Commons:Bots/Work requests/Archive 11

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to this page.

heading= → heading:

I noticed that I used "heading=" instead of "heading:" (the equal sign instead of the colon) in {{Location}} template by mistake many times. This wrong format is non-functioning. As we can see, that's not only my problem. There are hundreds files (1367 pages found) which contain {{Location}} or {{Location dec}} with faulty format of heading parameter. Could somebody correct it by a bot? (P.S., some other occurences concern the {{Depicted place}} template which doesn't support heading parameter at all yet.) --ŠJů (talk) 00:56, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Also other atributes of this template (region:, scale:, dim:), missing underscore character between parameters etc. can be checked. --ŠJů (talk) 00:56, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Halloo! Is here somebody? --ŠJů (talk) 23:42, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

I created Category:Media using Location template with incorrect parameter and will try to clean it up once it fills up a little. --Jarekt (talk) 06:00, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Category work needed

Category:Images from the Veikkos Archive – needing category checks has a backlog of some 13,000 files. I have come across a number of them that have a redundant category. Is a bot able to do the following:

  • If Category:Sealing stamps of LOCATION and Category:LOCATION both exist then remove Category:LOCATION only if Category:Sealing stamps of LOCATION exists (LOCATION is a variable)
  • If the preceding is true then remove Category:Images from the Veikkos Archive – needing category checks

This would save a lot of time for us human editors. Regards. Alan Liefting (talk) 19:00, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Fixing double parameter errors

Hi all,

The maintenance category Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls contains a lot of images (x out of 45000) which are quite easy to be fixed by both when we look at two simple patterns. The first pattern is two parameters of which one is empty and the other is filled. The empty one can just be removed. Examples: A1, A2. Another issue is two parameters with exactly the same content, one can just be removed. Examples:B1, A3 and B2. Is it an idea to fix those by bot? I expect something like 10.000-30.000 files will be affected. In the examples given only the information named parameters were affected, there are however also other templates which could cause the issue, a lot of times without named parameters.

Mvg, Basvb (talk) 16:10, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

We should probably finalize working on templates in that category, since a lot of files can be affected by one or two templates. Otherwise I think this is a great idea. --Jarekt (talk) 23:06, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Yes that's a thing I found out after this question. Mvg, Basvb (talk) 23:35, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
I fixed a lot of the templates, all of the creators and institutions. On Category talk:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls the most important templates which cause a lot of errors (used a lot) are described, these are mainly pretty complicated templates. Mvg, Basvb (talk) 15:38, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Fixing US Navy VIRIN links

Just came across Commons:Deletion requests/File:US Navy 100513-N-1926C-114 Information Systems Technicians 2nd Class Steffan Escobar and Jomar Romero drop off items at the E-Waste and Recyclable Appliance Turn-In event.jpg. Apparently the problem is that the source link that was given at the file led to nowhere. The problem is that the US Navy website has changed their URLs. Looking and spot-checking Category:Files created by the United States Navy with known IDs, it appears to me that this problem affects the whole category.

Could some bot take care of this substitution over all files in Category:Files created by the United States Navy with known IDs? s/\bhttp:\/\/www\.navy\.mil\/view_single\.asp\?id=/http:\/\/www\.navy\.mil\/view_image\.asp\?id=/g

Lupo 14:43, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Using a template might be a good idea in order to avoid further disturbance with websites changes? Jean-Fred (talk) 15:35, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes. They use {{ID-USMil}}, but the URL is passed as parameter, not coded in the template. I don't know why; maybe the URLs for the different services are too different. Lupo 17:22, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
I have been aware of DoD changes in websites, I have not invested much time in working it all out yet. If someone works out a better way of using the VIRINs to link to sources please do add guidance to Commons:VIRIN. I would he happy to catch up with whatever we establish as best practice for my uploads, though it may take me a couple of months. For DoD sources this is around 50,000 images. --Fæ (talk) 19:20, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
For mass uploads, I would suggest creating wrapper templates around ID-USMil that do contain the URL and only take the VIRIN and the site-specific identifier as parameter. For instance, for all those navy.mil images, we could have a template {{ID-USMil-navy.mil|100513-N-1926C-114|85516}} implemented as {{ID-USMil|{{{1}}}|Navy|url=http://www.navy.mil/view_image.asp?id={{{2}}}}}. And likewise for other sites we import lots of photos from. That way, we only have to change the appropriate template if the URL changes again in the future. Lupo 20:20, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Uploads from Flickr

Hi, This is a treasure. Hundreds of pictures with high educational value and a free license. Could someone with a bot take care of this? Thanks in advance. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:05, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

@Yann: any categories to sort into (eg. check categories)? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 07:44, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Some photos you can find here Category:Photographs by Carole Raddato --Butko (talk) 10:33, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
@Zhuyifei1999 and Butko: Thanks for this. Wow, did you upload them all already? Regards, Yann (talk) 14:07, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
I uploaded about 3 thousand today. In Flickr stream - 20,552 photos, in category 10 893 photos --Butko (talk) 17:24, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
✓ Should be running Long filenames will be replaced by "Carole Raddato" instead --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 06:06, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks again. I started reviewing them, and nominated for deletion some information boards taken in countries when there is no FoP. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:08, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Fix broken escaping in recent UploadWizard uploads

Hi,

UploadWizard recently started to replace | with | in file descriptions, to avoid accidental truncation of descriptions, per T78336. As it turns out, this was not a good idea. The behavior has been reverted, but files uploaded from Tuesday until now (2015-01-13 -- 2015-01-16) might have broken descriptions. Could someone go through the files which were uploaded in this period and are in Category:Uploaded with UploadWizard, and do a | -> | replacement?

thanks! --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 00:20, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

I'll take care of this with User:OgreBot 2. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 22:54, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done 278 pages updated. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:06, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Meadia in Category:Bundesstraßen numbers

Hello. Most of the descriptions of those images don't have an information box and the licence is wrong. To repair that, the pages shoudt have the box (same box for all, current date can be adjusted): 

{{Information
|description    =
{{de|1=Bundesdeutsche Bundesstraßennummer. Version von Zeichen 401 der dt. StVO}}
{{en|1=German Federal Road (Bundesstraße) number signet. Version of the German road sign Nr. 401}}
|date           = 2015-01-18
|source         = German law ("Straßenverkehrs-Ordnung")
|author         = The Federal Government of Germany.
|permission     = {{PD-VzKat}}
|other_versions =
}}

and shoudt be taken from Category:Media missing infobox template. Other categories can stay. Any other text can be erased. As an example look at File:Bundesstraße 200 number.svg. Antonsusi (talk) 19:29, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Database reports/Unbelievable life spans

This database report has not been updated for several months since the bot is inactive. Is there anyone who is willing to take over this task? --Leyo 13:08, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

It is unbelievablelifespans.py however there is no namespace table in the database. The database to work around is broken (see https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T50625#984645). --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:28, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Add date categories to my uploads

I've just discovered Category:Photographs by date and would like to have its subcategories added to my uploads. This will take a while if I do it manually, as I've uploaded over twelve thousand pictures. Could a bot do it? I'm imagining that the bot goes one-by-one through most of my uploads (details below), adding a date category only when the image uses {{Information}}, and using the date supplied in the |Date= parameter. Bonus points if the bot logs all images that don't use {{Information}} and all images that use the template but don't have anything in the data parameter or have something in it that's not precisely YYYY-MM-DD (example of this), and then gives me the full logs for both types so that I can check them and fix them if necessary. I've started adding date categories to new uploads (example), so it should also check to see if an image is already in a date category and ignore ones that are. Since they're not broken, there's no need to log these images.

I was imagining that the bot would go through every image in eight categories; it should ignore things I've uploaded that aren't in any of these categories, and it should add a date to anything uploaded by someone else that's in one of these categories. The categories in question are Category:Aerial pictures by User:Nyttend, Category:Building-centered pictures by User:Nyttend, Category:Community pictures by User:Nyttend, Category:Highway pictures by User:Nyttend, Category:Miscellaneous images by User:Nyttend, Category:Portraits by User:Nyttend, Category:Scenery pictures by User:Nyttend, Category:Signs by User:Nyttend.

Thanks! Nyttend (talk) 02:48, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Cleaning up Special:ListFiles/Maksim

The description pages of files transferred to Commons by Maksim are usually a mess. Since there are so many, it would be good if rough cleanups (example) could be made by a bot. --Leyo 23:27, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

A lot of these have no infobox templates, I was working on the uploads from uploaders with a lot of images without infobox templates. From this user there are 3900 files without infobox, however to me they proved a bit too difficult to use some general patterns. I couldn't really find good patterns for imported files yet because the original files were also formatted in different manners. But maybe some general stuff can be done by bot. Mvg, Basvb (talk) 23:39, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Yes, it's probably not an easy task. The common Esperanto phrase (using insource:/La bildo estas kopiita de wikipedia/ insource:/La originala priskribo estas/ even ~4600 files are being found) can surely replaced by bot. The same applies to categories copied from Wikipedia. --Leyo 00:31, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
IMHO the cleanup step may be done separate from the addition of the information template. --Leyo 18:18, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

URLs rename request

The Railway Site of Sergey Bolashenko has changed its domain name from sbchf.narod.ru to infojd.ru. All sbchf.narod.ru links in descriptions of photos from this site (link) need to be replaced with infojd.ru. The description of Template: Bolachenko would be fixed too.

Xenotron (talk) 07:51, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Why not using VisualFileChange.js? --Arnd (talk) 15:50, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
VisualFileChange.js allows working only with page, user or category. For example, I already fixed links in Category:Photographs_by_Serguei_Bolachenko, which contains only 141 files from that site, but the search result gives 251. I don't know how to load search result page into this editor. Xenotron (talk) 16:57, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done. All description links fixed Xenotron (talk) 19:54, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Category:Images_by_Rob_Lavinsky

I have raised this matter through the Commons OTRS mail queue. My email address has been reviewed against the source of the files and I have been directed here for resolution.

For the image listed at Category:Images_by_Rob_Lavinsky (there are over 50k files) I am requesting that someone can undertake a task on my behalf.

Every image in that category currently directs to the wrong source due to a website relaunch performed recently, and those links direct to a password protected source. Source links should all go to somewhere on iRocks.com, not mindat.org. Many of these photos are currently directing to www.irocks.com/db_pics/ that need to be redirected systematically to img.irocks.com/ but some direct to mindat.org and need to be modified to go to img.irocks.com.

Additionally, we need to modify the descriptions slightly so it isn't exactly the same as the text on our website because it is hurting us in terms of SEO. This can be done systematically based on information already uploaded, or if there is a better way (if I get a csv of all of the images/info, I can fix the desc and send back to be uploaded and overwritten... What can I do to help? Thanks!

I guess we need to create {{Rob Lavinsky source}} template taking some numeric ID which will display correct link, and run a bot to change all files to use that template. I would also replace {{Images by Rob Lavinsky}} with {{Rob Lavinsky cc-by-sa}} and Category:Images by Rob Lavinsky. --Jarekt (talk) 14:28, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
At the moment http://www.irocks.com/ is not online while mindat.org is. For example File:Acanthite-221197.jpg link to mindat.org works just fine while File:Acanthite-Barite-ma74a.jpg 2 links to irocks.com are broken. --Jarekt (talk) 13:09, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks - the pieces still exist, but there have been multiple changes that occurred over the last ____ years. That acanthite exists, but the image is now at img http://img.irocks.com/mdpics/MD-221197a.jpg. Mindat.org originally handled the import of this data, but they did it in a way that significantly helps them while hurting our SEO, so we're trying to regain that. Is it easier to just completely delete all images in the category, and then reimport them from our site using our correct current links? Is it even possible to mass-delete? I think there are so many weird programming issues that happened in the past through cheap bandaids that it's hard to figure out the right steps to fix it without just restarting completely.
Deleting and reloading the images in order to fix the links back to irocks.com and mindat.org websites is not an option, since all the images would be removed from the wikipedia articles. The dead links in the "source" field is something that happens all the time, and at least in this case is not necessary to verify the license. If there is some clear pattern in the form of a list of files and what change needs to be done than I think we can help, but otherwise I do not see what else can be done. --Jarekt (talk) 12:48, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

change all pages with {int:filedesc-header}

i sometimes see wrong == {{int:filedesc-header}} == instead of == {{int:filedesc}} == like here [1].

I do not know how much it is a problem (how many pages), but it is always shown as <filedesc-header>, not autotranslated. Maybe this can be added to the work list of the various "cleanup bots" or tools? Holger1959 (talk) 00:07, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

I have not seen it before and I do not know how to look for such pages. --Jarekt (talk) 12:35, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
YaCBot is fixing such things. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:10, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
thank you, so @McZusatz: can help maybe? Holger1959 (talk) 15:13, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
I think it is a long-running process until all these replacements have been performed. In my opinion it makes no sense to request a special treatment of certain files because it just rearranges the order of the renaming but not the final result where all files will be fine. So "all we can do is sit and wait" ;-) --Arnd (talk) 15:57, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
{{int:filedesc-header}} produces "⧼filedesc-header⧽", it there are any files that use this non-existing message, they should be fixed. I located 50 such files by searching for "filedesc-header". I hope that was all. --Jarekt (talk) 18:14, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
@Jarekt: great, many thanks! Holger1959 (talk) 21:10, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Change template

Hi,

could you change a template {{Mediagrant II|Foto českých obcí}} for {{Mediagrant II|Události}} within files from Category:Akce Cihelna 2014, please.

thx.

--Juandev (talk) 12:02, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Why not using VisualFileChange.js? --Arnd (talk) 12:18, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Double extension

Hi, Could someone with a bot help cleaning this list: User:Dispenser/Double extension. These files should be renamed. There are many cases which can be done with a bot:

  1. when the double extension is the same format (usually JPEG/JPG/jpg/jpeg), and,
  2. when the file name has a meaning.

I think the rest has to done manually. Thanks in advance, Yann (talk) 23:22, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

I'll code #1 tomorrow --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 13:19, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done → Commons:Bots/Requests/YiFeiBot (23) --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 09:29, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Correcting language templates

Hi bots, there are (many) photos at Commons, such as File:Պուշկինի լեռնանցք 19.jpg, that contain a language template (in the description) which is obviously not correct. In special case there are only Armenian letters why it is impossible that its English. Wouldn't it be great to correct such templates where all contained letters do not fit to the letters of the template language? Thanks, --Arnd (talk) 10:11, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Due to the timeout i am going to create my own bot for doing such task. Hope to have your support when requesting for it. --Arnd (talk) 13:29, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
@Aschroet: I published at gerrit:183266 a rough Pywikibot script to help with this cleanup activities. It can use langdetect to choose the best match. --Ricordisamoa 17:05, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
@Ricordisamoa: thank you. I hope that i could somewhen use it. Btw, since langdetect does not work for my example (Armenian) i looked through the Internet and found this. Beside this cleanup things in the beginning there is an interesting approach namely langdetect_by_chars which detects languages (including Armenian) by chars. Maybe it is worth to include that as well into your script. --Arnd (talk) 18:56, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Uploads by LasPo rocks

User LasPo rocks has uploaded dozens if not hundreds of images from Flickr with an automated tool. Problem is, each of these uploads was only categorised with tag-type cats, hence spamming improper cats. See Special:Contributions/LasPo_rocks. Proposing all these be tagged with Check categories and/or added to a new maintenance cat "Uploads by LasPo rocks needing category review". --Pitke (talk) 21:16, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Addendum: between 300 and 400 files. --Pitke (talk) 15:29, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
@Pitke: ✓ Done , see Category:Uploads by LasPo rocks needing category review --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:58, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Diffuse Category:Saints by name to Category:Saints by name - A‎...Z

Hello,

A hierarchy has been created (not by me) to unclog the 1350 subcats of Saints by name. Unfortunately, cat-a-lot does not allow to move subcategories.

Can a bot move categories to the appropriate subcats? Place Clichy 12:37, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Categorizing images

Hi. I have uploaded quite a few images from flickr (about 10000). About 80% of them have a scientific name in the title. Would somebody be able to get a bot to take the first two words of the title, check if there is a cat with those two words and if yes, move the image to that cat? Here an example: File:Lambertia formosa (5390133240).jpg First two words: Lambertia formosa, there is a cat with this name so move the image. All the files are located in Category:Uploaded_by_Amada44_(unsorted). Thanks, Amada44  talk to me 09:08, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

If you are really confident that the naming is consistently good, then I'll take a quick look at this now. --Fæ (talk) 12:43, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
That would be great. The pattern is consistently good. There will be some images like this: Acute triangular moth or this: Are you looking at me? (4262375888).jpg. Taking the first two words will (extremely likely) not lead to a valid category (In this example neither Are you nor Acute triangular are valid cats. ) So the script can only move the file, if there is a valid cat. If you say that that is not possible, I could manually move the non scientifc images out of the cat. Amada44  talk to me 16:25, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
The categorization is under-way, in alphabetical order. I have not noticed any problems and I'm through to "Corgatha dipyra". It'll probably take the rest of the day to complete. There probably will be quite a few that could be the reason to start categories, for example I see "Cnaphalocrocis bilinealis" does not exist on Commons, yet there is an English Wikipedia article for it.
By the way, I spotted "arse" in the title of 3 files:
You could probably think of more accurate names as I don't think "spotted blue arse" is a recognized common name. Anyway, there's no category for it. :-)
Update from the numbers so far, it looks like around half of the files will have existing categories to be moved to. --Fæ (talk) 19:00, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much! I will move the others manually and create cats where needed. Your script helps allot! Thank you! Not sure where to put the arse fly though ;-) . cheers, Amada44  talk to me 19:34, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done --Fæ (talk) 09:45, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Jarekt (talk) 12:34, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Template change

Hello,

could you replace template {{Mediagrant II|Foto českých obcí}} in files in category:Akce Cihelna 2014 by template {{Mediagrant II|Události}}? Thx!--Juandev (talk) 07:16, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

You could use VisualFileChange.js for it. --Arnd (talk) 08:46, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 12:34, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Jarekt (talk) 12:34, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Pics with date 4501-01-01

Hello all, due to a bug resp. feature in Picasa we have around 550 files on Commons that have the mentioned obviously wrong date in their metadatas. [2]. Could someone please mark them with {{Wrong date}} right after the date? --Arnd (talk) 13:59, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done 510 being replaced. --Fæ (talk) 15:55, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
@Fæ: Could you please check you Bot run because the Category:Incorrect date contains less then 300 files which contradicts that 500 files have been changed. Also a some random examples showed me that lots of files have not been changed by your Bot. Regards, --Arnd (talk) 16:16, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
It's fine. They are being replaced, now at 326/510. Probably finish in about an hour. I only have slow bots as I don't have one that is not throttled (I've never asked for anything faster). :-) --Fæ (talk) 16:27, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Maybe it is also worth to mark all media with date in future... --Arnd (talk) 19:27, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Personality rights

Hi,

would it be possible to add Template:Personality rights to all the pictures included in the subcategories of Category:Rallies in support of the victims of the 2015 Charlie Hebdo shooting ? Thank you. JJ Georges (talk) 21:08, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

As this only makes sence if people are pictured, a visual check is needed. Hence, just do it using VisualFileChange. --Leyo 01:18, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Adding the Information template to files that don't have it

Hi again :) As part of the File metadata cleanup drive, I'm working to add the {{Information}} template to the ~700,000 files that don't have it, so that the information can be accessed easily. This is a complex undertaking, but there are small tasks we can take on to make incremental progress.

An easy group of files to start with are those like this one, whose description page basically consists of: 

== {{int:filedesc}} ==

< Some description >

== {{int:license-header}} ==

{{Self| <some licence(s) }}

< categories >

In this case, it's relatively easy to add the {{Information}} template:

  • add the information template under == {{int:filedesc}} ==
  • move the existing description to the Information template's Description field
  • add the name of the uploader as the author (since it's their own work)
  • add {{Own}} as the source
  • add the date from EXIF data, if available, otherwise leave blank.

This will work for only a subset of the files missing the {{Information}} template, but we have to start somewhere :) (Pinging Multichill, MGA73, Amir and Keegan per previous discussions.) Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 00:50, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

I will fix this. Amir (talk) 12:05, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
I have been adding Category:Media missing infobox template and thinking about this issue. I was also trying to discuss it at VP, see here. I think we should use divide and conquer approach I would propose the following:
  1. Mark the files by adding them to Category:Media missing infobox template what will allow everybody to see the files.
  2. Some files likely have information template but have some syntax errors, those I try to place in Category:Pages using Information template with parsing errors
  3. I would propose to first give the original uploaders a chance to fix the files. We can do that by writing a standard message, which without any threat of deletion, ask for help whit bringing those files up to current standards. We should have one message per uploader with a list of all the files that need infoboxes. Many of the images without infobox templates are from the early days of Commons and many of those people might not be around anymore. We should also advise them on the use of VisualFileChange gadget or requesting specific tasks to be done by bots at Commons:Bots/Work requests.
  4. Many files have all the info just not in the right form, for example File:Orchis militaris flowers.jpg or File:St Germain des Prés fenêtre.jpg. We might be able to recognize some patterns used and fill {{Information}} based on that.
  5. Some images were moved from wikipedia, like File:St michaelis.jpg and have no information about the photographer. we would need to look the information up on EN-WP to find the name of the original uploader.
  6. Some images imply "own" work by the uploader, like File:MaisonHonfleur1.jpg or File:Pinus pinaster female.jpg, but do not actually say it. If the files have EXIF data and templates like {{PD-self}} or {{GFDL}}, {{Self}}, I think it might be OK to fill the {{Information}} with {{Own}} and the name of the first uploader and the EXIF date.
  7. Some files have some home-brewed infobox templates that are not maintained or recognized
  8. Many {{PD-old}} files should use {{Artwork}} instead of {{Information}}, for example File:Leonardo da Vinci Grotesque Heads.jpg.
  9. I do not know what to do with, files like File:Ruins at Delfi.JPG. User should have been advised that he needs to send the permission to OTRS, but 10 years ago when he uploded the image OTRS mostly dealt with handling emails from the public not permissions.
Once we deal with a lot of "easy" cases we can asses what is left. --Jarekt (talk) 16:46, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Jarekt! That's a great plan. Should we discuss the details elsewhere or is here ok? Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 18:35, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
I would just keep the discussion here. I was trying to have this discussion on VP and Commons talk:Structured data, but nobody wanted to talk about it, so this place seems better. By the way Category:Items with OTRS permission missing infobox template seems like are distinctive enough to warrant a separate category. --Jarekt (talk) 18:58, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
My approach is to fix easy cases and evolve the script as we handle more complex cases. Amir (talk) 19:49, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Amir, I am slowly working on step #1 adding Category:Media missing infobox template and more specific subdirectories, so far I am ~5% done. You can start with those files or have your own way of generating the list of files with no infoboxes. It should not be hard as I added {{Infobox template tag}} to all infobox templates (other than {{Information}}) so any file that do not have {{Infobox template tag}} or {{Information}} is likely not to have an infobox. So maybe you want to tackle cases where author, source and possibly date and the description are present, and unambiguous to a human reader (case #4), than you can develop regexp rules to detect them and place them in the correct fields. Some of those rules can be "borrowed" from toollabs:add-information. But the bot should skip unusual cases. Many of the uploads are by the same users which might follow the same pattern and we could process few more prolific users with a custom set of rules. --Jarekt (talk) 20:37, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
ُThank you for your hints, I'll use them and probably work on case #4 Amir (talk) 21:01, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

It would also be helpful to have toollabs:add-information fixed. Currently, it occasionally destroys section headers and other parts of the code. --Leyo 17:14, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Agreed; I'll reach out to Magnus and follow up here. Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 18:35, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

I finished the script that fixes cases that they consists only language templates (example 1, example 2) Is it okay to start with them? Amir (talk) 09:01, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

That is good, however are you going to be able skip cases which are clearly not "own work", like File:FSO ok 1974r.jpg. Also Files with only language templates might have date, author, source which are not the same. Do you attempt to recognize those? --Jarekt (talk) 09:38, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
It skips when the template:Self is not used and if the language template consists several lines (instead of one). Is that enough? Amir (talk) 11:06, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
I think that limiting it to files using {{Self}} is enough. Could you also remove Category:Media missing infobox template, in case the file has it? (you might be doing it already). Thanks --Jarekt (talk) 17:11, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
I don't remove self template. Should we remove it? Amir (talk) 21:23, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
I am sorry, I forgot : and Category:Media missing infobox template did not show up. I meant to remove that category. --Jarekt (talk) 03:30, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Yes, It does remove them Amir (talk) 08:46, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Next step: One line long descriptions: Commons:Bots/Requests/Dexbot_5 Amir (talk) 02:18, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Btw I found that there might be some uploads with "self"-templates which are not "self" by the uploader because they were transferred from other wiki's. See this one for an example. Some big uploaders (bots and users) have been busy with file transferring in the early days and should at least be exempt when using this method to add information templates. Mvg, Basvb (talk) 12:26, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

An example pattern

@Ladsgroup: @Guillaume (WMF): Last month under my "normal" account I went through and cleaned up a couple hundred file pages by hand looking for such patterns. Here's an easy(ish) test case for a bot to take on:

RHaworth has/had a bunch of old (2005/6ish) uploads that need formatting. They're pretty easy to do by hand, but even so there's still 61 files left that need completed; I did the other half by hand. The list is on this labs page. I can copy the file names over if need be. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 21:16, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

@Keegan (WMF): on File:All_Saints,_Beeston_Regis.jpg why did you put User:RHaworth as the author, when the text was clear that it is actually User:Stavros1 (Mark Hobbs)? --99of9 (talk) 23:22, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
@99of9: because I made a mistake there. I've fixed it, thanks for pointing it out :) Keegan (talk) 03:54, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Dutch wiktionary pattern

There are 130.000 pronounciation uploads from wiktionary on commons, a few thousand (my estimate would be around 7000-15000) don't have information templates. Most of these are uploaded with the same pattern. There are uploads by different uploaders with different patterns. In this edit I change the filedescription of a file by GerardM (which have similar patterns), the description was created by me (but could be generated based on the title. The words "eigen opname" (meaning: own recording) are added in slightly different formats, besides that there is not really a lot of info on the images. This one might be an easy one to add templates to and also a pretty big one. Mvg, Basvb (talk) 00:13, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

In smaller numbers this holds for other languages as well (en, pt I've seen). Mvg, Basvb (talk) 12:04, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
I will fix this for Dutch pronunciations by the weekend Amir (talk) 02:23, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

9154 files of Dutch pronunciations didn't have Information template. Now 8588 more files have it (so 566 still needs to be fixed. I'll do that too) Amir (talk) 05:37, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Nice work, with those numbers we can work very well! Mvg, Basvb (talk) 11:28, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Books

A list of books (with more than 100 files) which have no infobox template and could probably use some automated adding of the book-template. Most books have a few hundred pages and thus we are looking at a few hundred files per listed book. Basvb (talk) 00:17, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

I can finish the Book categories. I have a system going that adds book templates with unique page numbers so you can page through the files. The only slow down is that I am creating book templates and often creator templates as I go. --Jarekt (talk) 20:28, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done That was a good find and since all the files already use Template:LA2-NSRW, it was also easy to fix. --Jarekt (talk) 05:02, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

I can do those, since I have some script for adding page numbers so one can page through the book, but I would appreciate help with the book templates, like {{L'Odyssée}} or {{Nietzsche's Werke, III}}, since they are the most time consuming especially since I do not speak any of the languages. --Jarekt (talk) 05:04, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I can do the templates in a few days. Mvg, Basvb (talk) 12:01, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Btw, is there any fix for the fact that all (or a lot) books with booktemplates end up in Category:Files with no machine-readable source and Category:Files with no machine-readable author? Basvb (talk) 12:03, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Template:L'Ile des Pingouins is done (I'll add them to the relevant lines of the books from here on). Basvb (talk) 14:05, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
 Thank you. --Jarekt (talk) 18:13, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you! I've also left a message to the French Wikisource community to see if they can help to create the book templates. Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 18:21, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
@Guillaume (WMF): Thank you, althought my French is limited exactly to the understanding of book covers. I've a question, is it possible to generate from the data about files without infobox which users have uploaded a lot of files (let's take over 100) or a lot of files in one category? This would help a lot in finding books like these and other patterns which can be fixed easily. Mvg, Basvb (talk) 21:13, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Basvb: Sorry for the delay on this; I'm still new to SQL queries, so it took me a little time. The list you asked for is now available and I'll set it up to be refreshed every day. You might want to download the file to your computer to avoid encoding errors if you open it in your browser. I see familiar names in the list, like MarcBot (used for many of the books discussed above) and G.dallorto (that you mentioned below), so I'm reasonably confident that it's what you're after. Let me know if I can do anything else! Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 01:22, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Guillaume (WMF): Thank you very much, that makes it much easier to search for the big fish, which will save the people who work on this file by file a lot of work. If we for example fix all files of uploaders with over 1000 uploads (without infobox) than we have the first 200k done. About the anything else, I indeed had another idea, depending on how hard it is a good way to find similar uploads is when the lists are sortable on uploaddate, but I can be busy with the this uploader list for a while. Mvg, Basvb (talk) 09:08, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Basvb: I've made another query. You can now download a list of the files missing machine-readable metadata, grouped by user, and with the timestamp. Warning: this is a ~40 MB text file so some browsers may have issues with it. I suggest you download it to your computer and open it with a spreadsheet application, so you can reorder the content more easily. For example, I imagine that you could select all the files from a given user, and reorder them by upload date to see if there are patterns. The file isn't being updated for now, but I can set it up if you think it would be useful. Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 19:08, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Guillaume (WMF): Thank you, now I can get to the regexfixing. Update of the file is not really needed (until a big chunk is done). Mvg, Basvb (talk) 20:31, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

When I saw Guillaume's message on WS, I came here to see what I could do to help. I haven't check all these books, but the 1st one I looked (Category:Lettres de mon moulin), there is already a DjVu file from this same book edition: s:fr:Fichier:Daudet - Lettres de mon moulin.djvu... what is the usual procedure when we come around this kind of thing on Commons? is it considered as a duplicate? Thanks. --Ernest-Mtl (talk) 02:23, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

The DJVU Lettres de mon moulin file is misplaced in Wikisource, and has to be uploaded in Commons. There is a number of JPG book pages, such as Gustave Flaubert Category:Bouvard et Pécuchet, Category:L'Éducation sentimentale, Category:Madame Bovary, duplicates of DJVU; now Wikisource uses the DJVU and the JPG are no more useful. --Wuyouyuan (talk) 13:47, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
I do not think we have a policy on that but I am inclined to let the old files stay and the book template we use for them can be reused for the DjVu files, as I did with files in Category:Encyclopédie – Planches V1–9 (pages assemblées, DJVU). --Jarekt (talk) 03:19, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
I just realized you are talking about the case of some files on Commons which are the same as files on french wikisource. That is quite puzzling why is french wikisource hosting local files? Either way we are not going to delete our copy just because one of the projects has a local copy, and we still would try to add metadata to our copy. --Jarekt (talk) 03:27, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
The reason why I was asking the question is that we are actually moving all those files to commons. Some files from the early days of the projects were simply uploaded to WS. Furthermore, the quality of the djvu scans are a lot better than the jpg in the case of Lettres de mon moulin and I would, personaly, find it a waste of space to keep individual jpgs of a book that can be accessed in djvu, especially that the djvu format here on commons allows people to save individual pages into jpgs on their computer if they can't open a djvu file... That's the reason why I was asking what was the procedure here, before doing something that would not have been considered correct. If someone is to waste time on these 200 some jpgs files, it won't be me as I consider these files useless duplicates. --Ernest-Mtl (talk) 15:07, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
In such a case once the DjVu file is copied you should nominate the jpegs for deletion as poorer quality duplicates. --Jarekt (talk) 15:16, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Yes, except when the JPEG are not easily available. That was (is?) the case for the Encyclopédie files. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:46, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

One thing that I noticed is that most of the files here are uploads by User:MarcBot for french wikisource and all (as far as I noticed) were unused and replaced by DjVu files. The book images are often incomplete concentrating on the pages with "text" and skipping the title pages, tables of content, etc. We usually do not remove files which are not identical duplicates but in this case thase are truly unusable files, since better versions uploaded latter exist. --Jarekt (talk) 04:51, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes. The fact that most files are from MarcBot is because I looked at all the uploads from this bot. I don't know what's the best plan for the images. Mvg, Basvb (talk) 13:21, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Books are all done. --Jarekt (talk) 14:41, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Over 500 images by G.dallorto

There are over 500 images by G.dallorto without information templates which have some basic pattern, dates in exif-data and mainly have a self-license. Seems like a pattern which could be matched. Example edit: here (media missing information template cat should also be removed). Basvb (talk) 00:30, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

My bot will fix this pattern and similar. I'm waiting for approval. Amir (talk) 18:58, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done Amir (talk) 12:29, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
A lot of files in Category:Società Umanitaria (Milan) aren't done yet. Mvg, Basvb (talk) 19:56, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
their pattern was a little bit different, my bot fixes them too now and it finishes them soon Amir (talk) 19:48, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
I see now that this user has images with a lot of different patterns (just heavily active) thus processing all of those by both isn't really suitable, it'll just be part of other botbatches if it fits. Thus lets close this request. Mvg, Basvb (talk) 22:32, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

over 500 images by Lalupa

over 500 architectural shots with one sentence text description.[3] some with move table.[4] Slowking4 ♡ Farmbrough's revenge 23:15, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! Amir, do you think your bot could take care of those? Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 20:59, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
This user has uploaded 4225 files, I'm investigating Amir (talk) 14:04, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
I fixed about 400 cases, there are some more complex cases that need to be taken care of. Amir (talk) 04:14, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Continuing the work

We've made progress, but there are still many files missing machine-readable information.

Hello everyone,

A few days ago I looked at the numbers, and we've managed to fix more than a third of images on all wikis, and almost 100,000 on Commons! This is great :) We should continue the work to make further progress.

Commons is still the wiki with the most files missing machine-readable information (see image). Jarekt, Basvb, Slowking4, Amir: Do you think there are more groups of files with similarly-formatted file pages, or have we reached the point where it's time to expand the scope?

If we're done with the patterns we can find, it may be time to start filling the information template with less precise information. We could use a tracking category for the bot-fixed files, so we can check them later to improve the fields manually. In the meantime, the information will be available thanks to the bots, even if it's not perfect.

Here's how we could do it:

  • Take larger groups of files, like files with a == Summary == section but no info template, and put everything from that section into the "Description" field of the information template.
  • Otherwise, do the same for all content on a file page that isn't a license template or a category (this can obviously be refined).

This approach isn't perfect, since some information like the Author and the Source may be put into the Description field. However, it's better for it to be shown in the Description field than not be shown at all, at least until the file is checked manually.

Do you think this could work? I'm open to other ideas, but I don't think we want to wait years before we fix every file manually only. Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 23:50, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

There's still lots of stuff we could do with pattern matching: see the list of authors. All MarcBot's files are books and easily fixable. I simply had a busy time and my attention shifted. One thing we could do is ask all users with less than 10 images to check and add an infobox, as those will be the hardest to cover in automatic attempts. There's around 100k files from ca 50 uploaders with over 1000 files with missing info. Likely the 200k point is also still. The next 100k point is at 300 images or more. Fixing the files of 250-300 uploaders would devide the number in half leaving us with around 200k images to fix. I think these 300+ images authors largely be fixed in a 10-30 minutes of work for lets say 70% (the other 30% is not easily fixable). That would reduce the number by 150k in around 100 man hours (the first 75k is only 25 hours of that). After that stuff will get more time consuming, the next 100k images are in the 100-300 images/uploader range with around 600 uploaders (which would than produce a number of 200 manhours for ca 75k more fixes). It all depends on how much time we and others would like to invest in this. Other approaches with high performance based on generic patterns outside of user uploaded might prove valuable as well. I think going for quick and dirty approaches right now isn't the best idea. Is there really a hurry to fix of all of this? Mvg, Basvb (talk) 00:11, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Hmm, my estimates about time and percentage we can easily fix might be a bit too optimistic. But I believe we should try and keep to aim for high quality. Maybe we just need some more battle troops. I'm btw still trying to figure out how I can force the regex to start matching at the start of the text of a file, this is holding me back from quite some replacements. Mvg, Basvb (talk) 00:37, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
i would say there is lots of work still for the bots, if you group just by file name, you will see the pattern. and best to do those first and then call on the brute force humans for the last 20%. maybe you would want an uploader list for suggested groupings for the bot operators. Slowking4 ♡ Farmbrough's revenge 01:35, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Fair enough :) Thank you for sharing your thoughts! Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 17:05, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Basvb: I wouldn't say there is a hurry, but there is a choice we can make between the two strategies:
  • slowly work our way through ~425,000 files on Commons, using small bot runs and manual fixing. We don't know how long it will take to fix all the files, and during that time the information can't be accessed by the Mobile apps, MediaViewer, etc.
  • Or, do a massive migration of the remaining ~425,000 files although the infobox matching will be imperfect. Then, we can fix them manually as well, and we don't know how long it will take to clean them up, but during that time we will be able to have some (imperfect) information in Mobile apps, MediaViewer, etc. rather than nothing.
I personally think the second option is best, but if the collective decision is the first one, I respect that.
Regarding your regex issue, have you tried using ^ or \A ("Start of string" anchor)? It might be what you're looking for. Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 17:05, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

In the mean time my bot is slowly adding files to Category:Media missing infobox template and it's subcategories. I am probably more than 90% done, with ~560k files, so the final number should be less than 600k. I also remove files from those categories once someone adds infobox template. I noticed some activity in other problem categories resulting from users adding {{Artwork}} and {{Information}} templates. I was not spending much time on this effort, since I spend last couple months on development of Lua version of {{Other date}}. I can help with some regular expression based mass replacements using my AWB based bot, but the most time goes into finding the files with patterns. The replacements themselves can be done with VisualFileChange by anybody who knows regular expressions. I was working for a while on adding {{tl|Book} templates to old books, but I was relying on others to create {{Book}} templates. Other issue I run into was people reversing my edits, which replaced home-brewed versions of {{Information}} -like templates with the real thing. Apparently we do not have a policy about {{Information}} and other infobox templates, saying that it is preferable to no template or home-brewed versions written for a single user. We might need to change that, before we start asking others to add infobox templates. --Jarekt (talk) 15:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

By the way, looking at File:File metadata cleanup drive impact Oct2014-Jan2015.svg and comparing it to Category:Media missing infobox template suggest that there are many files that do not use any of the standard infobox templates, but do have machine-readable information. It would be interesting to see what those are. --Jarekt (talk) 15:51, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Jarekt: The difference may be the files with description/author specified in their EXIF metadata, that are currently recognized and used by the CommonsMetadata extension. There is a change pending to not use such data any more, though, because it's so unreliable, so I expect our counts to converge once the change is deployed. Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 17:11, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I fixed some files of MarcBot, Stahlkocher, and Immanuel Giel. I will work on them more Amir (talk) 14:55, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Fixed Sailko and SPUI files. So about 10,300 more files now have machine-readable information. I will go through the list and fix as much as I canAmir (talk) 10:56, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you so much Amir! Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 17:05, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Template updates

In addition to adding templates to the files that never had any infobox templates, there are also cases where a rare infobox template exists and needs to be either replaced with or merged with equivalent existing template, like one from Commons:Infoboxes, or templates derived from them, like templates in Category:Infobox templates: based on Information template. Some examples can be seen below. Please help me find more such templates used by files in Category:Media missing infobox template and help with conversions or template merger.

--Jarekt (talk) 05:13, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Jarekt. For user-specific templates, we don't necessarily have to convert them to the official information templates. Since custom templates are discouraged, I personally don't consider them a priority; we don't have to support every possible custom template if people don't use the official infoboxes. Just adding the machine-readable markers to the custom templates would be more than enough, and that's even something we could leave to their authors. Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 16:38, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Just like home-brewed license templates which we managed to retire some years back, user-specific infobox templates are just hard to work with or edit, are often abandoned and forgotten by users who retired years ago and are prone to someone breaking them on purpose or by accident without others noticing it for years. They are also often lacking intenationalization of the field names and proper machine readable fields. And as with user specific license templates, I usually try to make sure they are re-written based on standard infobox templates, so at least field names are translated and metadata is machine-readable, like with this file. --Jarekt (talk) 18:00, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I'm not saying we shouldn't convert them, however some users are clearly attached to their custom templates. If they don't mind, then it's fine to convert the templates or add the markers, but if your efforts get reverted, I don't think there's much more we ought to do for those users. Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 19:26, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
User:Aka revert is an issue with COM:OWN concept, but you are right that it is not a priority. I am working on merging Template:Audio upload, Template:Položka namluveného článku and Template:Gesprochener Artikel with Template:Spoken article entry. --Jarekt (talk) 19:59, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done converting files using about dozen home brewed templates to {{Information}} template. In the process I rewrote Template:Spoken article to be a much more mainstream template for files with reading of wikipedia articles. Please help by adding translations to Template:Spoken article/i18n and someone with better understanding of machine readable metadata should verify that it works well. --Jarekt (talk) 13:54, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

And this template. I'm not sure it's okay to just replace the template with Template:Information, if it's so, tell me to replace it. Amir (talk) 21:52, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

I am not sure either User:Aka reverted earlier attempts to fix his files, because he does not like the color scheme used for all the other files on Commons. --Jarekt (talk) 14:54, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

And this template Amir (talk) 21:55, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

I will look into that one --Jarekt (talk) 14:54, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Ok so there are more {{Information}}-like templates that do not use {{Information}}:

--Jarekt (talk) 17:52, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

More templates to process:

--Jarekt (talk) 02:54, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Jarekt (talk) 02:35, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

remove unneeded line breaks between ISBN and number

today i found that there are many (maybe thousands) images from Category:PD-Art (Yorck Project) where a little change in the source field [5] would make the ISBN special page link work. Maybe someone can take care with a bot? Holger1959 (talk) 13:59, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

✓ Will be done in a few minutes with VFC --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 14:49, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
@Zhuyifei1999: great, thank you very much! Holger1959 (talk) 15:06, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Holger1959 (talk) 15:07, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

The San Diego Museum of Art Collection

Hi, Could someone with a bot upload The San Diego Museum of Art Collection? The license is -NC-ND, but most of these files are PD-Art. There are more than 1750 files, and it would take ages manually. I am ready to review them once there are uploaded. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:01, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

@Yann: Would you create a check cat please? And is it just {{PD-Art}} (without license parameter)? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 13:50, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your message. Please add Category:Files from the San Diego Museum of Art to be checked. {{PD-Art|PD-old-100}} should be OK for most of them. Regards, Yann (talk) 23:01, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
 Ok, running --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 07:07, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks Zhuyifei1999. I will take care of images of Indian art, but help would be great for others. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:38, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Removing “none”

other versions = none is not very useful information that is often there. Someone willing to start a clean-up task? --Leyo 01:04, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

It is already listed under com:regex, so c:user:YaCBot will take care of those soon. --McZusatz (talk) 04:01, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
What about such cases? --Leyo 10:47, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
1, 2, ... --McZusatz (talk) 18:32, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Well, OK. But it will take months until they are all cleaned up. Can't they be prioritized? --Leyo 19:41, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

NYPL images update (over 81550 files)

See Template talk:NYPL-image-DigitalID. In nutshell, web-site digitalgallery.nypl.org is migrated to digitalcollections.nypl.org, and old "DigitalId" is not may be used for permalinks in new site (tgrough searsh only). Currently detected next algoritm for provide direct links to the new site:

  1. seeking all NYPL images with old "DigitalId"
  2. get migration link from digitalgallery.nypl.org
    these links currently generated automatically; as example, old link http://digitalgallery.nypl.org/nypldigital/id?54671 is redirected to http://digitalgallery.nypl.org/nypldigital/dgkeysearchdetail.cfm?strucID=118546&imageID=54671
  3. put "struc_id"/"strucID" in the second parameter of {{NYPL-image-DigitalID}} (template is updated)
    may be second unnamed parameter or named as "struc_id"
  4. purge template cache
  5. check for existing pages for new links provided by template

(my "bot-skills" is not enough for the job).--Kaganer (talk) 11:42, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

PS: As additional benefit of this work - check all NYPL images with incorrect DigitalId, for updating manually. --Kaganer (talk) 11:56, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

If the NYPL intent to switch off support for the old format, is there a link to where this is explained? I am concerned that the link format suggested may not actually be permanent links either. --Fæ (talk) 11:59, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
See yellow banner at the top of any page by old-format links (see this link as example): "Digital Collections will replace Digital Gallery in March 2015." Old format currently is not supported in new site; new permalinks is not includes "DigitalId" as part of URL. I have no further information. --Kaganer (talk) 12:05, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Template talk:NYPL-image-DigitalID is updated so that provides two links - permlink for old site, and keyword search for new site. After adding "struc_id" these be automatically changed with adding new permalink (as "migration link"); see example. --Kaganer (talk) 12:09, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Here's a bit of analysis which puts me off the suggestion of using the slightly complex way of presenting a URL with "strucID" which in the API is "RecordID". Neither of these provides a true permanent link, only the UUID. Note that it is free to set up a login to use the API, which includes getting a token if you want to run a bot.
Potential IDs are:
  1. ImageID (local_image_id): 54671 (which is displayed in the new gallery as well as the old)
    The ImageID can be used to find the UUID or return a (apparently broken) link to the full MODS catalog entry by calling http://api.repo.nypl.org/api/v1/items/local_image_id/54671.xml (login required)
  2. RecordID (local_hades): 118546
    Using the RecordID the API can automatically return the UUID, for example by calling http://api.repo.nypl.org/api/v1/items/local_hades/118546.xml (login required)
  3. UUID: 510d47d9-7c02-a3d9-e040-e00a18064a99
    From which a true permanent URL can be made: http://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/510d47d9-7c02-a3d9-e040-e00a18064a99
I previously used the ImageID to uniquely identify NYPL maps in the filename (more that 10,000 files), there is no particular reason to change any of these identifiers as they will all continue to work with the API and be referenced in the new gallery.
Under the new gallery system (which effectively hides the image behind a zoomify type viewer) there is no way to download the high resolution TIFF for the image. When I uploaded the NYPL maps at full resolution, this was by using the API to find high resolution TIFF links. For the example image given above, the links to a high resolution image are now missing from the API, which makes me believe the NYPL have decided to automatically levy (quite high) charges per image at high resolution.
I find this new secure lock-down of high resolution images by the NYPL sad. It should be possible to de-zoomify an image, but any volunteer that attempts to do so, may be liable to prosecution for systematically by-passing their site "security". --Fæ (talk) 14:53, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Report of OTRS verified images which are later deleted

After thinking about the case of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bling Bling.jpg which was an OTRS verified image, I realize that we have no system of offering feedback to OTRS volunteers when this happens. Could someone investigate how to produce a monthly report of images deleted against uploader, OTRS ticket and OTRS volunteer. I believe that as I do not have access to admin tools, this is impossible for me to create. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 15:38, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Since there was no response to this request, I have created User:Fae/OTRS DRs. This does not rely on sysop rights, so does not properly address the original request but should list all DRs being raised that relate to OTRS tickets. --Fæ (talk) 17:38, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

230k SUL user renames by User:Maintenance script

This is a continuation of the discussion on the Commons:Village pump. In short User:Maintenance script renamed 230k users lately as a part of SUL cleanup. The following moved pages were used as templates and are broken now, some of them are licenses. The pages on the left are transcluded somewhere and were moved to the new location on the right. I fixed bunch of those but could use some help with the rest. Those not running bots can also help with the rarely transcluded templates on the bottom. When I alter file pages I try to make sure that the resulting file has {{Information}} template and license template added directly to the file. --Jarekt (talk) 14:26, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

I just run [6]] and it seems like all affected pages are fixed now. @Bawolff: thanks again for the query. --Jarekt (talk) 19:54, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Jarekt (talk) 19:54, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

fix some hundred broken userpage links

Hello, can someone please edit all these pages and change [[User Walter Rademacher|Walter Rademacher]] to [[User:Walter Rademacher|Walter Rademacher]]? The userpage is correct at Walter Rademacher.
When it is possible, you could also replace own work (without brackets) by {{self-photographed}} there. this is safe because all these images are photographs. thanks Holger1959 (talk) 08:42, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

And the license should be substituted or better replaced by the standard cc-by-3.0 template (User:Walter Rademacher/licence_CC-BY-3.0-WMDE). Regards, Yann (talk) 10:19, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
I replaced [[User Walter Rademacher|Walter Rademacher]] with [[User:Walter Rademacher|Walter Rademacher]]. Now I am moving cc-by-3.0 from User:Walter Rademacher/licence_CC-BY-3.0-WMDE to the file pages. --Jarekt (talk) 13:16, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 14:12, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Jarekt (talk) 14:12, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Retrieving images from Gallica

Hi, This is not a one-time task, but a permanent available tool is needed. JeanBono‎ had such a tool, but it doesn't work any more (see [7]). Regards, There also was such a tool on the Toolserver at [8] (by Kolossos). The script is available at s:fr:Wikisource:Gallica/gallica.php. This is needed to retrieve high resolution images from Gallica, the French National Library. See also [9] (in French). Does anyone with an account in the Labs could make this available again? Thanks in advance, Yann (talk) 10:16, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

My tool works, but you have to upload manually files retrieved (so, to have an access to the files on the server ; displaying huge JPG files with "Content-Type: image/jpg" isn't a good idea). Since I don't have time (and help about uploading on Commons using PHP), I couldn't finish what I started on the labs. JeanBono (talk) 07:59, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Could anyone help here please? Yann (talk) 17:46, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Does the script itself does not work or it is because of "No webservice"? If last one, the maintainer should restart the webservice and set up bigbrother for autorestart. --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:36, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
@Steinsplitter: Something is broken, but I don't know exactly what. It is certainly more complex than restarting a service. According to JeanBono, the script works manually. Yann (talk) 20:24, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
@Yann: I made a clone of Kolossos's at toollabs:yifeibot/gallica.php But I have no idea whether it works or not (I seriously can't understand French). Could you do a test plz? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 01:09, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
@Zhuyifei1999: , I don't get anything: no image, no error with [10] (wich works as it is, but there is an even bigger size available with l=6). The full image is 3158 x 6621, i.e. [11] works. So the URL should be something like [12]. Yann (talk) 06:24, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
@JeanBono: Zhuyifei1999 fixed it. Thanks a lot! Yann (talk) 12:30, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 13:08, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Multiple renaming to fix obvious errors

In Category:H44 Ary Rongel (ship, 1981) please rename all files that refer to "Ary Rangel". The correct name is Ary Rongel. De728631 (talk) 17:30, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

I don't know of an existing safe method to batch-rename files in a category, nor is it in the scope of my bot. So ✓ added {{Rename}} to them all. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 11:11, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. Obviously this worked, too. De728631 (talk) 18:09, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Category:Files uploaded by Russavia (rename)

Strips out the Category:Files uploaded by Russavia (rename) from all files in this category:Media requiring renaming without the related template and sub categories, but not from files that are only in Category:Files uploaded by Russavia (rename), of course, that is in category:Media requiring renaming without the related template too. category:Media requiring renaming without the related template are all files to be renamed organized by subject while Category:Files uploaded by Russavia (rename) is a maintenance category to be emptied. Sometimes after categorizing a file correctly people (and me too) forgets to strip out the Category:Files uploaded by Russavia (rename). Thanks--Pierpao.lo (listening) 07:47, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Set pictures to personal category

Hi,

could you please set category Category:Files by Cheva to all files, where Cheva in the description template is the author.--Juandev (talk) 07:42, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Category:Pictures by Heather Cowper

Hi, Could someone add this category to all files from https://www.flickr.com/photos/heatheronhertravels/ [13] (first 40 done). In addition, could the links to her blog in each description be removed (spamming IMO), and =={{int:filedesc}}== and =={{int:license-header}}== added when missing? More pictures from this stream could also be uploaded here. Thanks, Yann (talk) 17:51, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

2014 ==> 2015

Bonjour. Je téléverse généralement mes fichiers avec Commonist et je les nomme à la chaîne. Cependant, il arrive parfois des erreurs qui sont si grosses que je ne les vois pas lors du téléversement. Pour ces trois dossiers précités, est-ce qu'il serait possible de changer dans le titre des fichiers l'année 2014 par l'année 2015 ? L'erreur est venue du fait que j'ai bêtement copié-collé le titre de l'année passée.

In the three category, is it possible to change in the title of the files the year 2014 by the year 2015 ?

Jérémy-Günther-Heinz Jähnick (talk) 10:51, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

@Jérémy-Günther-Heinz Jähnick: ✓ Done --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:03, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
Thank you @Steinsplitter: . Jérémy-Günther-Heinz Jähnick (talk) 12:34, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: McZusatz (talk) 16:31, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

User:ArchiveBot

Anyone able to take over page archiving (task 1) from this Bot? With Fastily inactive/leaving this Bot stopped as well. Best solution would be to get control over this Bot and have several people with access so it's steadily maintained and operated. --Denniss (talk) 23:18, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Bots/Requests/Revibot_I --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 01:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Above req has been withdrawn and new co-maintained bot is under review. Commons:Bots/Requests/ArchiverBot. — regards, Revi 14:44, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: McZusatz (talk) 08:39, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Rotatebot

Hi, I merged Rotatebot to toolslabs when toolserver was switched off. WMF is changing stuff every 5 minutes and i am no longer able to fix this stuff myself (do to lack of time and lack of php knowledge). It needs a rewrite (the code is completely outdated and has security vulnerabilities). It would be nice if someone can take this task over, the code is on bitbucket. Best --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:53, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

@Rillke: @Fæ: @Krd: @Jarekt: @McZusatz: --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:59, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
To be honnest this should be part of MediaWiki, there is absolutely no reason that basic functions on images such as Rotation or crop are written as bots which are going to be deprecated at one point (change in API, http -> https, etc.). --PierreSelim (talk) 17:13, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
phab:T35186 -- Rillke(q?) 20:18, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
I don' really speak PHP or Python, so taking over a task always means doing a complete rewrite in Perl for me, in my usual write-only code style. Second, system relevant bots should as possible run at multi-maintainer projects, but honestly my spare time is not sufficient to keep up with discussions, architecture changes and outages at WMF labs, so sadly I'm using it as little as possible at the moment. --Krd 18:24, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
After doing a couple of dozen or so manually, just to knock down the backlog some, I must say.... this is an incredibly tedious task. Someone, please fix this. :) Revent (talk) 08:37, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
I am lacking php knowledge as well, so I can not help refactoring the code to comply with coding standards. @Steinsplitter: Is the only security vulnerability storing the passwds in the source code? --McZusatz (talk) 08:48, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
I haven't checked it deeper (the security stuff), but the main problem is that https fail, wmf switched http off. The problem is that curl to ssl:// does not work's. Output is OK, the bot does not edit. I am tired that the wmf isn't keeping stuff backward compatible (not only the ssl stuff, also the apichanges). I spent hours. but i can't find the bug. I hope that phab:T35186 can be fixed soon. --Steinsplitter (talk) 09:35, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

I hope this issue would be fixed soon as the backlog will be raising quite fast. BTW is there any way to get access to the original Rotatebot account? If not shouldn't it be better to usurp it and reinstall a Bot with multiple maintainers? --Denniss (talk) 10:13, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

I have access to the original Rotatebot account. ... but never used it because my "version" was never stable. I hope that rotation by api will be possible on wmfwikis soon. The api function exists yet, but the code needs some fixed to run on wmf imagescalers (see phabricator). --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:57, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Worked today again on this script. Finally i got it working again :-). I hop that it work until T35186 has been fixed. --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:14, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Steinsplitter (talk) 12:54, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Empty galleries

There're several galleries without images and are linked from nowhere, such as Dean Hamer and Ambrogio Casati (both are deleted). Is it possible to find all of these and delete them?--GZWDer (talk) 10:15, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

insource:/\<gallery\> *\<\/gallery\>/ results in quite some false-positives. --Leyo 12:21, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Some have no <gallery> at all.--GZWDer (talk) 04:51, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Category-creation bot

LudwigSebastianMicheler helpfully creates photo-by-day categories such as Category:Photographs taken on 2015-06-07, but what if something happens to him or he simply decides not to continue contributing? It would be helpful if we had a bot to create a new category every day. The category only really needs a single template, which for today's category is {{Photographs taken on navbox|2015|6|7}}. Nyttend (talk) 13:57, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done @Nyttend: see this for example. Cat will be crated at midnight (if creation at midnight (00:00) fails then the bot will retry at 12:00, if page exist ignore). --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:42, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
@Steinsplitter: Nice! But a creation at midnight is too late to find this category - think about photographers near "International Date Line": their day beginns earlier there! To find the fitting day-box for their photos, the creation should start one day earlier? A Info-link or a little more explanation would be nice (like I have done sometimes as a comment direct in the categories like here:
taken on 2015-06-07/edit in Category:Photographs taken on 2015-06-07). An Info-link to the discussion-page Category talk:Photographs by date might be helpful (and a backlink to that discussion here to explain the development).

For the parallel day-timeline (like Category:2015-06-07) a creation of 3 days (or one week?) in the future might be helpful to create and include existing subcategories for realistic future events (example Category:21st century lunar eclipses. --LudwigSebastianMicheler (talk) 15:44, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

@LudwigSebastianMicheler: I followed the instructions placed in cats source here. Time not sorted by UTC? --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:53, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Though 7,340 Subcategories in Category:Days by day have been created in the past years, I do'nt know about a decision to follow UTC like it is written in the parallel photo-subcategories Template:Photographs taken on navbox. For me it seems logical for the future day-categories to follow UTC too, and add a short text to the description in Template:Date navbox to say that to our Commons-users and photographers. --LudwigSebastianMicheler (talk) 15:43, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

int:filedesc

Hi, FYI: I am currently adding {{int:filedesc}} to all flickr files (per commons standard). New flickr uploads will now automatically have the filedesc fd08437. Please let me know if you have any concerns. :-) Best. --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:22, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

I know we do not have a policy about it, but to me that is a perfect example of en:Wikipedia:Bot_policy#Cosmetic_changes. --Jarekt (talk) 11:44, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
@Jarekt: Commons does not have cosmetic_changes.py (or similar), appart from COM:Regex. I am not sure if this changes will ever happen. --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:55, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
cosmetic_changes.py has a subroutine listed at Commons:Tools/pywiki file description cleanup which can be run on Commons. Also much more extensive set can be found at Commons:File description page regular expressions. But what I meant in my comment was that You should not be editing pages to add such minor changes, but I think it would be OK if you do it while doing some more substantial changes. --Jarekt (talk) 19:41, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
@Jarekt: And what is THIS edit by JarektBot? Your bot added this cat to +510000 page?! Can you explain please. This is a clear case of wasting of resources and a good example of en:Wikipedia:Bot_policy#Cosmetic_changes. You complain about my COM:Regex fixes and you'r bot does thentousands of non helpful edits. --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:23, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
I'd, personally, like to see bot jobs that add files to such categories throttled based on the size of the cleanup category.... such a category with, say, 1000 members is much more likely to be worked on than a category with half a million. The 'wasting resources' argument is tbh a bit of a red herring, unless something is actively lagging the server at a particular moment.... disk space is cheap, and unused processor cycles and bandwidth can't exactly be banked for future use. The only real issue, imo, with a huge cleanup cat is the psychological one... nobody wants to attack a task that is obviously impossible. As far is adding the {{Int:filedesc}}, I personally add this to files manually all the time, so I think a bot task to do so is inherently useful... a 'cosmetic' change that is incredibly unlikely to ever be objected to by anyone simply saves the effort of someone eventually making the same change manually while doing something else, and a bot doing it means that it will be done globally. While it's true that the use of that and {{Int:license-header}} are technically 'optional', the consensus for their global usage is pretty obvious, and there is an inherent benefit to reusers in having file descriptions pages formatted 'somewhat' consistently.
The enwiki argument (that such changes congest histories) is not particularly relevant here, since the huge majority of file description pages are very infrequently edited. Revent (talk) 02:57, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Category:Media missing infobox template is also useful. Yann (talk) 04:59, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
This is useful. I added this to quite a number of files, and it is a job better done by a bot. Adding == {{int:license-header}} == would also be useful, but this is probably more complex. A category where this is missing would be useful meanwhile. Regards, Yann (talk) 12:32, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per my comment at VP. I don't think these sub-heads add anything useful to the file page. If yes, it is very easy to add such sub-heads as part of {{Information}}, {{Specimen}}, etc. and to license tags. Instead adding these floating sub-heads in filepages are ugly and difficult to manage. What is the use of a big letter "summary"? It is ugly, irrelevant and meaningless. Instead, we have beautiful and meaningful sub-heads like "binomial name" for {{Specimen}} that I widely used. Jee 04:17, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Jee, I don't understand your opposition. I think these are useful, 1. to separate different kinds of information (description, license, i.e. legal information), 2. is automatically translated, so it helps making Commons more friendly for no-English speakers, 3. to edit one section only. Regards, Yann (talk) 04:56, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
      • Point 2 is reasonable; that's why I support updating old "Summary" like sub-heads to int: prefixed heads (if they already exist on pages). I don't see a need for 1 and 3 as file pages are not much big to split up into sections. Moreover, license is part of {{Information}} for all my pages and a head like "summary" in big letters on top is rather unnecessary. Jee 05:15, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
If there is consensus to add this but only when other changes are done, please just append it to com:regex and note it with [Minor]. YaCBot will then do this in the next run. --McZusatz (talk) 16:21, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Any objections to https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AFile_description_page_regular_expressions&type=revision&diff=163620810&oldid=158622884 ? --McZusatz (talk) 20:29, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
OK for me. Yann (talk) 21:16, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 running on all pages where other things need cleanup as well. --McZusatz (talk) 13:24, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: McZusatz (talk) 13:25, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Default continuation mode for action=query will change at the end of this month

FYI: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2015-June/081931.html --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:45, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

For me, it's a good chance to rethink whether some bot tasks are valued. Those of mine that break (and there may be several as I rely on old versions of pywikibot) I'll probably just leave stopped, unless someone positively asks for me to get them working again. I'll have to ponder if it is worth my volunteer time compared to other stuff that might give me income or thanks and recognition for my effort. As an example, I would have a higher chance of getting through RFA if I stopped operating bots altogether, automation being used as a reason to dismiss my work as the work of the tools and me just being a tool monkey. --Fæ (talk) 11:57, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
This change will break a lot of bot. I am wondering if this api change is really needed. In general devs are encouraged to keep api backward compatible. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:01, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Don't worry about the bots: Every bot should be maintained and it isn't that much of a deal to add a single parameter. What worries me is, this will break all programs that were published previously or which the maintainer lost interest in and does not bother to publish a fresh release. --McZusatz (talk) 16:16, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
@Fae, your unsuccessful RFA has nothing to do with your effort building useful tools but the lack of addressing the questions that were already even raised in previous RFAs. --McZusatz (talk) 16:16, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
If you check through them, it has always been an issue. I have not said it was the only issue raised in 5 RFAs, certainly some nasty chapter politics guarantees my RFAs remain of interest for those that enjoy that sort of thing. As for RFA processes this is a subject to raise elsewhere, I am hardly going to rake through every heckle from griefers in my 9 years of contributing to Wikimedia projects, answering relevant questions based on my contributions to this project in the last 12 or 18 months makes common sense, after all anyone could easily clean start in that period and put in a successful RFA without questions about past sins. --Fæ (talk) 16:24, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: McZusatz (talk) 13:26, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

CategorizationBot down too?

Is User:CategorizationBot down too? Will many bots be down now due the new changes that are going to take place in WMF? I see that another bot User:Wdwdbot is probably dealing with similar works. Can it be used to do what CategorizationBot did? Pinging the owner @Wdwd: . §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 06:12, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Probably affected by Labs outage. --Denniss (talk) 07:47, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi, my bot-script add categories to uncategorized files with an algorithm similar to a function used to categorize files which were bot-transfered from de.wp to commons (the algorithm is briefly described on User:Wdwdbot). I use this functions and extend it to uncategorized files which are already on commons. Wdwdbot functions are not similar and could not easy extend to the functions of User:CategorizationBot - which find uncategorized new uploads and mark them. This is is a different task.--Wdwd (talk) 14:14, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: McZusatz (talk) 13:27, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

see bellow

The misspelling see bellow that occurs more than thousand times needs correction. In many cases, e.g. after |Permission=, it may even get deleted. --Leyo 14:22, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

I you perform the change when it as been discussed what replacement should be done. From some random samples I don't really see a useful pattern so far. --Krd 06:44, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Did a third using this fix. E.g. diff --McZusatz (talk) 13:42, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. There are just 59 cases left, of which several will probably be fixed like the example above. --Leyo 21:50, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
I don't think so because every case is a different one. Each of them needs autocorrected the spelling and then manual cleanup. --McZusatz (talk) 09:22, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Leyo 20:47, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Réunion des musées nationaux

Hi, Could someone add all images from Réunion des musées nationaux (French museums) (and also [14]) to the category Category:Images from Réunion des musées nationaux. Thanks, Yann (talk) 17:05, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

That source should probably have institution and 'source' templates, quite a few files. Revent (talk) 23:44, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
OK, here we are: Institution:Réunion des musées nationaux. Yann (talk) 05:28, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
Added a substantial number (over 1000) that had "Source =http://www.photo.rmn.fr/" in the wikitext using cat-a-lot, though there are quite likely others that should be included.... other search terms seemed to be pretty contaminated with things like File:Parc_de_Versailles,_Bassin_de_Flore,_Jean-Baptiste_Tuby_(1672-79)_07.jpg (that just uses the RMN as a reference). Revent (talk) 05:03, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
FWIW, they seem to be the source of quite a few images of works that are not actually in their collections. Revent (talk) 05:18, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
@Revent: Thanks a lot. There are a few copyright violation among these. As I was away for sometime, I will look about this now. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:38, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Pictures sorting

Hello all,

I would need a bot to perform the below task:

Thank you! Popo le Chien ouah 13:56, 22 June 2015 (UTC) 

You can create the list using a query with Catscan2. It will even format the results as a wiki table if you want it. --Fæ (talk) 14:12, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done There is a bunch of false positives but this will have to do. Thanks. Popo le Chien ouah 15:04, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Imperial German Navy category clean up

This section was archived on a request by: KuK (talk) 04:26, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, presently there are two English versions for the former "Kaiserliche Marine" - Imperial German Navy and German Imperial Navy - in use for different categories e.g. Category:Admiralstab (Imperial German Navy) vs. Category:Submarines of the German Imperial Navy. I myself have been using both versions while not paying enough attention to this subject. Now I became aware of the problem when working on a number of subcategories in this field. My request is to

  • change alle categories to the version Imperial German Navy,
  • delete all categories with German Imperial Navy,
  • change all affected subcategories and files accordingly.

The rational for this version is that it corresponds to Federal German Navy, the semi official English name for the later Bundesmarine and that the main category is already named Category:Imperial German Navy.

Thank you, --KuK (talk) 09:27, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

@KuK: Can you please file a request here? --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:23, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Sure, will do! --KuK (talk) 12:50, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

ICGC

Hi, Is there any interest to upload maps from ICGC? These maps are available under a CC-BY license.

To download maps, a login and password is required. So I registered, but then I got a ZIP file which contains 3 files. It seems that the map is a SID file, which requires a some plugin or converter to open. I tried to install that plugin, but it doesn't work on my setup (Vista+Chrome). It probably doesn't work on Linux. So not so easy. Looking at Category:Topographic maps of Spain, I see that there is not that much choice.

See User talk:Pere prlpz#ICGC for more information. @Pere prlpz: . Regards, Yann (talk) 11:32, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Template change

Hi,

I would like to request the following template change: replace {{Mediagrant|Fotoworkshop Pelhřimov 2015}} by {{Mediagrant II|Fotoworkshop Pelhřimov 2015}} in these files:

Thank you very much.--Juandev (talk) 06:44, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 07:20, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Thx.--Juandev (talk) 19:10, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: McZusatz (talk) 08:59, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Template

Hi,

I would like to request if you can add template {{Mediagrant II|Fotoworkshop Pelhřimov 2015}} to files in:

Thank you!--Juandev (talk) 06:09, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

@Juandev: ✓ Done. User:Armbrust (Local talk - en.Wikipedia talk) 13:49, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much Armbrust!--Juandev (talk) 07:04, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: McZusatz (talk) 08:59, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Adding a user-category to hundreds of photos

Hello. I have a request to add a category „Images by Karol Szapsza” to all my photos uploaded (excluding voice records). Would it be possible? Thank you in advance. Kszapsza (talk) 18:22, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: McZusatz (talk) 08:58, 3 August 2015 (UTC): done

correction: Information>Institution

i found a little error in some art images. can someone please make this change for all files here: Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Information:National_Gallery,_London? Holger1959 (talk) 03:02, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

@Holger1959: ✓ Done. User:Armbrust (Local talk - en.Wikipedia talk) 13:40, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: User:Armbrust (Local talk - en.Wikipedia talk) 14:49, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Category move

I need to move some of the files in category:Ramadan to category:Maryland Governor Ramadan Reception. I moved some of them but quickly realized that manually doing all of them is difficult. Can someone suggest a more efficient way to do this? Taha (talk) 03:01, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Help:Gadget-Cat-a-lot --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 16:08, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, done. Taha (talk) 21:21, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: McZusatz (talk) 21:21, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

moving one template out of description field

i found that in Category:Fotoflugkurs Cuxhaven 2013 there are many (>1000) images which have {{Fotoflugkurs Cuxhaven 2013}} as the only description, either as {{Fotoflugkurs Cuxhaven 2013}}, or with underscores as {{Fotoflugkurs_Cuxhaven_2013}} , or sometimes also within a language template like {{de|1={{Fotoflugkurs Cuxhaven 2013}}}}. (so this request is not about those images of the series which already have an other description written in words)

Reasoning: The template does not provide real information about an image. It only says that it was taken during an aerial photography course in 2013 and that this was supported by two Wikimedia chapters. The usual position for such templates is further down, above categories (below the license). As only description the template is not useful, or even misleading (please notice that in this "Fotoflugkurs Cuxhaven 2013" category there are various images, not only the expected aerial photographs, but also images of meals, of museum exhibits, of maps etc).

  • It would be great therefore if someone can fix this and move the template like in this example no 1.
  • For maintenance reasons it would be best to leave the description field empty like in this example no 2, so that the light yellow box is present whih tells that a description is missing. That means: if only an empty {{de|1=}} would be left, better remove it.

PS: i'm working on Category:Aerial photographs of Germany for a couple of months now (main task: identifying locations). When i add a normal "good" description, i always have to reorder this template (and sometimes other stuff) by hand which takes time and is very boring. It would be very helpful if someone could take care for this part with an automated tool/bot! Holger1959 (talk) 11:23, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

The template does not contain any Licence information, hence it is wrong to put it there. revert this. empty description fields are also wrong. Plus: Documenting an event with pictures showing food is not misleading, if the category is not "aerial photographs". --Ailura (talk) 05:33, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 Oppose Was soll das denn werden? Niemand hindert dich, Beschreibungen zu ergänzen. Die Vorlage stört doch niemanden. --Ralf Roleček 08:52, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Na schön ist das wirklich nicht mit diesen drei Bausteinklötzern als "Beschreibung". Marcus Cyron (talk) 12:28, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
mich hat vor allem geärgert, dass die Klötzchen (zunächst, inzwischen korrigiert) in den Abschnitt "Lizenz" verschoben wurden. Die Beschreibung komplett zu leeren (und nichtmal de= stehenzulassen) finde ich auch eher suboptimal, da bevorzuge ich eine Grobbeschreibung, die irgendwie darauf hindeutet, dass das Bilder aus Norddeutschland (bzw. eben aus dem Projekt) sind. Aber das ist sicher Geschmackssache. --Ailura (talk) 12:33, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Notice after Ailura's comment: i don't care if the template is positioned below the information box or below the license, it should only been put out of the description field ("further down" as i wrote).
@Ailura: if there is actually no description yet, leaving an empty language template like {{de|1=}} leads only to categorization in Category:Language templates with no text displayed. For maintenance it is better to remove such empty templates because it is categorized in Category:Media lacking a description and {{Description missing}} is automatically displayed (better for less experienced users who can help).
Holger1959 (talk) 07:56, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Alternativ hätte ich den Baustein durch einen Texthinweis auf das Projekt ersetzt, der wie gesagt zumindest schon einmal in einer sehr groben Annäherung angibt, dass es sich um Bilder aus Norddeutschland handelt, dann stellt sich die Frage nach de= oder nicht auch nicht mehr, das erhöht dann aber wie Du richtig sagst die Wahrscheinlichkeit für Nachbearbeitung nicht. --Ailura (talk) 09:25, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
@Ailura: mit "Bilder aus Norddeutschland" meinst jetzt aber nicht Bilder aus Wien, die auch mit "Fotoflugkurs Cuxhaven 2013" versehen sind? ;) Stichwort Nachbearbeitung: das machen bei den Luftbildern neben mir noch 1-2 andere Leute halbwegs regelmäßig, ich hab jetzt schon mehere tausend (!) lokalisiert und verbessert, da hab ich mittlerweile schon einen gewissen Überblick was Änderungen daran angeht. Nach meiner Beobachtung erhöht "description missing" die Wahrscheinlichkeit einer Nachbearbeitung/Ergänzung der Beschreibung signifikant, weiß also nicht, woher du was anderes aus meinen Worten rausgelesen hast. Wenn du meinst {{de|Fotoflugkurs Cuxhaven 2013}} wär hier eine gute Minimalbescheibung statt "description missing", kann ich persönlich damit leben, sehe aber nicht, wie das dann bei so vielen Bildern noch wartbar sein sollte (dann ist ja nirgendwo mehr sichtbar, wo noch was fehlt, was ja genau der Sinn von Wartungskategorien ist). Holger1959 (talk) 09:57, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Die Bilder aus Wien hatten das sogar im Dateinamen, das mache ich selten. Ich habe nichts anderes aus Deinen Worten herausgelesen, sondern wollte Dir beipflichten, ich habe lange nicht mehr versucht, Luftbilder nachzusuchen, und habe dafür beim letzten mal keine Wartungskategorie benötigt, sondern das ganze Projekt angeschaut. --Ailura (talk) 10:11, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Den Bildern fehlt keine Beschreibung. Die Beschreibung gefällt dir nur nicht. Setze doch irgendeine Kategorie rein. "Fotoflugkurs Cuxhaven 2013" ist eine ganz normale Beschreibung, sie ersatzlos zu entfernen, ist Vandalismus. Klar, die Vorlage ist vielleicht nicht optimal aber deine Aktion ist keine Lösung. --Ralf Roleček 08:30, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Solche Aktionen haben übrigens zur Folge, daß ich meine restlichen Bilder von S-H nicht erst hochgeladen habe. für die 38 von den nordfriesischen Inseln habe ich über 60 Stunden gebraucht. die anderen 500 sind halt auf der Platte. Entweder wird alles hochgeschaufelt oder ein Großteil bleibt liegen. Meine Zeit ist begrenzt. --Ralf Roleček 10:36, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Dann an dieser Stelle einmal danke dafür, dass du uns nicht noch 500 unbeschriebene und unauffindbare Bilder mehr vor die Nase geschüttet hast. Sorry, aber mit solchen Diskussionsbeiträgen vertreibst du auch noch die Letzten, die hinter dir aufräumen. --Indeedous (talk) 12:05, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Mit Geokoordinaten, sogar Kompaßrichtung, ist nichts unauffindbar. --Ralf Roleček 12:29, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Um das nochmal klar zu sagen: Ich bin wirklich dankbar für jeden, der hinterherräumt, ich merke das täglich in der Beobachtungsliste. Manches ist sinnvoll, manches nicht (oder ich verstehe es nicht). Das Kategoriensystem auf Commons ist ein unbeschreibliches Chaos und ich halte mich daran, jede Datei wenigstens in "irgendeine" Kategorie zu packen. Geschätzt 99% meiner Fotos werden irgendwann von irgendwem mittels irgendwelcher Mechanismen irgendwo einsortiert, das Wiki-Prinzip funktioniert also. Danke an Holger fürs Hinterherräumen! Aber warum die Beschreibung leer machen? "Fotoflugkurs" ist eine Beschreibung und die beinhaltet nicht nur Luftaufnahmen. --Ralf Roleček 21:45, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

@Holger1959: , with Help:VisualFileChange.js you can do this yourself. Once you understand the tool, it works like a charm. And you don't need a bot. regards --Herzi Pinki (talk) 07:03, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

@Herzi Pinki: thank you. i tried to understand the VisualFileChange help earlier in this year, but for me this tool is too complicatet. i think i would need a "Anleitung für Doofe" to use it. Holger1959 (talk) 08:16, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done: E.g. Fancy templates should not be used as description. --McZusatz (talk) 17:21, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: McZusatz (talk) 14:33, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Template change

Hi,

I would like to request to replace {{Mediagrant|Fotoworkshop Pelhřimov 2015}} by {{Mediagrant II|Fotoworkshop Pelhřimov 2015}} in files of this category. Many thx!--Juandev (talk) 08:04, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done sısɐuuǝɔıʌ∀ (diskuto) 08:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:This section was archived on a request by: sısɐuuǝɔıʌ∀ (diskuto) 08:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

images sourced to wikia.com

All images sourced to wikia.com should be tagged with {{LicenseReview}} if that's not present. Bot operators running new upload cleanup jobs should add this to their cleanup as well. Many images seem valid but I also found multiple TV/Game screenshots and images with bogus or non-existing primary sources. --Denniss (talk) 07:33, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

The most of my pictures at Wikia are copyrightet or NC-ND. Thats the part, why i no host this pictures here. --Ralf Roleček 11:58, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Bump - Nobody? --Denniss (talk) 07:57, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
I made a list for all images with an external link to wikia (interwiki links don't count): quarry:query/4866 --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 10:10, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Bots/Work_requests/Archive_11&oldid=193130559"