
  7. Click Publish changes
  8. Repeat until all images have been added
  9. Remove the example image
  10. Delete these instructions

Title[edit]

Site[edit]

Description[edit]

By[edit]

User:??


Thanks very much

John Cummings (talk) 11:59, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment stupid question: do we even have VisualEditor enabled anywhere on Commons by default? For me it's still listed among the beta features. Oh, and there is a checkbox "Enable the visual editor and the new wikitext mode in Structured Discussions" in the editing section of the preferences, but since we don't have "Structured Discussions" I have no idea what that does. --El Grafo (talk) 12:15, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
OK, I just should have tried it: apparently it enables itself once you try to create a page using that box. --El Grafo (talk) 12:19, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Multilingual caption designs for the file page[edit]

This past January the Structured Data on Commons team introduced multilingual captions, one of the first features that will be available. There was a discussion back then around designs for the Upload Wizard, which has lead to a prototype available for testing and feedback.

The draft designs for how multilingual captions will look and function on the file talk page are now up for review and feedback. The page contains a lot of visuals of how things might work, and the text may be technical in places. If you have some time to look at the pages and tell the team what you think or ask questions, I invite you to do so. Thanks. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 16:31, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

  • What about for Special:Upload. Will there be some sort of de-serialization available to allow that to remain text-based? - Jmabel ! talk 19:25, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
    • Hello. Could you expand a bit on what you'd like to see? Perhaps something like Quick Statements for Wikidata, but in a Special: Upload form? RIsler (WMF) (talk) 23:38, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
      • At the recent Wikimedia Conference, there was discussion of being able to maintain the text-based workflows that are common among experienced users. Basically, at present we frequently go to an existing file page, select "edit", copy, paste into Special:Upload, select a different (but similar) photo, edit the pasted text to make small changes, and upload. As I understood the upshot of the discussions at the conference, there are two reasonable choices:
        1. maintain the same workflow using serialization of the data for the existing photo and, upon upload, an inverse deserialization of the input in Special:Upload (or its equivalent/replacement).
        2. If Special:Upload (or its equivalent/replacement) no longer can simply use a single block of text, we need to be able to specify that existing file page to Special:Upload (or its equivalent/replacement) and have Special:Upload (or its equivalent/replacement) pre-populate accordingly. - Jmabel ! talk 00:49, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
        • Okay. Thanks for providing more detail. At present, we're still figuring out the fate of Special:Upload with structured data. It could stay largely the same, have enhancements, or there may be a replacement. Preliminary work suggests that something like #2 of the options you presented above might be the way we go, but we'll know more in the near future as we prep plans to launch. Nothing for this form is etched in stone yet, so feedback/questions like this are helpful. Thanks again. RIsler (WMF) (talk) 01:26, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
          • I - as with many users - absolutely need the ability to upload entirely as plaintext. Even Jmabel's #2 is not a sufficient replacement for that ability - I copy-paste from a .txt file rather than an existing file. I cannot how emphasize how vital it is not to lose existing features while adding new ones. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:31, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Same here. The changes as proposed will drive me away from Commons, probably from any WMF project. I’m sure I’m not the only one. -- Tuválkin 05:34, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
    • How about this: For Special:Upload, you paste the structured json right in the text field, and the server recognizes it as json representation of structured data and deserializes it. Then each file description page needs an export view allowing you to grab the existing json. Basically, that would just be a very dumbed down version of Special:ApiSandbox. If Special:upload is replaced (which seems like a totally reasonable idea to me), there could be a Special:Upload/raw, similar to how we have for the watchlist. Seems doable to me, right RIsler? —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 06:13, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
      • That is along the lines of my serialization/deserialization idea. But we'd need to see specifics to know whether any particular solution is going to work.
      • In case this is unclear to anyone: Pi.1415926535, Tuválkin, and I all upload a lot of images to Commons, mostly our own original photos, and I think our workflow using Special:Upload is common to many of the contributors who do just that. I don't think I am overstating things to say that it is necessary a workflow along these lines is accommodated. If we break the workflow for many of Commons most active contributors without providing something at least very similar, this will be a big problem and will drive away some very important contributors. - Jmabel ! talk 06:56, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
No worrise, it's clear, and as far as I know there's no discussion about breaking yours or anyone else's workflow. This post relates to a modification to the UploadWizard, it doesn't touch Special:Upload, and how to work with multilingual captions on the file page. Those are the specific things that are being worked on right now. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 16:29, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
  • You’re saying that it is not workflow breaking when you want us to paste as JSON what we are used to paste as wikitext? Since when "power user" means "IT guru"? -- Tuválkin 16:08, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
    That certainly is workflow breaking.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:47, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

My presumption is that none of the suggestions will interfere with the current API based upload processes, such as Pywikibot. If they might, please flag me and I'll do some research as it could stop my upload projects. -- (talk) 07:25, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

  • @:, are use saying that because Pywikibot will presumably be OK, we should not be concerned about Special:Upload, or are you raising a separate issue? Because if the former, this seems like a non sequitur. - Jmabel ! talk 16:11, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
On recent times I've been trying to use more the UploadWizard instead of the basic form, but the UW is still very limited and unpractical for many uploads. I concur with everyone here saying that it should be left as it is, for me as well it is an essential tool for uploading.-- Darwin Ahoy! 09:36, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
  • @DarwIn: re: "it should be left as it is", do you mean Special:Upload, or something else? As I understand it, Special:Upload inevitably will change in some respect if descriptions are no longer simple text; the issue is to keep it usable at all. - Jmabel ! talk 16:13, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
  • @Jmabel: Hey! Yes, it's exactly that form. By "left as it is" I meant left usable, indeed, as you said.-- Darwin Ahoy! 16:20, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
  • @: your presumptions are correct, and if things should ever change I'll certainly be in touch with you. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 16:33, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
  • @Keegan (WMF): Hello, I agree with my colleagues, I often use this tool that works with Special:Upload, I assume I'm not alone, and I will be worry/disappointed if something is broken. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:50, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
@Christian Ferrer: You are not alone.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:50, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

May 24[edit]

Blocking Account[edit]

Hello, I am working on a feature to allow the user to see that he/she is blocked from editing from within the mobile application (see the link below for the specific issue). In order to test that, I need the account Seannemann1234 to be blocked within the Beta environment, and I was directed here in order to accomplish this. Any help would be appreciated!

https://github.com/commons-app/apps-android-commons/issues/1511 —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.132.246.83 (talk) 03:26, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Assuming you mean the Commons beta cluster (there are numerous beta clusters) then you have to ask someone listed here. The beta cluster is technically a different project. Admins here don't have rights there unless specifically granted to them. --Majora (talk) 03:43, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
sure, done. — regards, Revi 15:32, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

नगला भाट रूपसपुर शिकोहाबाद[edit]

हमारा गाँव शिकोहाबाद से चार किलोमीटर दूरी पर सतिथ है हमारे गाँव के प्रधान थे स्व श्री मुकुट सिंह यादव । हमारे यहाँ अभी फ़िलहाल पानी की समस्या नहीं हैं निकट भविष्य मैं पानी की कमी ज़रूर महसूस होगी

नगेन्द्र यादव

पुत्र स्व श्री मुकुट सिंह यादव (ex प्रधान )
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ngndra52 (talk • contribs) 04:46, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
I think that you have taken the metaphorical name of this page too literally. Best wishes to your village, anyway. Perhaps a Hindi speaker can explain.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 05:19, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

May 25[edit]

Bug in image history[edit]

Hello. Anyone know how to sort the bug on this file: File:Sabah State Legislative Assembly seating, 2018.svg. Notice the oldest version is showing as the current version. This is after a history merge. File a bug? Rehman 02:46, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

@Rehman: Works for me, cache issue?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 02:59, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Hmm thats odd. I've even tried on a different computer. Are you sure you don't see the old version (11 May 2018) on top of the File history section? Rehman 03:15, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Fixed by User:Zhuyifei1999. Rehman 05:12, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

W3C validator[edit]

Hi, I am working rather excessively with both validators. Since some time both seem to be buggy, they ignore the first line of coding and while one of them declares the code unckeckable and refuses to check , the other one checks at least for W3C-errors. With Rillkes "Edit SVG" the first line is present! Whom can such a bug be reported? -- sarang사랑 18:59, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure what problems you are seeing, but the report should go to W3C. See "feedback" at the bottom of https://validator.w3.org/
Earlier today I went to File:Pump with tank pid en.svg and tried clicking on the link in "The source code of this SVG is valid." The effective link is
https://validator.w3.org/check?uri=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSpecial%3AFilepath%2FPump_with_tank_pid_en.svg&ss=1#source
It took me to the W3C validator, but the validator complained it could not run: "Sorry! This document cannot be checked." It gave the reason as:
External Checker not available
Checking the Document Type of this document requires the help of an external tool which was either not enabled in this validator, or is currently unavailable. Check in the validator's system configuration that HTML5 Validator is enabled and functional.
The error encountered was: 403 Forbidden
The file I was checking was SVG 1.0. I could tell the W3C validator to check it as a 1.0 file (which it would do) or to check it as an SVG 1.1 file (which it would also do but complain about version=1.0); that's done by specifying the DOCTYPE rather than using "detect automatically".
I believe the W3C checker passes some validation requests to the nu validator (which uses schemas and can do a better job), the "external checker". My guess is it tried to pass the check to https:validator.nu, and nu responded with a 403 (Forbiddden).
Trying a different file (SVG 1.1):
https://validator.w3.org/check?uri=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSpecial%3AFilepath%2FFirst_Ionization_Energy.svg&ss=1#source
Works with no problems.
A more direct link to W3C's nu is
https://validator.w3.org/nu/?showsource=yes&useragent=Validator.nu%2FLV+http%3A%2F%2Fvalidator.w3.org%2Fservices&acceptlanguage=&doc=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSpecial%3AFilepath%2FPump_with_tank_pid_en.svg
If I follow that link, the first line (the XML declaration) is not shown in the listing; instead there is a blank line. My file has standalone="no" in the XML declaration. If I use a 1.1 file, the nu validator shows the first line:
https://validator.w3.org/nu/?showsource=yes&useragent=Validator.nu%2FLV+http%3A%2F%2Fvalidator.w3.org%2Fservices&acceptlanguage=&doc=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSpecial%3AFilepath%2FFirst_Ionization_Energy.svg
Maybe the checker is confused by SVG 1.0 or maybe standalone="no". What files give you trouble?
Glrx (talk) 23:08, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. As a matter of fact, all SVG files give the mentioned trouble. I tried to report as Bug 30257. -- sarang사랑 05:09, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

May 26[edit]

Movie publicity stills[edit]

I know there has been many discussions on this, but I could not locate one specific to my case.

I uploaded a picture at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jack_Benny_in_Buck_Benny_Rides_Again.jpg with the notation that it is marked as copyrighted in 1939. I searched the appropriate copyright renewals for 27, 28 and 29 years later finding no renewal. Is this sufficient evidence that the picture is now in the public domain?

It just so happens that the movie itself has also lapsed into the public domain, but I want to understand if searching the renewal records is sufficient.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwbuck11 (talk • contribs) 13:42, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Generally so. Of course, someone could imaginably come along and prove you wrong. - Jmabel ! talk 04:19, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Wiki platinum medal.png[edit]

Hello, could any expert image editor create a diamond or platinum version of File:Wiki gold medal.png? It is important for me. Thanks, Patriccck (talk) 19:25, 26 May 2018 (UTC) @Patriccck: Probably better asked at Commons:Graphic Lab/Illustration workshop. - Jmabel ! talk 04:20, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Korean language and law help needed[edit]

Commons:Country specific consent requirements lacks guidelines with regards to South Korea, a cursary google search led me to blog posts (https://klawguru.com/2014/02/21/personality-rights-under-korean-law/ and https://pureumlawoffice.com/blog/dont-take-photo/) asserting that there is in fact an actual "rights to face" in Korea and suggesting that the relevant legal framework for such a right are articles 10 and 17 of the Korean constitution (https://elaw.klri.re.kr/eng_service/lawView.do?lang=ENG&hseq=1). If we were to take these blogs as being correct an outline for a guideline for South Korea would be i)consent needed to take a recognisable likeness of a person ii) consent needed to publish such a picture iii) consent needed to commercially exploit someones likeness. However, the onus in Korean law seems to be on the subject to actually have to actively protect their own likeness and if they can't be bothered to do so the law will not intervene.

Searching for actual caselaw leads to http://lexkorea.org/?p=839, which seems to contend that Korean law is at the moment undecided in this, and from which I infer that South Korea is in the process of awaiting the accumulation of sufficient legal precedents to inform future cases. However I am unable to read the Korean language legal references provided, and would be unable to interpert them even if I could do so. So can I ask anyone with the inclination and ability to do so to explore this further and write up a guideline. Thanks in advance.--KTo288 (talk) 19:52, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Stolen photo![edit]

I have just found the file File:Meteor trail over Chelyabinsk.jpg that is obviously stolen from File:Chelyabinsk meteor trace 15-02-2013.jpg and improperly attributed. Please take necessary administrative actions. --ssr (talk) 22:51, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

I've nominated it for deletion. --bjh21 (talk) 23:39, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the assistance! --ssr (talk) 23:44, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Neighbourhood vs Neighborhood[edit]

I have found some categories using the word "Neighbourhood" while it seems that the word choosed in Commons is "Neighborhood" (see here). I have seen that has been object of discussion (for instance here). Can you tell me where is the discussion whish has decided to use "Neighborhood" instead of "Neighbourhood". I notice that in the english WP, the term used is "Neighbourhood" ! Personaly, but I'm only French, I used to prefer "Neighbourhood" --Berdea (talk) 23:15, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

I doubt there was a discussion. Category:Neighborhood was just there first. By about 4 and a half years actually. The English Wikipedia actually uses en:WP:ENGVAR. Which is basically "whatever's there first, stays". It is just easier than constantly fighting over something as trivial as spelling. You could always start a RfC to see the Commons community's opinion but I'm personally for sticking with the status quo in this situation. --Majora (talk) 23:20, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

May 27[edit]

Blocked Account Help[edit]

If I log into a blocked account on a device, then log out of the account, and then log into an unblocked account on the same device, will everything function as though I had not logged into the blocked account originally? I.e. will logging into the blocked account block my IP address, so logging into an unblocked account will then not function properly? —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.142.220.203 (talk) 21:09, 27 May 2018 (UTC)