Commons:Bureaucrats' noticeboard/Archive 2015

Request for Global interface editor

I need sometimes to translate interface messages in Greek here in Commons. I'm one of / or the most active translator for Greek language on Translatewiki, Meta, Mediwiki, Wikidata and here in Commons. Regards --Γλαύκος ^{shoot it} 07:52, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Are you asking for "translation administrator" or "Global interface editor"? If the first, on hold for 2 days per Commons:Translation administrators/Policy, if the latter, to be requested at meta wiki. --Krd 08:20, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

@Krd Yes please, I would like for "translation administrator" also. --Γλαύκος ^{shoot it} 08:47, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

You don't need to be a trnslation admin to translate pages. --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:40, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes indeed Steinsplitter. But for some strange reason I didn't and I don't have access to interface group of messages and I thought that I might need special rights for that. Apart from that I would like to indicate pages for translation and to import translated strings that I might work offline. Thank you --Γλαύκος ^{shoot it} 22:21, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

@Krd,Steinsplitter May I know on which grounds my request has been rejected, if so? --Γλαύκος ^{shoot it} 20:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Oppose. This request is explaining itself. User not experienced enough. --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:41, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Comment. Steinsplitter I don't think that translation admin has any serious rights or can cause any harm. And I am not going to discuss if I am experienced or not. --Γλαύκος ^{shoot it} 07:47, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes it can break _a lot_. For example marking translations as invalid (which can't be reverted) and other stuff which is very hard to revert. Apart from that global-interface-editor and translation administrator are two competently different things. It looks like you are not experienced with that stuff. --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:31, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Now "it looks like" that you're judging on grounds of apperance. I have already most of these rights on Translatewiki.net, as translator and importer. I don't need more admin buttons to feel better or show my stuff...I am a long term contributor in translations in many wikis as I explained above. You better should think ways of not discouraging people to contribute and trying to find ways to prevent them to do so. And something else: the way you address to others is quite rude. --Γλαύκος ^{shoot it} 12:20, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

The prolonged silence is quite interesting. Nobody sees nothing. Nobody wants to place himself. I don't have the right even to import translations, while I contribute to Mediawiki core messages for more than 5 years. It's an absurd situation and nobody cares. --Γλαύκος ^{shoot it} 17:28, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

@Glavkos: Well... If you want to use it for importing translations i have no problem. Argumentum ad hominem are not helpful add all - you request was not clear (at lest for me) until now. --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:35, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

I have now applied the translation admin right. Please use it carefully. Thank you. --Krd 17:44, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

@Krd Thank you, I will. --Γλαύκος ^{shoot it} 17:53, 28 November 2015 (UTC)@Krd: I am still getting the message "You're not allowed to edit interface messages" when I tried to translate MediaWiki:Titleblacklist-custom-no-fileextension/el . It's probably a bug. --Γλαύκος ^{shoot it} 18:09, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

@Glavkos: We don't allow non admins to edit the MediaWiki: namespace. You must file a {{Edit request}} on the talkpage. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:17, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Ok. It's only two strings. --Γλαύκος ^{shoot it} 18:22, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 17:44, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Proposed topic ban for User:Fæ

Pinging this noticeboard as I feel that this is such a big problem that has been going on for so many years with such a longstanding user that some Bureaucrat involvement is required. I would appreciate your guidance in managing any discussion and possibly in closing it. Thank you. -- Colin (talk) 22:44, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't go the way you hoped, so you're trying to get another advice ? That's nice. Pleclown (talk) 12:56, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

• 22:41 5 Dec 2015 AN/U post
• 22:44 5 Dec 2015 BN post.

Pleclown. Wow this place is just full of bad faith spite + piss-poor reading comprehension. -- Colin (talk) 13:23, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

I too not very good in maths; but Pleclown beat me here. ;) Jee 13:27, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 06:04, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Translation rights

Could I please have translation administrator rights added to this account? This is my work account (my private account has the translation administrator right already) with which I very often end up updating translatable pages or setting up pages for translation during our GLAM collaborations. /André Costa (WMSE) (talk) 15:27, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

On hold for 48 hours per policy. --Krd 16:32, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

No one objected during the 48 hours. I'll add the bit. --Dschwen (talk) 22:29, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 07:35, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Flickr and PD images

We have some difficulties in handling PDM 1.0 marked files in Flickr. It was intended to apply on very old works; bu many Flickr users are using it to declare their works as PD. We run a RfC which was closed recently. The same user who closed it started some DRs soon, which added some friction in the community and attracted a discussion at VP. A new discussion just started at AN too. I don't think this closing of RfC or those random DRs are much helpful as we didn't arrive into a concrete solution so far. Expecting your wise administration in this case as in all previous RfCs. Jee 09:52, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

 Comment And that is happening on File:A lovely slinky 1940's nightie.... (22498026659).jpg. I think someone should place an announcement that "before uploading Flickr images, look if the PDM 1.0 license is used correctly" or similar. ★ Poké⁹⁵ 10:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Please don't discuss this issue here. It should just be a request for 'crat input at the village pump. Pokéfan95 if you have suggestions for improving the upload wizard to warn, then make them at the VP discussion. -- Colin (talk) 14:13, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

So the legal expressed their unofficial opinion (as usual) and returned the ball to our court. One crat also expressed his opinion there. We need a formal closing from the crat's side to maintain the uniformity in actions taken by admins and other maintenance volunteers. This will avoid future clashes. (I too expressed my opinions; but they are just my thoughts. I've no problem however it is closed.) Jee 02:56, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 16:11, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

GWToolset rights request for User:RCJU-ArCJ

For uploading several pictures the user User:RCJU-ArCJ Archives cantonales jurassiennes (ArCJ) needs rigts for GWT. --Micha (talk) 11:24, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

The user seems to have been renamed to User:Archives cantonales jurassiennes Is this request still valid? If yes, have tests edits been made at Commons beta? --Krd 22:15, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

@Micha:  ? --Krd 06:29, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi Krd. Actually we have some problems with renaming: [1]. I will repeat the request after solving that problem. --Micha (talk) 17:08, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

@Krd: : Renaming is eventually done. Can a bureaucrat give that account User:Archives cantonales jurassiennes GWT-rights please. Thank you very much in advance. ^Micha, ArCJ (talk) 08:14, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Is the operator of this account already experienced with the tool, or have test edits at commons beta been made? --Krd 08:42, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

@Micha: we do have a procedure for handing out these rights. The GWT is a powerful set of tools that has the potential to generate a lot of damage (i.e. cleanup work for admins) if used improperly. Users that request the right are asked to demonstrate their ability to use it on the beta wiki first. This allows experienced users to give individualized guidance, tips, and constructive criticism. The user is then given the bit here on commons and is asked to upload a small set of images here (the reason being that we then can check if all local templates are embedded correctly). --Dschwen (talk) 22:18, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

@Dschwen: . Actually I work with that account and have full access rights and I have already proven my knowledge to handle that tool. I already uploaded for example Category:Durheim portraits contributed by CH-BAR or Category:BAZ-Zurich Panorama. I hope that proofs my ability to work with that GWT. The ArCJ will not upload any pictures without my guidance. In my eyes this fulfils the requirements and preconditions to give the GWT rights to that user account. Thank you very much. --Micha (talk) 08:57, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Done. --Krd 09:16, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 09:16, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

De-adminship policy

Hi, Can a crat please take a look at Commons talk:Administrators/De-adminship#.233:_ten_actions_and_ten_edits_over_six_months? --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:18, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

As 3 crats voted there, including myself, I'd suggest to wait a few days if there is an uninvolved crat available to evaluate the poll. --Krd 18:14, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

---

• Marking this section as resolved to allow archiving as there is no satisfactory community consensus on said page to implement proposed changes to the policy. odder (talk) 21:42, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: odder (talk) 21:42, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

GWToolset rights request for user:ETH-Bibliothek

Hi, for letting user:ETH-Bibliothek upload their pictures, they need access to the GWT on both commons et commons.beta. May a bureaucrat please activate them? Kelson (talk) 11:15, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Please register the user at Commons beta. --Krd 11:19, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

The user "User:ETH-Bibliothek" is now available on beta. Do we need to do something additional to get GWT permissions on beta & commons? Regards Kelson (talk) 10:31, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Please make some test uploads at Beta. --Krd 10:41, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Thx, we will start testing on beta as soon as the ethz.ch domain will be withelisted in Mediawiki. Kelson (talk) 11:02, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Glad to see this progressing. I'm emailing ETH about the SwissAir archives, but hopefully this will be handled soon by the GWT project. --Fæ (talk) 11:17, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes, AFAIK this is part of the upload Agenda. Feel free to contact them on their user page too. Kelson (talk) 11:25, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Tests were successful on Beta and ETH is ready to go on on Commons. May you please give them GWT permission on Commons too? Kelson (talk) 04:48, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

For your latest test upload [2] the usage of {{PD-self}} doesn't appear valid to me, should be replaced by a variant of {{PD-old}}. Also, can you link the creator somehow, e.g. by using Creator:Walter Mittelholzer? --Krd 08:46, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes, first collection will probably be uploaded with pd-old-70. We will try to use as much as possible the "creator" templates. There are also a few other small things we need to improve (for example the file names). Have you fix the permission problem? Kelson (talk) 10:45, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

From your statement it appears that you are still in the testing phase. Would you mind to do tests at beta until the problems are fixed? --Krd 10:36, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

How does it looks like now, for example with that picture? I appreciate the quality check on your side, but to make it faithful it's important for the community that the criterias/checklist is public. Can you please communicate it?Kelson (talk) 05:31, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

As far as I know there is no checklist, anyway at least the obvious should fit together. You are now using pd-old-100 but the author died in 1937 so is not deceased for 100 years or more. GWToolset is a powerful tool and should be used with most possible care because later corrections of large amounts of files are hardly possible. --Krd 05:43, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, we changed the template to

The author died in 1937, so this work is in the public domain in its country of origin and other countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 80 years or fewer. You must also include a United States public domain tag to indicate why this work is in the public domain in the United States. Note that a few countries have copyright terms longer than 80 years: Mexico has 100 years and Jamaica has 95 years. This image may not be in the public domain in these countries, which moreover do not implement the rule of the shorter term.

This file has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.

https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/PDMCreative Commons Public Domain Mark 1.0falsefalse. It is shown under that picture. Is there anything else? Thanks. --ETH-Bibliothek 13:30, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

ETH-Bibliothek, Kelson, Krd: The case of Walter Mittelholzer is special and care should be taken to create an appropriate template. We are luckily in the very good situation that there is no URAA issue with Mittelholzer's work (if first published before 1978) for the following reason: Mittelholzer died in 1937. Until 1993, Switzerland had a protection term of only 50 years after the death of the author. That means that Mittelholzer's work became public domain in Switzerland (as the country of origin) in 1988 already. In 1993, the term was extended to 70 years after death of the author, but already expired copyrights were not restored. This was confirmed by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court in its "Sternheim" decision (BGE 124 III 266) in 1998: "Die in Art. 80 URG angeordnete Rückwirkung des neuen Rechts bezieht sich nicht auf Werke, die nach früherem Recht urheberrechtlich geschützt waren, deren Schutzdauer aber vor dem Inkrafttreten des neuen Rechts abgelaufen war". That means that Mittelholzer's photos are PD in Switzerland since 1988 and have continued to be PD. The good thing for Commons is that this also means that they were free in their source country on the URAA date of January 1, 1996. I've tried to reflect this e.g. in the licensing tags of File:Mittelholzer-haileselassie.jpg which I scanned from Mittelholzer's book "Abessinienflug", published in 1934, a few years ago. But probably there a now better fitting tag combinations. Still, there might be an US issue with photos that were not first published before 1978. There's a draft in my user space for possibly problematic files, created in 2008: User:Gestumblindi/Draft-tl-Mittelholzer-unknown - see there for the possible issues with copyright protection in the USA. Gestumblindi (talk) 14:17, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello Gestumblindi. If somebody died before 1946 it is public domain in the US anyway. Isn't it? That's according that: Template:PD-US-unpublished. So Mittelholzer died before 1946. So it doesn't matter if they are published or not. This is my interpretation. --Micha (talk) 12:37, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Also according that: [3]. For US it is the first case. ANd for Switzerland it's the same. Where's the problem? --Micha (talk) 12:41, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

@Micha: No problem for unpublished works, indeed (the Hirtle chart is also available on Commons, by the way). No problem with works first published before 1978, too. There might be an issue with works that were first published after January 1, 1978. See also the Hirtle chart you mentioned, under "Works Published Abroad After 1 January 1978". E.g. if a work by Mittelholzer was first published between 1 January 1978 and 28 February 1989 with copyright notice, it might still be protected in the U.S. by my interpretation. Gestumblindi (talk) 20:12, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

@Gestumblindi: So I would just recommend to declare it PD until proven the opposite. It makes no sense to declare it different for a negligible probability that there could be such a publication with copyright notice. And if there was such a publication it is still not clear who is actually the copyright holder. So if an instutiute printed copyright notice by a publictation it is still not the case that this institution is the acutal copyright holder. So don't forget the de:Dispositionsmaxime. As long you have no counterparty you have no legal case to decide. So my recommendation: If there is not proven the opposite it is just act bona fide if we declare it PD for US too. --Micha (talk) 09:02, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

@Micha: I agree, it seems reasonable in this case. My main concern, after all, is that the files are transparently marked as PD-1996 as well (with a pointer to the fact that Switzerland had a copyright protection of only 50 years p.m.a. until 1993), similar to the few Mittelholzer photos I uploaded in 2008, to avoid deletion requests by overzealous Commons community members who don't know of the special case. Even in Switzerland, many people nowadays aren't aware of the former, shorter protection term. It's not directly relevant in Switzerland, as everything that was PD-50 then is PD-70 now, but for Commons it's still important because of the URAA issue. If Mittelholzer's work had become PD only in 2008 (70 years after his death), people on Commons could at some point argue for deletion based on the work being still protected on the URAA date (January 1, 1996) in Switzerland and thus having restored copyright in the U.S. Though I think that the current majority opinion on Commons is that files shouldn't be deleted solely on URAA grounds, that could change. So, to be on the safe side, make it clear that these files were in the PD in Switzerland continuously from 1988. Gestumblindi (talk) 11:11, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

@Gestumblindi: For me it is important that it is obvious that it is in Switzerland PD too. If it is clear that it is since 1988 public domain because the copyright was not restored then everything is ok. For US it is just without clear counterevidence also PD. --Micha (talk) 13:02, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Could anybody please summarize the result regarding creator Walter Mittelholzer? Is this resolved? Are there files to be uploaded from different authors that need to be discussed before GWToolset rights can be granted? --Krd 07:48, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Care is being taken to determine copyright status and apply the best possible templates, along with good test results. That's plenty in order to grant GWT access. The fine details of copyright can be discussed using 'live' uploads. --Fæ (talk) 08:02, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Done. --Krd 08:09, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 08:09, 29 April 2016 (UTC)