Talk:Main Page/Archive 3

Images Link

The "Images" link at the top right of the main page goes to a redirect (Category:Images) rather than a category (Category:Pictures and images). --Ozhiker (talk) 15:22, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

• It looks like it was fixed. Evrik (talk) 21:35, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

 Done Evrik (talk) 21:52, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

POTY 2008

We'll be getting in results on the semi-finals (and thus the winners in the individual categories) by the 1st of March. Would it be a problem to run these category winners on the main page, one or two per day, during, say, the first week or two of March? What would need to be done to make this practical? Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:08, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

 Done Evrik (talk) 21:42, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Search box

{{editprotected}} There is no search box at the top of Main Page, even though there is a reference to one under Browsing.

I see one, just below the logo… --Mormegil (talk) 13:24, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

• I see one as well. Evrik (talk) 21:33, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

 Done Evrik (talk) 21:33, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Erratum: earthrise caption

{{editprotected}}

there is a significant technical error in the potd caption/description:

"Taken by Apollo 8 crewmember Bill Anders on December 24, 1968, showing the Earth seemingly rising above the lunar surface. Note that this phenomenon is only visible from someone in orbit around the Moon. Because of the Moon's synchronous rotation about the Earth (i.e., the same side of the Moon is always facing the Earth), no Earthrise can be visible from the surface of the Moon".

THE PROBLEM WITH THAT:

If you are on the surface of the moon, & you travel over its surface longitudinally, the position of the earth in the moon's "sky" would change accordingly, just as when traveling in orbit above the lunar surface. For example, if you were to drive across the lunar surface (traveling through degrees of lunar longitude), the earth might "rise" or "set", might or might not be visible in the lunar sky at all, depending upon where on the moon's surface you started from, & where you traveled to.

(this is comment is being written in somewhat of a hurry, & i know it's not the best wording to describe the thing; a diagram would be a MUCH easier way to demonstrate what i mean here, but i hope the point is clear.)

i'm not an admin here, but this is a pretty big error, somebody needs to fix it asap.

Lx 121 (talk) 04:46, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

ok it's been a good 11 hours; does anyone actually read this? :P Lx 121 (talk) 15:45, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

The original caption looks perfectly OK to me. The fact that you could create a sort of artificial earthrise by driving across the lunar surface is a rather special situation that hardly seems worth mentioning, in the same way that it's not worth mentioning that you might see an earthrise if you were to climb a very high ladder mounted vertically on the lunar surface. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:26, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

correction: my to my embarrassment, i wrote this in too much haste. east/west is irrelevant. the only direction of travel that matters is relative to the position on the lunar surface where the earth is most directly overhead. you travel towards, or away from that point & the earth rises/sets. the earth does however grow larger/smaller in the lunar sky, as the 2 objects co-orbit each other; moving closer together, & further apart.

the caption as written would receive a failing mark on a 3rd grade science quiz.

1. it is not in any way an "artificial" effect, as you worded it. in both the terrestrial & lunar skies the effect is the same; "apparent motion" of the object across the sky. the earth happens to rotate at a speed that causes this effect to happen while one is standing still, on the surface of the earth. since the moon is locked into always facing same side towards the earth, with effectively no change in this orientation, in anything less than a geological timescale, one has to move across the lunar surface, to make the earth appear to move.

2. climbing a ladder might or might not achieve the same effect, depending on where you placed the ladder, & how you oriented it.

3. the caption, as worded, is unclear & misleading. the purpose of wikimedia, as a whole is to educate. this caption damages that purpose. not to mention, it makes us all look like a bunch of idiots who couldn't pass a 3rd grade science quiz.

i'm sorry, please do not take this personally, it is not meant in such a way. BUT no person with any real knowledge of the physics involved, and an ability to write clearly in english, would consider that caption acceptable.

this one belongs on our "blooper reel"!

Lx 121 (talk) 22:49, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

the grammar is also wrong, btw. i wasn't going to mention that, since i actually thought that the physics error would over-ride the details of the wording. Lx 121 (talk) 22:55, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

:  Done Solved at Template:Potd/2009-04-26 (en). --Mormegil (talk) 13:19, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Manjit Mendiratta's Indian Oil Painting "The Swing": Public Domain?

Does anyone know if this painting is public domain? It's a picture of a boy with dark curly hair and a young maiden sitting on a swing in a forest.

The painting looks like an older style, early 1920's?, but I was wondering if it's public domain yet. You can email me @ ediesummers@hotmail.com if you know.

thanks!

You didn't read the big red box at the top of this page, did you? In any case, COM:PD#India says that the image is public domain 60 years after publication. You would have to know when it was published, of course. The question whether it is public domain in the United States (required to upload it at Commons) is more complicated, take a look at w:Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights. --rimshot^talk 06:26, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Spelling error

It should be Bohadschia argus NOT bohadschia argus. Preferably also in italics. Cayambe

 Done --Mormegil (talk) 16:01, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

need of updates

the files of the day are out of date — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.143.4.107 (talk • contribs) 09:12, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

 Done Evrik (talk) 21:31, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

identified subject

This has been changed to Category:Unidentified subjectss someone please change it on the main page from Category:Unidentified subjects glaringly in red!!! WayneRay (talk) 16:16, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

 Done --rimshot^talk 18:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

English Wikipedia down?

I realize this isn't even the right project, let along the right page, but is anyone else getting an error that says,

This wiki has a problem

Sorry! This site is experiencing technical difficulties.
Try waiting a few minutes and reloading.

(Cannot contact the database server: Unknown error (10.0.6.24))

when you go to the English Wikipedia? The other languages seem to be functional, but every page in English seems to be down. Anyone know what's up? Newsboy85 (talk) 22:33, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

According to IRC now: "The main database got fucked up through overload; we don't know why yet," "Someone made a change, the server blew up, they're working on it," and "Wiki down due to a botched update, server admins are looking into it." - BanyanTree 22:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

A longer explanation of what happened can be found on the technical blog. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newsboy85 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

 Done It seems to be working now. Evrik (talk) 02:34, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

English Wikipedia down?

Curiosity of many of us editors on en.wikipedia begs me to ask if anyone here knows what the problems were when the site was down. One man thought the crash coincided with the news about Michael Jackson's death-- all the fans being upset. I wonder if it's because the "Bryan" "Flickr to Commons Upload" broke down (I assume for good). Anyone know the real reason? --Leahtwosaints (talk) 11:52, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

See [1] for an explanation. But it is quite off-topic here. --Mormegil (talk) 18:59, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Bundesarchiv image donation

Why is this still on the front page?-- penubag  (talk) 00:16, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

It seems like it was removed. I actually liked it there; perhaps there could be a standard box on the Main Page featuring recent content partnerships and imports?--Eloquence (talk) 18:24, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

That's a good idea, it would make this site more recognizable. But how frequently do we receive these kind of donations? -- penubag  (talk) 23:05, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Well that depends on whether you just include voluntary contributions. We often do large imports of media from various sources - I've done two public domain media imports this month of about 3000 files each. Dcoetzee (talk) 02:37, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Another one is just coming in! See Commons:Deutsche Fotothek. --Dschwen (talk) 03:29, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I heard about this! Exciting news! We need to work more on soliciting large donations here in the English-speaking world. :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 03:38, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I added an announcement to the main page, but left it commented. On the other hand the story already broke and is carried by several news outlets. I'm activating it now. --Dschwen (talk) 03:47, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I have the original German press release and the English translation, but it's embargoed until noon CET. Raul654 (talk) 05:10, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Commons:Batch uploading

I think a link should be added to Commons:Batch uploading below the Deutsche Fotothek box. This would indicate successful past batch uploads, as well as requested future batch uploads. Actually, since the Deutsche Fotothek batch upload is going to expire, I think it would be better to have a permanent box related to batch uploads, with links to ongoing collaborative efforts provided below. For instance, there is currently a simultaneous project going on that aims to do mass uploads of images from the Google-hosted LIFE Photo Archive. Regards. --BomBom (talk) 02:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

English, French, and Portuguese descriptions needed for AF 477 items

Category:Air_France_Flight_447 = This entire category, including all items inside, needs description in English, Portuguese, and French. WhisperToMe (talk) 15:18, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

• Category:Search for Air France Flight 447 - They are needed for this page as well. WhisperToMe (talk) 05:50, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Main page content

What about something for new files and pages, similar to that at WP? Some of the better new media and galleries could be displayed. Richard001 (talk) 06:40, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

• Isn't that what Special:RecentChanges is for? Evrik (talk) 21:38, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Links to sister projects

Why do the sister projects link to the English version of the project, and not the portal? Same goes with links on Recent Changes - there's links to the English sites, but not the multilingual portals. Seems a little odd to me. How do you turn this on (talk) 12:58, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I wonder that myself, though almost all projects seem to be doing it. After all we are a multi-language project so I support a change. With that I also mean changing wikiqoute, wikisource etc to the portal page showing the different language projects. --Kanonkas_(talk) 13:31, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Unless anyone cares to object soon, can the links please be fixed? Thanks. Same for the recent changes list. How do you turn this on (talk) 23:25, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Another point, Commons:Welcome is linked twice in the same section at the top unnecessarily. It only needs linking once. How do you turn this on (talk) 23:29, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Anyone care to change this? I would but the page is fully protected... How do you turn this on (talk) 19:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

As a German and Italian speaking user I would support this change. However, I think it's logical that the English main page links to the English sister projects. The German main page (Hauptseite) links to de.wikipedia.org and so on. --Gnom (talk) 12:51, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, forgot about the other language versions... I guess having the languages isn't so much of a problem. Amicon (talk) 09:25, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Gnom. Can we consider this request as "Done?" Evrik (talk) 21:40, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

News: Tropenmuseum

w:WP:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-08-10/Tropenmuseum partnership could replace the somewhat dated phototek item on the main page. Especially since the upload seems to be on hold. -- User:Docu at 22:33, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

At this moment the uploading still has to start. So this is not the best of times. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 15:48, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Fotothek categorization done: is it time to remove the link to the project from this page?

I've just categorized the very last of the Deutsche Fotothek images. I've already notified the project itself at its talk page, but I know that deleting the remaining empty "to be categorized" categories will add a red link to the main page (the "Your help is needed categorizing these images" part). Is it time for this "temporary announcement" to be removed, or at the very least remove the "your help is needed" line? Thanks for your help in advance.

TFCforever (talk) 01:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

P.S. It would probably be better for you to contact the project's talk page instead of me and settle this matter with some of the more experienced and knowledgeable users: I'm only just a "freelance categorizer." - TFCforever

Please remove "Your help is needed categorizing these images." -- User:Docu at 11:20, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

 Done Though the message will probably soon be replaced with the message of the 5 millionth file being uploaded, there's no need to keep outdated lines for the moment. --The Evil IP address (talk) 12:27, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. TFCforever (talk) 15:43, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Architecture

... should appear below "Society • Culture", not (only) under en:Engineering. It is a combination of Art and Technology, to reduce Architecture to the technical aspect is IMHO wrong. TomAlt (talk) 01:37, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

• I don't think this idea got much traction. Evrik (talk) 21:36, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

sounds like a good idea to me. I think most people would think of architecture as an artistic design process more than strictly science/technology. DroEsperanto (talk) 00:37, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Today in images

Today in images

May 2

[[Category:Days|Other images by day]]

Today in images

May 2

[[Category:Days|Other images by day]]

I suggest we add a box with a link to either side of the main page title "Today in images." It would link each day to the gallery for that day, see December 17 as an example. Thoughts? Evrik (talk) 16:29, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Supports, sounds like a nice idea. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 18:48, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Suppport, good idea. — Rlevse • Talk • 09:52, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I like the idea, but I think it's a little too much to have a huge section header and just one link in it. An alternative might be to put today's date on the page somewhere, like underneath "A database of N freely usable media files...". So have the next line be, "Today is [[{{CURRENTMONTH}} {{CURRENTDAY}}]] [[{{CURRENTYEAR}}]]". howcheng {chat} 16:27, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I like the idea too, and also Howcheng's suggestion for avoiding an-overlarge box. Will Beback (talk) 18:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Today in images Heroes' Day (Namibia) Heroes' Day (Namibia) Battle of Crécy Women's Equality Day More images from May 2

The line would only go halfway across the screen and [[{{CURRENTMONTH}} {{CURRENTDAY}}]] results in the redlink 05 2. Apparently there are no redirects? Also, the date would always be wrong in half the world on average, unless one was in UTC.

Just to complicate things, I came up with what a full-fledged "Today in images" Main Page box might look like. This seems like it would be a large-scale project to set up, though largely self-running once there was a template for every page. Just to clarify, I'm not volunteering - just daydreaming. In any case, I like the idea and will support regardless of what form it takes. - BanyanTree 06:20, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Oops, I meant {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}}. howcheng {chat} 23:31, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

• I fixed the image box so the link would work. I think the box looks nifty ... but programming something like that is beyond me. How about adding the text box to start out with, or the date underneath one of the existing headers for now? If someone then wants to create a template for an image box, we can add that later. Right now, there appears to be room on the left for the larger bar and date box. Evrik (talk) 03:56, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Good idea. Today in image would be FPs, am I wrong? Kwj2772 (msg) 11:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
    • That may be a bit strict, I'd personally suggest including at least valued images as well. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 13:05, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
    • Only FPs? I don't see that happening unless you want to make it Bug of the day. I'd even expand to Quality images. You need a reasonably big pool to choose images from, that have a strong connection to the current date. --Dschwen (talk) 13:39, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
      • The current date pages have images dealing the date, and that seems to be a sensible criteria for the purpose. Unless someone is hiding a lot more valued and featured pictures somewhere, I don't see any point in making this harder than it needs to be, especially since the initial proposal is to not even include images on the Main Page. Hopefully, just the fact this exists will encourage people to subcategorize into Category:Days. - BanyanTree 13:54, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
      • O.o My comment was just a question. Please don't treat this sensitively. :) Kwj2772 (msg) 13:59, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

If folks would like to maintain it, it sounds great to me. I'd recommend that all images be eligible. Of course FP and QI should be the first choices, but I'm not sure that we have enough FP+QI to find material for every day. --Gmaxwell (talk) 05:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Me too. I like this idea. I think the last couple comments up missed what is actually being suggested here. It's media related to each day in history. That's impossible to do if want them to be FP/QIs also. Photos of bugs would never make it on this (unless it's the anniversary of some well-known discovery of some species or something). This isn't an extended "picture of the day" thing. Rocket000 (talk) 06:31, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

You must have missed the irony... --Dschwen (talk) 04:06, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

What irony? I see potential sarcasm or pun (bug), but nothing ironic. I wasn't referring to your comment anyway. Rocket000 (talk) 12:44, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

To rephrase what BanyanTree said, “the current date pages have images dealing the date,” and the initial proposal was simply to create a self-updating link - especially since it requires no maintenance. I think that it may encourage people to subcat images by date. Evrik (talk) 03:52, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Evrik. I think I derailed the conversation about the original proposal with my daydream idea above.

Today in images Images from May 2

On my screen at least, the right hand column on the Main Page is always a little taller than the left-hand column, so would suggest adding your idea (formatted above for only half a page) to the left hand column below Media of the Day and above Participating. In any case, I support such an addition, however you want to do it, without prejudice for any proposal in the future to have the new section include images, once such a system of templates is created and coded.

Since absolutely nobody seems to be against this idea, you might as well just do it. At that point, somebody will undoubtedly complain, but such is the wiki. ;) - BanyanTree 04:42, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

• Can someone with admin priveleges do this please? Evrik (talk) 02:05, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

{{editprotected}}

 Done Just wandered back onto Commons and it looks like I'll be the one to stick my neck out... - BanyanTree 06:23, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I tweaked your CSS a bit, I think it looks fine now. I do rather wish we'd go with the fancier box idea you suggested above: all we need is one template and 366 subpages. Shouldn't be too have, given that it'd mostly just be a matter of copying two or three images from each of the existing "Today in images" pages. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 08:35, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

• I think the fancier version can be something to be worked on in the future. As it is, I have spent about 60 hours in the last year getting the galleries up for each of the pages. :-) Thanks everyone. Thank you! Evrik (talk) 17:57, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

5,000,000 files

Since no one else had done it yet, I've replaced the Fotothek announcement with one about the five million files milestone. Feel free to improve it (and to use {{Editprotected}} if you have improvements you can't make yourself). See also discussion at COM:VP#5.000.000. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 09:02, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Harry S. Truman

Harry S. Truman ! not Harry Truman

 Done Thanks for your help. Yann (talk) 21:32, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Category:Video > Category:Videos

{{Editprotected}} There are 2 wrong category link on the Main page, since the video files are now stored in Category:Videos. Please repair.--Kozuch (talk) 16:02, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

 Done, thanks. --The Evil IP address (talk) 16:25, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

The same could probably be done for Sound > Audio files, but these cats are a mess so far still...--Kozuch (talk) 17:18, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Caption change

{{Editprotected}} Could the caption to today's potd be changed to read at the time, rather than at the moment. The latter implies at the present time, which does not fit with the past tense of the subsequent sentence, making it awkward to read. (Incidentally, the template appears to be unprotected, but I'd prefer not to edit it myself without consensus as it's transcluded onto the main page).Tivedshambo (talk) 09:02, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

 Done, I made the change. However, you wouldn't have been able to change the template today, because it's protected by the cascading protection of the Main Page. --The Evil IP address (talk) 14:32, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Login and Re-Login

I am a user in en.wikipedia.org. First I logged in in the en.wikipedia. Then I opened the wikimedia commons, then wiktionary.

In wiktionary the login details are taken care automatically. But in wikimedia commons again I have to Login. Please take care of this minor problem, to avoid repeated logins within wikimedia. --TRYPPN (talk) 03:04, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Go to Preferences and click on "(Manage your global account)". Rocket000 (talk) 06:43, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Page title

How is the "Main page" title concealed from appearing at the top? I was thinking about improving another languaje's main page, and that's something that should be included Belgrano (talk) 19:35, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

It is hidden by CSS in MediaWiki:Monobook.css (see the section containing “BODY.page-Main_Page H1.firstHeading” etc.). --Mormegil (talk) 09:42, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

What??!

What a rubbish Wikimedia it block my uploading name ᰕᰫ་ᰊᰪᰰ་ᰆᰧᰶ ᰛᰩᰵ་ᰀᰪᰱ ᰛᰪᰮ་ᰀᰪᰱ.SVG (which is Lepcha script) and it lost all the information I typed into the uploading form!! This is the 1,000,000,000,000,000,...,000 time Wikimedia lost the information the uploader typed into the uploading form, and that's very disappointing and continueing doing that nobody will like to upload files to Wikimedia... --虞海 (talk) 07:33, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

At least Wikimedia often lost my typed-info-in-uploading-form and as a consequence there's more than a year I do rarely use Wikimedia. Later, each time I upload files to Wikimedia I copy the typed-info-in-uploading-form into notepad before I press "Upload" and in order to prevent losing info I always check the "Ignore all warnings" checkbox. This time I forgot to copy them and Wikimedia gave me a lesson by losing my info!!! --虞海 (talk) 07:38, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I think it's time to change the rubbish uploading form. --虞海 (talk) 07:40, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

 Comment: You might want to ask at MediaWiki talk:Titleblacklist to whitelist this character combination. --The Evil IP address (talk) 10:49, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

{{Editprotected}}

Carnildo find the problem in MediaWiki talk:Titleblacklist#Lepcha_language, but he does not have an administartor-priviledge. Please someone correct the bug. --虞海 (talk) 05:29, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

The request to edit the protected page Not done This has nothing to do with the main page, there is nothing which should be edited here. Continue the discussion at MediaWiki talk:Titleblacklist, where it probably belongs. --Mormegil (talk) 09:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Capitalisation error

The caption for today's featured picture reads "Bank of Tanzania headquarters, Dar es salaam, Tanzania" — please capitalise "Salaam". Nyttend (talk) 19:01, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

 Done --Mormegil (talk) 19:35, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

SUBODH SAWRAV

HI

By law the contributions are still owned by people who donated them. These people are not bound by the license and can use their property in the way they like. However media with multiple authors require permission from every contributor to use them differently from the terms of the Wikipedia license.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Subodhsawrav (talk • contribs) 17:35, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

How to categorize?!!

I agree that it is quite important to categorize images in order to make them usefull for others. It still ofters occurs to me, however, that during uploading I forget to add the right categories. And then the circus begins, because for one reason or another, I mostly don't remember how I did it before. And another time: again and again. For one or another reason, the whole uploading ceremony makes you forget, that you simply may categorize it the way you are categorizing normal articles, that is by clicking the edit tab! So please please, add a remark about that for us simple workers at any possible occasion! Thank you! --Pyt (talk) 16:05, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

The upload form contains a row called "categories". There, you have to press the "+" button to add categories. Furthermore, for category work, I can only recommand Hotcat, which you can enable in your preferences under "Gadgets. Also, try to use other pages than this one (for example the help desk), as this is the discussion page of the main page and unrelated comments, as the one by you, often remain unnoticed. --The Evil IP address (talk) 19:28, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Upload

This is most certainly not the right place to ask my question, so I appreciate any hints to the proper forum.

I have a number of .ogg files which contain German pronunciation. For example "De-adeln.ogg". There are about 500 of them and there will soon be more, so I'm looking for an automated upload tool. Commonist is a tool which does the upload, but, unfortunately, the files should be inserted into commons:Category:German_pronunciation, but not just like this, but instead, "De-adeln.ogg" (for example) should be uploaded with [[Category:German pronunciation|adeln]]. How could one accomplish this task in an automated manner?

Many thanks. This request is related to a project of a handful editors of German Wiktionary to endow the articles there with spoken examples. Jakob.scholbach (talk) 12:29, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

You may have better chance for a reply at Commons:Village pump or at the German Commons:Forum. --Mormegil (talk) 12:38, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Plagiarism

Compare File:Grav slingshot simple 2.gif with this website. While the former image is technically a creation of the uploader, it is clearly plagiarized from the original website, and its description page gives no credit to that source. This is highly unethical.128.46.5.32 00:41, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Is it a joke ?

This image is so simple the it can be copyright (under the threshold of originality), so it's ridiculous to speak of "plagiarism".

Cdlt, VIGNERON * ^discut. 13:16, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Today in images redux

The Today in images section on the Main Page was created recently. As described in Talk:Main Page/Archive 3#Today in images, it was hopes that something more than a barelink would eventually develop. I've taken a stab at possible set up at User:BanyanTree/Tii Main page mockup, which pulls from a bare template at User:BanyanTree/Tii, which is turn pulls from date specific content, with only User:BanyanTree/Tii/2010-02-05 and User:BanyanTree/Tii/2010-02-06 set up for illustration. Besides some awkward coding, and an extra box outline or two I can't seem to get rid of, I would like to get some feedback. Also, if anyone knows how to code User:BanyanTree/Tii so that if a date subpage doesn't exist it provides a bare link, like the one used on the Main Page now, I would greatly appreciate it. The mockup is transcluded below. Thanks, BanyanTree 11:41, 5 February 2010 (UTC) User:BanyanTree/Tii Main page mockup

I think that's a great idea. Of course, it should be checked if that fits into the main page design, but I'm sure this is doable. Some feedback and some thoughts about this:

• What about the captions? Will they be used and if, will it be possible to translate them? This layout should not only be used on this main page, but also on the other ones.
• I think all images should show different things (for example on 25th December, not only Christmas images, but for example also images of the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake) and they shouldn't be the same over the years. Otherwise, this would be quite boring.
• The pictures don't have to be FP, QI or VI, but should be of decent quality, with clear licensing and source and not up for deletion. A totally horrible image wouldn't be good for our reputation and it wouldn't be nice to suddenly get a redlink on the main page.
• The images should be chosen via a template, similar to the POTD format. I'm not sure if an "ifexist" should be used. Every day should have its own pictures if we do this.
• Might be an idea to use hoax images for April Fools' Day. --The Evil IP address (talk) 13:53, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

"Science" and "Engineering" should go under the "Society/Culture" section

As they are human endeavors, it makes no sense for them to be apart. 82.112.139.195 03:47, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I think they're apart because they have their own subpoints, unlike the other items listed under "Society/Culture". --The Evil IP address (talk) 15:54, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Big picture donation

Hello, I want to set this new message (english version) on the main page and I hope, it's ok. Feedback? -- Ra'ike T C 12:40, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I'd wait until they are uploaded, but I think it's a good idea to replace the not that recent Tropenmuseum one. -- User:Docu at 12:47, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Not replace, but above it ;-). I will do it now, because the german language page has also that message and on the discussion page was written, that would be ok. greetings -- Ra'ike T C 21:49, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for answering your question, but I guess you don't care anyways. -- User:Docu at 22:42, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Tropenmuseum 35.000 pictures

I suggest 35.000 be changed to 35 000 to avoid colliding with decimal points. AFAIK, no language uses the space as a decimal point. –Psbsub (talk) 19:10, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

 Done A comma would be an alternative, you are right the dot was not a good idea. --Mormegil (talk) 19:56, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

By the way, a comma is used as a decimal point in the whole of Europe. --Sjorskingma (talk) 15:03, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Total and absolute rudeness and ignorance!

It is a real offence to an artist to use his or her work without acknowledgement. FIX IT! Amandajm (talk) 03:43, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Talk about rudeness... Just click on the image and get all the info you want. Rocket000 (talk) 03:45, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

BTW, There's 20 images on the main page (21 counting Common's logo). None of these do not have attribution directly by them, why be selective? Especially for an artist that died in 1919. Rocket000 (talk) 03:50, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I am an artist. I am an art historian. I am telling you it is the height of rudeness to feature someone's artwork without acknowledging them. You have a whole lot of stuff about the purpose of the drawing. Now state who did it! You attitude is ignorant and does Wkipedia no service whatsoever!

As for the Wikipedia logo, it was created for the purpose that it serves, and in the understanding that the authorship of a logo is not usually acknowledged when it is used.

If you are going to feature a photo, then yes, that needs acknowledging as well. The section is specifically about the quality of the image, is it not?

Amandajm (talk) 04:30, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Why hasn't the attribution of the drawing been fixed yet? Amandajm (talk) 05:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

And it's rude to yell at people commanding volunteers to do something while calling them ignorant and a disservice to Wikipedia[sic]. I don't really care if you're an artist or an art historian, you're still being rude. You can't expect people to willing to help you if you act that way. No, it's not about the quality of the image, it's about the subject. The author's been dead for over 90 years, I wouldn't worry about offending him. Besides, wikis aren't about ownership. Just like the logo, this image is serving it's purpose too. Rocket000 (talk) 05:08, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you're a volunteer. So am I. However, if you are a volunteer who has taken on the job of editting a main page, then it needs to be done well. As you know, there is a MOS, and people are continually reminded of certain points. This is not the first time that I have commented on the lack of proper acknowledgement on main pages. I think that you know the difference between a logo and an artwork. Please don't make silly statements. Just take on board the fact that artists in general find the use of artworks without acknowledgement to be offensive. There are copyright laws to protect the rights of recent artists. There is something called "common practice" with regards to older ones. The importance of authorship does not have a cut-off point along with copyright.

As for your statement about "ownership", that notion of non-ownership has to do with the ownership of articles and editting by editors. It has nothing to do with the very real ownership rights of artworks and objects that we write articles about.

If I were to make a statement in a article that could be queried, I would soon be asked by another editor to cite a reference. It is time that Wikipedia caught onto the fact that the acknowledgement of the creator of a "primary resource" (an artwork) is essential if it is to be used on the main page, and that it is both ignorant and rude not to do it. If we are to call ourselves an encyclopedia, then that "main page" needs to look pretty professional, whether it's done by volunteers or not. Amandajm (talk) 11:33, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

One little point your missing here... this isn't Wikipedia. There is no MOS, there is no articles, there is no WP:V, etc. Welcome to Commons. I would have added the artist's name if you simply asked instead of demanded it. Oh well, it will be off the main page in a couple hours. Rocket000 (talk) 21:08, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

"I would have done the right thing if you hadn't been so upset about me doing the wrong thing" ... is the excuse used by a great many people to justify not backing-down. It is pointless to take a stand to justify what is obviously in error. Welcomme to the real world!

I observe that we now have a beautiful photograph which is also uncredited. It was uploaded by a wiki contributor. This needs to be acknowledged. You are featuring the work of a particular individual. They chose the subject and the composition. It is their artistry, regardless of whether they have reliquished copyright. The main page policy, written or unwritten, is obviously lacking because it violates what is commn cusom among reputable publishers. You are apparently in a position to do something towards remedying this. Why don't you?

Amandajm (talk) 02:15, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Because my views are different than yours. I don't believe there is a problem. Why don't you do something about it? Rocket000 (talk) 03:29, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

A bug of the Wikimedia bot

File:Smp kalmyk.gif point out an wrong username ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ, which dose not exist. Who can debug it? and who can correct File:Smp kalmyk.gif? --虞海 (talk) 07:51, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

You might want to contact the bot owner, Magnus Manske, about this personally. It's quite unlikely that he'll notice your comment on the talk page of the main page. --The Evil IP address (talk) 19:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Links fixed (diff). Athaenara (talk) 01:10, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Request for slight adjustment

{{Editprotected}}

Do not know, why I have not noticed this before, but the section on the page with the headline Featured pictures & Quality images should really mention valued images as well if it is to correspond to the text below (which I think it should). So I guess something like Featured pictures, quality & valued images would be more appropriate. I'm not English speaking, but is the present capitalization correct? Localizations to other languages should be updated as well, if they are not already. Thanks in advance. --Slaunger (talk) 13:49, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I think that would make the heading a bit too long, so that it will need two lines. For such a tiny section, a two-line heading might be too big. How about a new heading altogether? I'd propose Our best images. --rimshot^talk 18:04, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

the present heading above it, "Image donation by mineral collector Robert Lavinsky" is more than 50 characters. Adding valued would bring it to a little more than 40 characters, so I think that if there is room enough for the Lavinsky heading, there should also be anough room for adding valued. Having said that, I am also open to considering completely alternative titles for that section, as the current one (and the one i am proposing) would be very redundant to the actual content. Personally I am not too keen on the Our best images proposal. I think it is the word best, which I do not think is spot on. Other suggestions could perhaps be Featured Content (assuming featured can also embrace a wider term than just FPs), Getting started, Appetizers, or Highlights perhaps? --Slaunger (talk) 22:02, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

 Comment: I don't think making section headers longer is really a good idea. We should keep it easy and short for our visitors. "Highlights", "Highlighted images" or something similar which represents all three ratings would be better, and a shortened section heading for Lavinsky as well. --The Evil IP address (talk) 22:26, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, it seems we all agree that the current title is not optimal. I'm in for any of the suggestions put forward by The Evil IP address. --Slaunger (talk) 01:43, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

 On hold until the page returns to the usual format. If we now change Main Page/std and Main Page/pano, we might forget to update it on the real main page once we revert to the usual main page design. --The Evil IP address (talk) 18:08, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

•  Done, please don't forget to make updates to the main pages of the languages that you speak. --The Evil IP address (talk) 14:14, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Panorama POTD

{{Editprotected}}

POTD of Feb 19 at 600x115 px (twice the standard 300px)

POTD of Feb 19 at 300 px (standard width)

For the 19th, would it be possible to stretch the POTD of the day across both columns? 360° panoramas tend to get tiny. -- User:Docu at 11:54, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

/sample -- User:Docu at 20:53, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Today's picture in the sample is 600x450px. The panorama to the left would be just 600x115 px. The change would be active just on February 19. -- User:Docu at 20:57, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

To do the switch automatically, the following is needed:

at the beginning of the page:

{{#ifeq:{{#time:Y-m-d}}|2010-02-19|{{Main Page/2010-02-19}}|

at the end of the page:

}}

In addition, Main Page/2010-02-19 needs to be protected. -- User:Docu at 12:32, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I changed this, one ":" was missing, otherwise the {{Main Page/... is recognized as template namespace. Protection not required, the page is cascade protected. The transclusion works fine, with the page Main Page/2010-02-19 I have still problems due to the image notes and my slow computer Im constrained to use today. However, I can not guarantee that im online at 1:00 local time, so if anything wents wrong with the switch someone else must repair it. --Martin H. (talk) 14:35, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

A nice idea for a change. It might even be an idea to automatically add existing imagenotes to the potd, though I'm not sure this is possible. --The Evil IP address (talk) 21:16, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

POTD of March 27 at 600x86 px (twice the standard 300px)

It's back to normal now. MediaWiki:ImageAnnotatorConfig.js excludes image notes on the main page. Probably to avoid problems with load time. The 360° panorama had quite a few.

For March 27, there is an even smaller panorama. Using Main Page/switch should be able to change the layout for that day (switching between Main Page/std and Main Page/pano) -- User:Docu at 00:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Hm, I'm quite sure the imagenotes had been on the Main Page. Anyways, I support changing the potd again on March 27. --The Evil IP address (talk) 10:32, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I made a request for today at Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Blocks_&_protections#Panorama_POTD -- User:Docu at 05:00, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

POTD of April 15 at 600x127 px (twice the standard 300px)

The one for April 15 is 127px at 600px. -- User:Docu at 06:29, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Gallery

The main page in the new vector skin has on the left links "Gallery - Discussion". I think, the main page isn't a gallery. It's a little shame to have such a mistake just on the main page. --ŠJů (talk) 15:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree. The main page is no gallery and should be moved with its sister pages into the Commons namespace, where portal pages belong. --The Evil IP address (talk) 15:56, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I think, the main page (and eventual other portal pages) should either have their own namespace or be in the main namespace just like disambiguation and redirect pages. But they shouldn't be declared as galleries. The purpose of "Commons" namespace is different. --ŠJů (talk) 03:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

The Main Page is fine where it is. In Monobook there was a fix (not sure if it was in javascript or not) to replace the "Page" or "Article" text in the tab with "main page" (see here). I'm currently looking into doing the same for Vector aswell, as "Gallery" is clearly wrong. –Krinkle^talk 12:46, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Edit request

Please temporarily unlock:

• File:Ambox warning yellow.svg
• File:Ambox warning blue.svg
• File:Ambox warning orange.svg

So that I may make some uncontroversial clean ups to the image. -- penubag  (talk) 00:10, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I've reduced the protection on the two last images (the first one was already below full protection). Leave a message here or at my talk page when you're done. Blurpeace 00:24, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow, I can't believe I put this on Talk:Main Page... I thought I was on VP. Thanks -- penubag  (talk) 00:38, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

POTD caption change request

"only primate that live freely in Europe" -> "the only non-human primate that lives freely in Europe". Thanks! - Richfife (talk) 16:35, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Done at [[Template:Potd/2010-04-16 (en)]. If you'd like to check future captions, feel free to peruse Commons:Picture of the day. Killiondude (talk) 22:17, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Big Road Blues

Please, please be careful about putting unchecked Internet Archive-sourced sounds on the main page. The Internet Archive only has to obey Egypt's VERY LIBERAL copyright laws. We do not get to operate under that dispensation, and we had a song that's almost certainly in copyright on our main page all yesterday. (I've replaced it with a free-licensed work now, but it was Tommy Johnson's Big Road Blues, and he first recorded in 1928. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:15, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I never understood the Motd system, but AFAIK they were all created years ago, so it might be that it's because copyright wasn't yet taken that seriously during creation. --The Evil IP address (talk) 18:39, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

The search box

Should be a lot more prominently displayed. After all, it's what people are gonna use. 85.77.205.127 10:41, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, the Usability Initiative changed this to fit more to web standards. If it bothers you a lot, you might want to report it here, but I doubt that the Usability Initiative will change it back. --The Evil IP address (talk) 18:48, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

If we wanted, I suppose we could put out own search box on the page itself using <inputbox>, like this:

I'm not going to agree or disagree about whether this would be a good idea or not. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 22:39, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Please rename File:SL indipedance.jpg

It's mis spelt. Please re-name to File:SL indepedence.jpg --92.19.6.50 18:40, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done! Killiondude (talk) 05:07, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Images and copyright

I'm not an expert in images and copyright, but i want to report a case you can judge for yourself: File:Schermata_progecad.jpg is a screenshot of a proprietary (not open source) software. Is it allowed to stay on Common ? (Please excuse my bad english) EffeX2 (talk) 09:28, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

 Deleted. Next time, you might want ot use {{Copyvio}} for obvious cases or open a deletion request if more discussion is needed. --The Evil IP address (talk) 12:11, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

MotD

As a lot of you may know, this'll be getting a revamp soon. I've opened threads about aesthetics at Template talk:New Motd; I should have a decent test page up in a week or so. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:52, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

PotD caption

In the Picture of the Day caption ([2]), "an tree" should be changed to "a tree". Ucucha (talk) 11:43, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done --Mormegil (talk) 12:04, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Moving the language links

I have my doubts about this move. While I recognize there's a lot of clutter on the main page right now, we shouldn't cut out other languages. It's right that about 2 billion people speak English, which makes one third of the world's population. But there are also 4 billion people who don't understand one word of English, for which the language links are essential to participate. Otherwise, the usability for those people sucks. Also, certain points from the mailing list post are clearly wrong: "I've got my browser set to my language and i'm coming from a certain country, right?" Right, you have set it to some language, but as an anonymous person, that doesn't matter. You'll always be redirected to the English main page. As it currently stands, the main pages need to be on several separate pages, because of two things that don't work yet: The localization isn't done automatically, be it via autotranslation or via system messages and recognizing an anonymous user's language isn't possible (yet). As it's mostly anonymous users that visit the main page, we can't set it to autotranslate yet, which relies on the user being registered. So, I admit that the main page is in need of some redesign, but to remove the language links, other steps have to be taken first: This would be creating system messages to translate (probably at Translatewiki) and then installing the LanguageSelector, just as the TranslateWiki did. I mean, changing the sitenotice was long overdue, and if I still had the admin bits, I would have done it, but we shouldn't remove important things while cleaning up. --The Evil IP address (talk) 20:14, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

The proper fix would be to redirect people automatically depending on their browser language (easy to detect independent of log in status). The necessary data is already in Mediawiki:MainPages.js. If this is not being done yet it would be easy to implement. --Dschwen (talk) 20:47, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I strongly agree. Adding a bold link and small icon from the top of the page to "other languages is one nice compromise that various Wikipedias have chosen over the years. --SJ+ 03:41, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

A non-English user who has setting as English may never know there is a main page in his/her own language. Please remember even in login with merged accounts, Interface language never change to his/her home wiki language. And an anonymous user has no option to configure that :-(--Praveenp (talk) 02:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok, this is a bit of an over-dramatization. Just because it is at the bottom of the page does not mean that users will never ever see it. With that rationale we might as well remove the links to our sister projects, terms of use, etc. Screen real estate is a limited resource. Priorities have to to set. The different languages are one aspect of commons, and we can be proud of them. The main mission of commons however are the images and other media files. They should be given priority. It is not acceptable that at standard screen resolution all a new visitor sees when coming to this page is a giant wall of text. I activated a script that will show a link to the Mainpage in the user's browser language for non-logged in users. Users that are logged in should set their preferences. The user that set his preferences to different language seems like a constructed edge-case. Either he is happy with his interface language, or he isn't. If he isn't he can change it. If he is happy, what's the problem? --Dschwen (talk) 02:24, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

K. With updated script it will be nice. Actually I didn't see that, and when I see this subheading I thought It was removed from main page. Still English is a pretty hard language for me ;-)--Praveenp (talk) 09:48, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Logged in vs. Not Logged in

Hi, I really do not understand why the same category page looks different when I am logged in versus not logged in. When I first go to Category:Expo_2010 as an anonymous user, the category page looks like the old version. After I have logged in to wikicommons once, I can see all the category changes like "Shanghai expo branding" etc. Is there a cache problem? If I had never logged in, none of my recent category moves would ever show up. The first link I make is usually via en.wikipedia. Benjwong (talk) 00:33, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

You do see a different cache when you are anonymous. I believe it updates less frequently, so that not every anon page-view causes a database check. --SJ+ 03:43, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Tropenmuseum

I've removed the old old old notice on the Tropenmuseum donation. Hope no-one minds. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:30, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Fine by me. I already suggested that on the ML anyways :-). --Dschwen (talk) 02:11, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I miss it ;)

We might want to add one about the Brooklyn Museum (once uploading is finished, if it's ok with them). -- User:Docu at 02:13, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Just swap out the Mineral-Guy for it when you think the time is right. --Dschwen (talk) 02:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

PLEASE HELP ANYONE

there is a picture of a girl, with jacobsen syndrome on this site. i have a 2 yr old son with this, and have been told children with this syndrome never make it to a teenager, well she is 17! I am very interested if anyone has info on the picture. and the girl in it?...

Thank you so much.

-Christina

or email at mccallionc@yahoo.com

We can and will not give you medical advise here. Also "this site" is not the creator nor the owner of the image, we are hosting it. The original source and author(s) of the file are listed at the file description page, File:Jacobsen syndrome patient.JPG, it comes from this scientific article. Commons or Commons user cant tell you anything more about the image or the jacobsen syndrom. --Martin H. (talk) 06:17, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Invalid tag extension name: categorytree

Someone fix it in the main page. Thanks --Wilfredo Rodríguez (talk) 14:52, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Category tree

Domas disabled the extension due to performance issues, see also https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23682. –Krinkle^talk 14:57, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

I can live for a while without the category tree template. But what is worse is that all counters are gone in category displays (empty state is no longer displayed), which is a major nuisance, even more so in for example Category:Non-empty category redirects and Category:Non-empty disambiguation categories. --Foroa (talk) 17:07, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

{{Editprotected}}

It works again, would you uncomment it? -- User:Docu at 10:40, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. -- User:Docu at 18:31, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Panorama POTD (2)

{{Editprotected}}

POTD of June 10 at 600x141 px (twice the standard 300px)

POTD of June 10 at 300 px (standard width)

Tomorrow's POTD is fairly large. I will try to update the version used by #Panorama POTD for the current layout. -- User:Docu at 04:00, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Similar to this revision, please replace the page with the code on /switch. It can be reverted on Friday (11th).

Main Page/pano and Main Page/std should be protected until the 11th. -- User:Docu at 11:54, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:05, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. -- User:Docu at 19:11, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Panorama POTD (2010-07-01)

POTD of July 1 at 600x132 px (twice the standard 300px)

POTD of July 1 at 300 px (standard width)

The next panorama seems to be the POTD of July 1. See #Panorama POTD (2) for changes to fix the layout. -- User:Docu at 10:45, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

{{Editprotected}}

As at #Panorama POTD (2), please

• change Main Page to /switch (this version
• and protected Main Page/pano and Main Page/std.

Thanks. -- User:Docu at 07:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for your vigilance. --99of9 (talk) 07:50, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Skull and mandible

"Skull and mandible" is redundant; skull includes mandible (as well as other parts that could just as well be named). See en:Skull ("The skull is composed of two parts: the cranium and the mandible.") Should simply be "skull." Ecphora (talk) 15:04, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

This is about Template:Potd/2010-06-27_(en). Too late, sorry. -- User:Docu at 07:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Bad translation

The image caption for the picture of the day appears to be subject to a bad translation (File:Cedar Breaks National Monument partially.jpg). Why would an obscure dialect word from southern England be applied to a geological feature in the Western U.S. I can't find any non-Wikipedia mirror using the term for the U.S. It is just badlands to us. There is no evidence of a waterway at all in the image as the chine page seems to say is a defining feature of that term. 75.41.110.200 02:37, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

How do I re-upload an image on the same page?

Hi...I uploaded 2 images yesterday for the article Pritish Nandy Commmunications. These were deleted by another editor because he/she feared that I did not have the requisite permissions. Anyways, I have asked the original copyright holder to send you an email giving me permission to upload these images. My questions is, how do I upload the images on the same page again? I would ideally not like to create a new page from start because I already created the pages yesterday and they currently exist without any image. You may see the talk page for the name of the page created. Shishir58 (talk) 08:56, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Here, these are the pages created. File:Hazaaron_Khwaishein_Aisi_A_PNC_Film_Official_Poster.jpg, File:Kaante_A_PNC_Film_Official_Poster.jpg Shishir58 (talk) 08:59, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Did you send it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org ? In that case please wait for them to confirm the license, if everything is okay they will undelete the files. Btw: This is not really the right place, next time use Commons:Help desk--DieBuche (talk) 10:18, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

"No media of the day today" (2010-07-17)

Media of the day could be File:Cityscape of Rome (partial, seen from Pincio hill).ogg (Better than nothing) ... --Mattes (talk) 03:36, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

You can add suggestions here: Commons:Media_of_the_day. --99of9 (talk) 05:52, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

{{Editprotected}}

As there is nothing for today either, would an administrator replace Main Page/std with Talk:Main Page/std/no mediaofdat‎?  Docu  at 09:51, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

There are a lot of media files available. I think we should keep MOTD and find content for it. Something like FP, VI, or QI. --Nevit Dilmen (talk) 12:07, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok for me, in the meantime, please don't leave a dead link on Main Page.  Docu  at 13:21, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

• Removed editprotected since it seems outdated. --The Evil IP address (talk) 12:19, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Big link to Upload

Hi. Why don't include a big link like this in the mainpage? Many newbies come here to upload files (a hard move, because they can here from another projects), and they have to search where is the upload link. Yes, veteran users know that it is on the left sidebar, but newbies don't. No joke, a big link. emijrp (talk) 17:36, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Upload a file

The main page is designed really for the casual Internet surfer, so a huge upload file link wouldn't be very good. Plus it would look super ugly. --O (谈 • висчвын) 18:01, 07 August 2010 (GMT)

I can't see why they would have to 'search' for the upload link. It's on the Main Page after all. On the most visible page of the whole Commons. --Petritap (talk) 09:54, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

When I say "casual Internet surfer", I mean people who only intend to indulge themselves in existing content. Obviously uploading files requires accounts, and it is better if those with accounts get used to where the upload button exists in the MediaWiki user interface. --O (谈 • висчвын) 04:13, 16 August 2010 (GMT)

Commons:IUCN red list

Hi. I would like to announce the partnership with IUCN to produce range maps for 25,000 species (more details on the page linked above) on the main page, to see if we can get more volunteers to help out produce the maps. Is there some criteria for announcing stuff on the main page? Thanks in advance, GoEThe (talk) 13:17, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Image donation by mineral collector Robert Lavinsky

For how long are we going to have the image donation on the main page. It's been there too long! 86.210.202.162 13:49, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

I most certainly agree--DieBuche (talk) 14:30, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

How about the donation mentioned directly above?--DieBuche (talk) 14:30, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree, of course ;). How about the text:

"The IUCN red list has agreed to license distribution maps derived from the data present on their website with a Creative Commons By-SA 2.0. There are currently around 25,000 maps for many species of mammals, amphibians, reptiles and corals.

We need help producing the maps, inputting description and source of the images (including translations), and uploading them to Commons. You can read more on how you can help here." GoEThe (talk) 10:14, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

 Done since nobody else did. ZooFari 20:33, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Missing capital letter

For the POTD's caption, it should be "...skyline of the German capital." not "german". Jolly Janner (talk) 17:12, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done --Mormegil (talk) 17:26, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

In Wikipeda

May I know why there is an interwiki link in sidebar to en:Hønefoss?--Praveen:talk 07:24, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Because of a missing colon at Template:Motd/2010-11-13 (en); fixed. --Mormegil (talk) 12:18, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect Link in Content Section

{{Editprotected}} In the Content "By license" section there are links for content in three main "Copyright statuses".

The "GFDL" and "Public domain" links lead to pages with content posted under those license types, but the "Creative Commons licenses" link leads to the page about Creative Commons licenses not content posted under a Creative Commons license.

Basically, all the links in the "Content" section of the main page lead to media content except the "Creative Commons licenses" link under "By License".

The text of the link should be changed to "Creative Commons" and the the URL should be changed to "http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Creative_Commons".

No. The section lists three categories, Category:Creative Commons licenses, Category:GFDL, Category:Public domain. All three categories are license categories and contain files by license in their subcategories. This are located in the Category:Copyright statuses category tree which is a top level category and any file on Commons is expected to be in a subcategory of that tree. The categories Creative Commons licenses and Public domain are empty, they are splited up in various specifications and contain only subcategories (I clean out the manually added images to Category:Public domain frequently). Category:Creative Commons is a topic category and contains various content related to the topic Creative Commons, an organization. Thats something different, also files in Category:Creative Commons are not necessarily under Creative Commons licenses but under various copyright statuses. --Martin H. (talk) 10:24, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Mistake in te main page.

This an error in the Main_Page, it coudn´t see the image, the link is bad. :( --Roberto Fiadone (talk) 02:10, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

"Screetch"

Could somebody correct the spelling of "Screetch" in the POTD caption to the correct "Screech?" Acroterion (talk) 13:17, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

design flaw?

hi;

i think i've spotted a small design flaw in the "media of the day" section.

right now, it's an audio file, captioned as follows:

""A chantar m'er de so qu'eu no volria", a 12th century Occitan language song by Comtessa de Dia. It is the only surviving music by a woman troubadour. "

& there is a nice little player-thing, so that you can listen to the file,

BUT

how do you get to the file's info-page?

there doesn't seem to be any link to take you there...

Lx 121 (talk) 10:25, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Hit the under the play button.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:40, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

there isn't one? (i'm using the chrome webbrowser on ubuntu, if that's relevant) Lx 121 (talk) 04:30, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

correction: there isn't one unless you hit "menu" or until after you play the file. that's (a lot) better than nothing, but it's still awfully "hidden" for what should be the most important link in the section. Lx 121 (talk) 04:34, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

It sounds like a tech issue (and browser may be an issue - in particular how JS is working). In firefox the i displays fine on audio. On video - clicking on the image takes you there. The most important link in that section is the play button.

I agree that there should be a prominent link to the file page, I'd suggest the village pump is probably a better place for discussion than here.--Nilfanion (talk) 08:37, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Queensland Library donation

Can we replace or supplement the current map donation blurb with something about the Queensland Library donation? I wrote up the following based on the ICURN blurb:

The State Library of Queensland has agreed to donated 50,000 copyright-free photographs documenting some of the history of Queensland.

We need help categorizing the images, and completing and re-wording image descriptions, and determining geocoordinates of the images. You can read more about how to help here. [modified per suggestion below]

I will solicit feedback from John Vandenberg on the wording. I'm also going to ask someone involved in the ICURN map donations to comment on whether that still needs to be on the frontpage.--Chaser (talk) 05:11, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

The only correction to the above wording is that "agreed to donate" should be has donated; the library have already handed over all the files and metadata, so they have completed their part of the deal. More visibility and involvement would be very beneficial, as the library is hoping to be able to report that donating to Commons exposes their collection to a more international and motivated set of people.

I would prefer that we dont mention geocoords at this stage. The library have given us geocoord data, and I am nearly ready to start adding it to the uploads. Once that is done, there will be images which dont have geocoords, and their will be images that need verification of the geocoords. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 05:34, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, this definitely should be on the main page. On my monitor seems to be place for it as a separate item below or above the IUCN, and if I remember well there have been in the past two donation items at a time. I find IUCN is pretty important, so I would be in favour of keeping it in place. --Elekhh (talk) 05:45, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Could you elaborate? I don't dispute that the IUCN donation is important. To me the issue is whether to continue using premium main page real estate to request assistance with processing that donation. I got no response from either of these queries about whether help is still needed with IUCN maps.--Chaser (talk) 05:35, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

As far I can see from ca. 25,000 potential distribution maps only ca. 1,700 have been produced so far, which is less than 7% (and many are not SVG, i.e. improvable), so I think it would be beneficial to keep this still "advertised". This is a similarly slow processing as that of the Tropenmuseum donation, and as is to be expected the QSL will be. The IUCN maps' importance is defined by their worldwide scope. I do agree however that after 6 months it starts to look a bit dated, so maybe it could be renewed with a better image (a map for example) and some status update. --Elekhh (talk) 07:39, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good. I agree with John Vendenberg that the geocoord shouldn't be included. Given the type of images, this is a bit tricky.

The ICURN announcement has been there for half a year now, let's replace it - otherwise some might think that nothing has changed since. --  Docu  at 12:14, 28 December 2010 (UTC), lapsus edited 18:18, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

 Support, obviously. Lankiveil (talk) 02:45, 29 December 2010 (UTC).

 Done. There was room for a few more lines so I left in a "See also: IUCN Red List donation". --ZooFari 08:38, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. The image of QSL still links to IUCN. Maybe the main link shouldn't go to Wikipedia, but also to the local page. Would fix that too? --  Docu  at 08:43, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Looks like you had just noticed and fixed first part. --  Docu  at 08:46, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Done, since a link to Wikipedia in the Commons page already exists for users who want to read more about it. --ZooFari 23:08, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Please add link to Commons:State Library of Queensland into "See also" string (or delete this string). --Kaganer (talk) 01:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

The current announcement is the donation of the State Library of Queensland. Why should there be another link to Commons:State Library of Queensland (for the third time)? I'd agree to a link for the Commons:Tropenmuseum donation but that's not the case... --ZooFari 01:46, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, this was the "edit mode effect" ;) I could not understand what the link was retained specifically. It might be better to separate the horizontal line, as I did here? --Kaganer (talk) 15:16, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Line looks ok so  Done. --ZooFari 20:17, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

I dont like the "See also: IUCN Red List donation". What does the IUCN donation has to do with the Library of Queensland that I have to see that page? Whe should create a page Commons:Partnerships and fill it with the previous notifications in alphabetical order. See Category:Commons partnerships. --Martin H. (talk) 23:14, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

.... I should realy use the preview button more often, that page already exists, we should link that instead. --Martin H. (talk) 23:14, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Agree, that may work better. --ZooFari 23:18, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Malayalam Translation

If default language for the site is not Malayalam, Malayalam translation of Main Page (ie, പ്രധാന താൾ) giving a redirect arrow image and link to Main Page just under welcome message. I wish to remove that because it is pretty ugly to see. But don't know how. Please help :( --Praveen:talk 18:32, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Sorry but I don't understand what is the problem. This page പ്രധാന താൾ works fine for me. Yann (talk) 18:50, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Please check, these screenshots [3] [4]--Praveen:talk 19:40, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

I see. This only comes when not logged in. This is probably intentional, and I don't know how it is made to appear, as it is not in the page wiki markup. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:50, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

You can solve this by setting your browser (Chrome, Firefox) in a different language. It suggests the language of your browser. –Krinkle^talk 10:13, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

OK. But I think it is more understandable if it is in a sentence. When I saw it I felt it is some kind of error :(. I prefer my browser language as English (because even google's Malayalam translation is bad). --Praveen:talk 15:43, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Storage on Commons from the German Wikipedia

Please help me to move the following images from the German Wikipedia onto Commons:

• [5]
• [6]

Thanx in advance, --84.148.236.216 13:09, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

 Done by someone elses. –Krinkle^talk 14:38, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Adding big search box

I received suggestion form Polish Wikipedian to add big search box on main page as Polish Wikipedia does (somehow it works in IE 7, but doesn't work in Firefox 3.6.7 for me). This sound very reasonable for me, because it will emphasize search possibility and will make work with long name (especially prefixed with namespaces such as Category much more convenient).

Sure, user interface specialist should be involved in tweaking such feature.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:23, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

A major concern is that this distracts users from the normal search box and seemingly vanishes after a single search is performed, leading to potential confusion/frustration. This is why the English Wikipedia community rejected such a proposal.

Incompatibility with a popular browser is another significant problem. —David Levy 21:29, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Funny, there was such a big search box on the French main page, and it was removed last week :-) Jean-Fred (talk) 21:44, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Video

I uploaded a few videos last week but I do not see them within video lists/categories. How can I put them into proper video categories or lists? Orgio89 (talk) 05:45, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

solved myself. Thanks.

My uploaded videos are not seeing in video subcategories. How can I include them in the video subcategories especially Videos by User(Orgio89) and Videos by Country(from Mongolia)? I tried many previous video page codes and perhaps it is requiring some Mod involvement. Thanks. Orgio89 (talk) 05:34, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Alleged?

Is there any reason to doubt that the three men in the picture are Sadhhus? If yes, why include the picture? If no, then why say, "alleged"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maunus (talk • contribs) 19:11, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

File upload

I have been trying to upload a file but the normal form has been replaced by one which does not allow the license to be specified. I have also tried to go in from Wikipedia but have the same problem. Can someone please reinsert the old version until the problem has been sorted out.--Ipigott 15:40, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I noticed that too. You might want to try the Upload Wizard in the meantime. --Ernie 16:00, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Panorama POTD (2011-02-15)

POTD at 600x71 px 

POTD at 300x36 px 

Tomorrows FP is fairly large, thus I'd do the usual switch to the two column version (previous).

Main Page/pano and Main Page/std need to be updated before. Please unprotected them.

Once they are updated, we can update Main Page with Talk:Main Page/switch this version --  Docu  at 07:25, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

{{Editprotected}}

Better solution:

1. Please protect Main Page/pano2 and Main Page/std2
2. update Main Page with Talk:Main Page/switch (this version)

That's all.

Main Page/pano2 will only be displayed tomorrow with tomorrows POTD, thus it wont look too large. --  Docu  at 12:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Done. Thank you. Walter Siegmund (talk) 05:14, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Panorama POTD (2011-03-02)

{{Editprotected}}

POTD at 600x85 px 

POTD at 300x43 px 

The next large POTD is the one of March 2.

The layout change can already be prepared by updating Main Page with Talk:Main Page/switch (this version, diff). --  Docu  at 02:20, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

media of the day link-through

ok, i know i've mentioned this before, but there is no easy way to link-through from the main-page motd to the page for the actual file!

& now the problem seems to actually be worse than when i first mentioned it...

the "info" button-thing in the player no longer provides a working link; the "share" button only gets you an embedded link, & the "copy" button in "share" does NOT work (or, at least it, does not work for me, using chrome on ubuntu).

we really need to fix this; there needs to be a way to get to the motd's file-page, & it should be easy & obvious, not something you have to struggle to find...

(i'd try to fix it, but i'm not a coder)

Lx 121 (talk) 02:54, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Main Page title

Does somebody know why the title of the main pages does disappear so lately, while loading the page? In other wikis, which don't display the title, you can't see it at all.-F. F. Fjodor (talk) 11:15, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Addition: And could somebody change Mediawiki:Common.css that the redirect from Commons:Main Page is not shown?-F. F. Fjodor (talk) 11:59, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Images Donation

Sir My name is Rehmat Aziz Chitrali, I am pakistani researcher and photo journalist. I want to donate my images to Wikimedia Commons with the permission of Khowar Academy. please let me know the procedure.

Rehmat Aziz Chitrali (talk) 02:54, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

• Dear R A Chitrali, I don't know if you will see this, but I hope so! You should go to Commons:Contributing_your_own_work for a guide on how to contribute! Cheers, Nesnad (talk) 15:26, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Media of the Day section

See COM:VP#Media_of_the_Day_on_the_Main_Page. --  Docu  at 11:48, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Typo on media of the day

The media of the day says "Documentary about basque rap singers and their histori"; should be "history". InverseHypercube (talk) 02:28, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done --rimshot^talk 06:18, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Typo in Media of the Day section

There is a small spelling error in the Media of the Day section. "eletric" should be "electric". Thanks, Mattinbgn/^talk 05:29, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

 Done --rimshot^talk 21:38, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Who's men and women in uniform?

I'm taken aback by the description of Obama's speech that's todays media. Will some admin please change it to be more global and neutral. --Keithonearth (talk) 05:29, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Upload wizard?

I thought Commons had a new upload wizard? Where is it? Randomblue (talk) 15:43, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

At Special:UploadWizard and currently linked from the top of Commons:Upload. --SJ+ 01:01, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Media of the day - RSS

Somethings wrong with the RSS link for Media of the day --לאה צחור (talk) 22:34, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Media of the day error

The guillemets in the media of the day section should be quotation marks. InverseHypercube (talk) 00:44, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Layout problems

There seems to be some huge layout problems on the main page today. Hopefully it can be fixed promptly. InverseHypercube (talk) 00:24, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Done, it was a space at the beginning of the caption. --Martin H. (talk) 00:53, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Typo in POTD caption

The word "technics" should be "technique". --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:40, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done --Mormegil (talk) 08:04, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

MOTD caption needs fixing

"The demonstration concludes with the throwing of a green smoke hand grenade (1m 16s)." Thanks. upstateNYer 13:49, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

New parthership project - RIA Novosti

Maybe it's time to update the current partnership project to RIA Novosti donation? --Kaganer (talk) 08:43, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Definitely impressive images! Are there going to be more donated? --ELEKHH^T 09:02, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done, updated to feature this new donation. Jean-Fred (talk) 09:30, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! --Kaganer (talk) 13:27, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, this project will be continued. By the end of 2011 is planned to publish on the Commons about 800 historical images of different subjects (but mainly related to the history of Russia). --Kaganer (talk) 13:27, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2010 caption wikifying

I can not find the correct template, thus writing here. Please wikify following items of the caption:

• ESO (European Southern Observatory)
• Paranal Observatory
• Very Large Telescope

either to their en.wikipedia pages or to categories on commons. Thanks.--Kozuch (talk) 12:25, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done in Template:Potd/2011-02-11 (en). Jean-Fred (talk) 13:47, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

{{Edit protected}} Could an admin remove the whole thing? I think it's time. theMONO 01:16, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Not sure how long it's supposed to be there or anything, but since it was intruding to the POTD and MOTD I have moved it under the "Highlights" section. --ZooFari 19:30, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Increase size of POTD

The current size of POTD on the main page is rather small. I think it should be expanded to the full width of the left column thus offering a much larger preview. Additionally, when panoramas becomes POTD would it be possible to stretch it across both columns? --Jovian Eye _talk 15:22, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

New content cooperation - COM:HM

Good news everyone, a new GLAM cooperation has been established and I'm about to roll it out. Currently the "Donation by the Russian International News Agency" is on display. Would be nice if anyone could tell me how and if this can be updated in favour of the cooperation with the Museum für Hamburgische Geschichte. If anyone can make a statement on the conditions for changing this main page display, feel free to write on my talkpage or mail me directly. Regards, PETER WEIS TALK 22:00, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Move picture donations to template

Would anyone mind if I moved the donations to a template? Donations are now quite common, and while I'm fine with having them on the main page, I think it unnecessarily clutters the history (which is why most things here are within templates). --The Evil IP address (talk) 18:09, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

"Clutter"? - there were just 17 edits this year up to now. :) Well, what is bad with edits on the main page? I do not see a good striking reason to move them to a template just for this reason. A downside would be for example that you cannot view the main page on a specific date anymore. And having less templates on the main page means that maintainers from other language mainpages can watch all changes more easily to update their "translated" mainpages. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 22:38, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Thousands separator

{{editprotected}} As most English speaking countries use a comma to separate thousands, and a full-stop (or period if you prefer) for the decimal point (see File:DecimalSeparator.svg), please change 100.000 to 100,000 in the secion about contributions by the National Archives and Records Administration. Thanks.—Optimist on the run (the user formerly known as Tivedshambo) (ask me why) 05:47, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Done. Killiondude (talk) 06:18, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Picture of the day caption

Think even the British usually spell it "coloration"... AnonMoos (talk) 12:45, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments

I’ve been bold and added Wiki Loves Monuments to the Main Page (fulfilling an edit request on, er, Twitter). If there is any problem with that, revoke or let me know. Jean-Fred (talk) 09:21, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Featured pic on en.wiki could use annotations

File:Stockholm photochrom2.jpg is currently featured on English Wikipedia, but I noticed that the color of the flags in the photocrom are wrong. There weren't any national flags in 1897 that had a red cross on a blue background, and this is by all reasonable assumption supposed to be Swedish flags. The one in front would be the Swedish flag with the badge representing the Swedish-Norwegian union that lasted until 1905 (see for example File:Flaggsirkulære 1899.jpg). And the flag on top of the dome can't be any other than the Swedish flag. Could an admin please add annotations to point this out?

Perhaps this is technically more relevant to en.wiki, but I thought it be more appropriate to request a change here.

Peter ^Isotalo 12:20, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Try File talk:Stockholm photochrom2.jpg or COM:VP. This is the talk page for Main Page. --  Docu  at 20:07, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Do Commons admins never check this page, or do they simply not care about errors that happen to be discovered outside of Commons?

Peter ^Isotalo 20:37, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

What? Killiondude (talk) 22:44, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Images featured on English Wikipedia are edit-protected and they can only be amended by Commons admins. Why didn't anyone simply introduce the comment?

Peter ^Isotalo 15:30, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Commons admins don't typically check the talk page for the main page (this page) for edit requests dealing with featured images on the main page of the English Wikipedia. You could have posted on a number of more apt pages that admins specifically watch, such as COM:AN or COM:VP. That having been said, you were responded to correctly, above, by Docu when he pointed you elsewhere. If I would have seen this on that day I would have fixed it, but like I said, this probably isn't the best place to ask for that sort of correction. :-) Killiondude (talk) 20:58, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

I'll keep that in mind if anything pops up again. I just assumed that admins would watch this page for reported errors. Thanks for the info.

Peter ^Isotalo 18:14, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Cannonball what?

The media of the day File:Cannon ball mill.ogv could really use some more information. I'm guessing it has something to do with making the cannonballs round, but it's impossible to tell what it's actually for. Could someone please explain the function in more detail?

Peter ^Isotalo 11:23, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Try Category:Stone mills and Steinmühlen. --Foroa (talk) 11:42, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I can not translate

I put the Template:translation possible, but I can't translate it please help. Could you please help to resolve this problem??? (Nisetpdajsankha (talk) 00:51, 16 September 2011 (UTC))

First step is: Please use the correct page to ask. This page is only about the main page. Please ask again at Commons:Help desk. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 05:39, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Saibo (Δ) 05:39, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Blackwhite Pictures

I think that is a good idea to make a special category in the main page of black and white picture of the day. Many of as love white-black pictures, old ones and new ones.--Geovagrand (talk) 15:32, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Time to make the pics larger

They're really absurdly small for today's conditions. Most commercial sites are image-intensive, even for developing-country consumption, so I don't buy the "it's restrictive to fast broadband" argument. At stake is the whole impact of this brilliant site. Tony1 (talk) 03:47, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Agree, and there are too many frames (today's FP has a frame, and than is placed within a frame which is inside a frame which is within..., you guessed. Could also do with some cleanup. For instance the top links Nature - Science -Society with those childish icons seem superfluous as repeated at Topics. --ELEKHH^T 07:50, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Not to mention that the picture of the day frame has a heading which repeats the heading of its encapsulating frame. Department of Redundancy Department? —LX (talk, contribs) 14:39, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Created a mock-up version at Main Page/sandbox simulating the changes discussed above (except I did not know how to remove the extra frame around the picture). What do you think? --ELEKHH^T 22:09, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

I agree its time to change it, I think 370px will be a good size if you want the Pic of the year format to stay, OR, to reformat the pic of the year so the pic will be under the describition than 400px.

Elekhh; Iv'e removed the frame you mentioned from the page.
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 00:04, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh yeh, soo much better, thanks for that fix. The picture of the year should not stay there forever, so maybe that could be smaller and the picture of the day at 400px. I support immediate implementation of these small but well aimed changes. --ELEKHH^T 04:42, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Support aswell.
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 11:18, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

 Support --99of9 (talk) 12:15, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

 Support  ■ MMXX  ^talk 17:18, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

{{Editprotected}} Than maybe is time to implement the changes (removal of the three category icons on the top-right, removal of the extra frames around picture of the day and media of the day, removal of duplicate titles, change of image size for picture of the day) as illustrated by the sandbox. --ELEKHH^T 02:20, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Before I implement, I made another draft: What do you think of [7] ? (Tip: Try to resize your window) --DieBuche (talk) 09:31, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Much better, I my self like it.
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 00:54, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

The only difference I see is the feature to maximise the width of the Picture of the day based on the window size. This works particularly well with panoramic photos like today's image. With yesterday's portrait format I found it a bit excessive on a large screen, but still support the changes. --ELEKHH^T 02:35, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

What about main page in other languages? should we change them all?  ■ MMXX  ^talk 15:35, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

I'd say yes. I don't have time for that though. --DieBuche (talk) 09:48, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Front page FP randomizer

We have so many featured images and counting I doubt we'll be able to give each one its own day. What if we had a randomizer that showed a different featured pic on each hit (and maybe some kind of tracker so people could see the ones they recently viewed)? Maybe we could tag non family-safe ones to prevent them from showing. -- One, please. ( _{^{Thank you.}}) 20:48, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

If there is a backlog with FPs than the simple solution is to speed up display and have two pictures of the day for 12h each. I don't think random display of images would make the main page more attractive. --ELEKHH^T 00:10, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Elekhh. I worry about unpredictability, the difficulty of troubleshooting, and the potential for subtle vandalism if everyone is not seeing the same page. --Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:03, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

POTD

I do not know what happened so that a direct link to POTD is not available anymore, but I do not think it is a good idea.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:37, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Good observation, probably the link below the POTD to "Other Featured pictures" should be changed to COM:POTD. That would be consistent with the link below the Media of the day and remove another redundancy, as there already is another link to featured pictures on the right side under "Highlights". --ELEKHH^T 05:20, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Is somebody going to return the link? I am not a sysop and can not do it.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:21, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

{{Editprotected}} I think it should be uncontroversial. Please replace the "Other Featured pictures" link below the POTD with Other Pictures of the day. --ELEKHH^T 20:27, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done --Joku Janne^(Fi) (Wikiwiki) 15:54, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Great, thanks to both of you.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:41, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Video

Hi, there seems to be a spelling mistake on the video description. If i'm not mistaken, isn't it supposed to be "video about lightning storms on Saturn", not "video about ligthining storms on Saturn". Just trying to help, Benzband (talk) 14:14, 5 November 2011 (UTC).

Corrected. Thanks a lot for your help. Yann (talk) 16:23, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Tired image

As much as we like the POTY, it's become a fixture on the wall ... how long has it been there for? I'm surprised a few runners-up haven't been alternated.

On another issue, is there an iron-clad rule about restricting the size of images on the front page of what is the world's largest repository of free images? Tony1 (talk) 13:37, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

It's still there. That same old image. How long???? Tony1 (talk) 11:41, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I would appreciate that as well. --ELEKHH^T 12:55, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --ZooFari 18:49, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Animation too big

Can it be made smaller? I cannot see it comfortably because it doesn't fit on my monitor... 68.224.132.9 05:57, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree. Its aspect ratio is unusual and thus the template for today ought to be adjusted accordingly to a fixed pixel height (and not width). --Slaunger (talk) 06:05, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

It's fixed for today, but I'm not sure if my solution is technically appropriate for all situations (I had to remove a div). If anyone knows better than me, the place to look is Main_Page/potd. --99of9 (talk) 06:40, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Featured image caption

Should be "Om Navashivam, traditional Hindu song, Kumaon, Uttarakhand, India." InverseHypercube 19:08, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Ludo.jpg

On a fresh mediawiki install, I had an image called 'Ludo.jpg' on my site, which was refferencing an image on wikimedia. Is this some kind of easter egg? ~ ash2424@live.co.uk

Do you have InstantCommons enabled? If yes, all images on Wikimedia Commons are accessible from your site. --Mormegil (talk) 15:44, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Featured image caption

"mac" should be capitalized. InverseHypercube 04:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

You mean featured video? In fact the technical stuff could be removed altogether ("created on a mac, and compressed with ffmpeg2theora.")... Don't you think? --Saibo (Δ) 04:18, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Spinning_Dancer.gif

Is there one of a naked guy too? I can think of lots of fun uses for it. Carolmooredc (talk) 16:53, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

View Wikimedia Commons in British English

I'm shocked and surprised to see at the head of the page there is a banner saying "View Wikimedia Commons in British English" and in the drop down menu on the left I am invited to read in "British English", or "English". This choice should read "British English" or "American English". American English is NOT the default version of English. No one version should have precedence. In fact, I could argue that if any one version were to be called "English" plain and simple (which I'm not, because as I said, no one version should have precedence) then I'd say that British English should be the version referred to as "English" and American English as "American English". The language developed in England, after all: we've been speaking it for centuries longer than the Americans. This is an important matter as Wikimedia is opening itself to accusations of extreme bias and US-centrism by putting this choice up. 86.143.69.229 16:27, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

It's not that simple. Commons' main "English" is, much like English Wikipedia's "English", a mix of all variants of English; it is ISO code "en", not "American English" (ISO code "en-us"). Quite why we even have the "British English" option (ISO code "en-gb") I don't know; it may be more trouble than it's worth. Rd232 (talk) 18:23, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I expected "categorizing" and "license" to be spelled differently on the BrE version of the page, but they're the same. What are the differences, exactly? If there aren't any differences, what's the point of offering the page(s) in BrE? 82.36.129.101 03:15, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

It's not for content on pages but for system messages and template messages (if they are available in that language). For British English it looks like we only have 4 system messages and several templates directly for en-gb and on the English Wikipedia we have 10 messages in en-gb. Killiondude (talk) 21:45, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Translation of POTD / MOTD description from localized Main Page.

For helpful translation of POTD description from localized Main Page will be make some small changes:

1. Add preload parameter into {{Edit}} - see Template talk:Edit#preload parameter
2. Improve {{Main Page/potd}} with adding preload param to first two {{Edit}} call (for "lang" and "fallback_lang");
   • as example, instead

     {{edit|Template:Potd/{{LOCALYEAR}}-{{LOCALMONTH}}-{{LOCALDAY2}} ({{{lang|en}}})}}

     should be

     {{edit|Template:Potd/{{LOCALYEAR}}-{{LOCALMONTH}}-{{LOCALDAY2}} ({{{lang|en}}})|preload=Template:Potd/{{LOCALYEAR}}-{{LOCALMONTH}}-{{LOCALDAY2}} (en)}}

3. Improve {{Main Page/motd}} in the same way

--Kaganer (talk) 23:24, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

How do you creat a collage picture?

I wanted to ask if anyone knows how to make a collage picture for a city? What website do you use because I want to make one by myself for my own city please! Reply as soon as possible! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.7.87.164 (talk • contribs) 2012-01-22T10:50:45‎ (UTC)

Hi! Please ask your question at COM:Help desk (see the intro of this page). Please delete this section when you have read it. --Saibo (Δ) 19:30, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Orion Nebula pic caption

The caption of today's image (File:Different Slant on Orion (495636660).jpg) needs to be improved. The term "Spitzer image" assumes you actually know there's a telescope by that name (rather than, say, a method of photography) and "a little different" doesn't contain any meaningful information. Could someone with a basic knowledge of astronomy write up something better?

Peter ^Isotalo 02:13, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and by the way: how many people would recognize what "HST" stood for? I bet far fewer than "Hubble telescope" or even just "Hubble". This is certainly not the first time I see some really substandard captions go live on the mainpage.

Peter ^Isotalo 02:15, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your hints … I've added links for HST and Spitzer now. --:bdk: 03:36, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Nice big pic

Congratulations to whoever is behind the upsizing of the main pic. I don't come here often, but if today is representative, finally we're using the main page of Commons to do justice to this part of the Foundation's endeavours. Tony1 (talk) 12:38, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

PS, but not so good on "the National Archives and Records Administration" ... that's the American National Archives and Records Administration, is it? Is the US the default country at Commons? Not good the narrow the brand and potentially alienate folks. Tony1 (talk) 12:41, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done --99of9 (talk) 05:12, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Category changes

I just noticed that on the right hand side we have a section

By author

• Architects, currently Category:Architects should be Category:Buildings by architect
• Composers, currently Category:Composers should be Category:Compositions by composer
• Painters, currently Category:Painters should be Category:Paintings by painter
• Photographers, currently Category:Photographers should be Category:Photographs by author
• Sculptors, currently Category:Sculptors should be Category:Sculptures by sculptor

Are you all happy to make this change? --99of9 (talk) 05:39, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

"Yes, we are". ;) --  Docu  at 05:42, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done now that Docu has checked me. Admins, feel free to revert and discuss if you disagree. --99of9 (talk) 06:17, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Octocopter (alt. Multirotor) flight not Octokopter fly - please change asap

Could somebody (with admin or similar authority) who can change the main Commons page please change the explanation of the media of the day picture (from today feb 1) to either Octocopter flight or alternativly Multirotor flight Octokopter fly is badly translated german. I cannot change this myself i believe. Greetings from Sweden --RBinSE (talk) 09:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

 Done. Yann (talk) 09:31, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Yann for the first part (Octocopter) The other word I considered wrong in this context was fly - I believe it is not correct English wording. I would call it Octocopter flight not Octocopter fly. But somebody with English mothertongue should please judge that. thank you--RBinSE (talk) 11:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

No admin reading this? fly can't be correct...?--RBinSE (talk) 19:40, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, just read it now. You are very welcome to check translations (and add new ones) at Commons:Media_of_the_day (or one of the localized versions) before the Video goes live on the main page. For urgent admin help you could ask at COM:AN in the future. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 02:15, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Pic of day (Saturn)

The caption is Saturn's Rings in Ultraviolet Light. But why? This is not a picture of just the rings, the planet is quite well seen there. And this differs from the most pictures in Category:Saturn_(Rings) by having the whole planet also in the pic. There are about ten others like that in that category, don't know why. 82.141.94.42 01:41, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

"Lapp" caption; not appropriate

The caption of the picture of the day says "A Sami (Lapp) family in Norway around 1900." "Lapp" is at best considered dated and at worst derogatory. It's basically the equivalent of calling a Roma a Gypsy, ei rather inappropriate and unnecessary. Please change this at once.

Peter ^Isotalo 10:45, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Web accessibility

{{Editprotected}} For web accessibility, change [[File:MP images.png|24px|link=Category:Pictures and images]] to [[File:MP images.png|24px|link=Category:Pictures and images|alt=]] Add "|alt=" for [[File:MP sounds.png|24px|link=Category:Sound]] and [[File:MP videos.png|24px|link=Category:Videos]] and [[File:NARA Logo created 2010.svg|100px|left|link=Commons:National Archives and Records Administration]]

Thanks. --EmmanuelFrance (talk) 20:31, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Done. Which images should get a alt text? Anything that is not just for visual identification / logo-style images? Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 20:53, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Racism

There are a lot of anti-Semitic picturs here, pls do something with this--Haya831 (talk) 19:51, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

You should be ashamed putting the photo of the Tannery in Marrakech up in your "Tanning" wiki. It is thought in this part of the world that to have your photograph taken diminishes your soul. It is evident that the boy on the left is trying to hide his face and yet you still put this up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.168.155 (talk • contribs) 2012-01-12T10:55:05‎ (UTC)

It is thought in some parts of the world that women should not expose even their ankles. Should we refrain from uploading any images of a woman's body apart from her eyes? Many people think many things. I understand cultural sensitivity, but if the boy's soul has been stolen by the photo, the deed has been done and uploading it to Commons won't make a difference. Lukys (talk) 22:34, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

It is of course unethical to upload pictures of living subjects who are not public figures and who have not given permission, or who are clearly opposed to having their pictures taken.Maunus (talk) 02:37, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Is it against the law in the country in question? If not, I don't believe it breaks any rules on Commons, depending on your interpretation of "demean" and "ridicule". Lukys (talk) 00:40, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Whats legal and what's ethical are two very different things. I personally have the first as the ideal as the second as the minimal standard.Maunus (talk) 17:29, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

No media of the day today

Where is today's media? --Meno25 (talk) 15:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

• [8]--Ymblanter (talk) 15:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Просьба удалить файлы

Прошу администраторов по желанию автора удалить все мои файлы. Я был заморожен, а теперь обошёл заморозку и прошу удалить все мои и участника:Unknown russian composer (тоже виртуала с моего адреса) Adagio molto II (talk) 17:52, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Lyrics

Dear Wikimedia Personnel,

I propose that we use this wiki has a sister project for searching lyrics of songs, with the words and phrases being lead to their Wikitionary pages. That way it is easier to understand whether or not songs are appropriate, because the songs might have inappropriate lyrics some parents would not understand. I suggest the name to be Wikirics.

Sincerely,

Largerthanlife147 (talk) 16:22, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Bypass redirect

{{editprotected}} The link to Category:Pictures and images at the top of the Main Page (link-text: Images, shown alongside Sounds and Videos) now leads to a category-redirect page, since the target category has been moved (after this discussion) to Category:Images. This is not a very attractive thing for a new user to come across right off the Main Page. An admin needs to change the link to point directly to Category:Images. Same for the other protected pages that link there (not all the pages in this list are protected, but I'm not going to make any changes to the unprotected pages until an admin acknowledges the necessity of the change by editing the protected pages). TIA. - dcljr (talk) 10:18, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

 Done --Jarekt (talk) 19:38, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

{{editprotected}}

Oops... There's another link to Category:Pictures and images under "By type" in the "Content" section. This, too, should point to Category:Images. - dcljr (talk) 22:51, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

 Done —David Levy 07:18, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, I've changed all the editable Main Pages (and a few other relevant pages) that link to Category:Pictures and images. The rest need to be edited by an admin. In particular, I found the Main Pages Hauptseite and Pagina principale; the system messages MediaWiki:Searchresulttext, MediaWiki:Searchresulttext/fr, MediaWiki:Searchresulttext/bg, and MediaWiki:Searchresulttext/ko; and the subpages Main Page/std, Main Page/std2, Main Page/pano, and Main Page/pano2 [which don't appear to be used anywhere "important", but might need changing just "for consistency"]. (Not using the {editprotected} template yet again because I'm assuming someone will read this soon and want to act on it without the blaring warning...) - dcljr (talk) 10:00, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

{{editprotected}}

 Done (I hope.) --Mormegil (talk) 16:21, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it looks like we're done here... Thanks, everyone. - dcljr (talk) 21:58, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit request?

{{editprotected}} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guest Kashapov (talk • contribs) 13:10, 27 March 2012‎ (UTC)

You need to explain what edits are needed. - dcljr (talk) 21:58, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

POTD caption

{{Editprotected}} A minor point, but the caption of today's POTD in some languages says the date the wedding happened (19 June 2010), and in others doesn't. The English description is locked by cascading protection, so an admin needs to change this one: Template:Potd/2012-03-27 (en). I've changed the others myself (why aren't they also protected?), but since I don't know the respective languages, I've just tacked "2010-06-19" onto the end of each; if anyone can do better, please do: es, ja, hu, ka, nl, eo, ko, and pt. - dcljr (talk) 22:24, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Nevermind. It's off the Main Page now. - dcljr (talk) 03:32, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Upload time

I've been uploading a 120 MB TIFF for the past 24 hours. How long should it take to upload a file to Wikimedia Commons with high speed DSL? I need to know if I've made a mistake or something. 184.36.92.83 23:55, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I noticed you posted this on Commons talk:FAQ, too. I've moved it to COM:HD#Upload time. In the future, the best places for these types of questions are COM:VP or COM:HD. Have a great day and hope your question is answers soon! Killiondude (talk) 00:36, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you kindly. 184.36.92.83 03:30, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Pic of the day

The caption is rather weird. I still don't get the context, and I doubt whether most other people will. Any mention of Hitler can offend, so best to be cautious. Tony1 (talk) 10:02, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

 Done thanks. --99of9 (talk) 11:49, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

there is a problem in upload picture ? we want to take care ?--Dileman (talk) 14:54, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

How to add photos?

Can somebody tell me how to upload photos please? Thanks! GARNERshiqian (talk) 07:23, 13 May 2012 (UTC)GARNERshiqian

Hello. Just click on "Upload file" and follow the instructions. It is very easy these days! LynwoodF (talk) 08:27, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

May I ask

Is there a list of ALL pictures by name (ABC) so I can choose one regardless to its category? sometimes i don't know what is the category. I am looking for a picture of a well known Angel in the Jewish tradition, named Metatron, but I don't know how to search it. thanks! SegevAfriat (talk) 09:39, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

See https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AAllPages&from=&to=&namespace=6 Ruslik (talk) 10:40, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

You might want to use Special:Search. Jean-Fred (talk) 11:05, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Blue background?

Why has the background gone blue? It's really hard to see Tetrisforaliens (talk) 20:30, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm assuming you're using Chrome? Anyone using Chrome (and the vector skin) that has (accidentally or purposefully) the zoom set at a different level than 100% will experience this bug: http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=113711. Just reset the zoom to 100% and it will "fix" it (fix is relative, here). Killiondude (talk) 22:21, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

POTD caption

Hello,

Could someone change "brazilian">"Brazilian"? Thanks. InverseHypercube 01:37, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. Needs adressing, pronto. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 04:12, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Just came to ask about the same thing myself. Seraphimblade (talk) 04:25, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done --99of9 (talk) 05:06, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

{{editprotected}}

Could somebody please get rid of the awful term "native"? We wouldn't use it for an inhabitant of a village in a Western country. "Resident" or something similar would be more appropriate. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:40, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. InverseHypercube 17:52, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Feel free to fix it at Template:Potd/2012-05-21 (en). --Mormegil (talk) 15:00, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Main Page spam

Is this on the main page for any reason other than being a soapbox for the petition? It's not even a featured image.  An optimist on the run! 11:43, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

It is there because someone nominated it for Commons:Media of the day and nobody who reviews those objected within the review period. If you want to improve the selection of Media of the day process, please get involved instead of criticizing choices of other volunteers. --Jarekt (talk) 13:40, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

As far as I can see, there isn't a formal nomination process - people just add what they like to an empty slot and hope for the best. It's not reasonable to assume users will have all these potential slots in their watchlists so they can raise possible objections. Note that it wasn't the media itself I was objecting to, but the external spam links in the accompanying blurb, which I see was later removed.  An optimist on the run! 06:35, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

I agree that this might not have been best use of out Main Page, but the only way to prevent that is to keep track of Commons:Media of the day and Commons:Picture of the day before they are on the main page. --Jarekt (talk) 14:33, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

POTD caption

Hello,

Can the POTD caption be changed from "The american golfplayer Morgan Pressel, 2009." to "The American golf player Morgan Pressel, 2009"? "American" is always capitalized, and I've never seen the word "golfplayer" being capitalized.

Thank you. InverseHypercube 00:55, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

 Done. --rimshot^talk 06:21, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Nigerian internet

[Advertisement/article removed by Philosopher]

Thank you for sharing about the Nigerian internet. However, this page is for talking about the Main Page, not for draft Wikipedia articles or for advertisements. If you are trying to start a Wikipedia article, you can see My First Article, but please remember that advertising is not allowed there either. --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 22:33, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Pictures from Google Earth

I want to use a picture of a hill from 'Google Earth' on a Page 'Dhosi Hill' Will it involve any patent rights. Sudhirkbhargava

Hi Sudhirkbhargava,

First we are not much concerned with patents, but with copyright, which is a different law.

And yes, all images created from Google Earth get a derivative copyright, and are therefore not allowed on Commons. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:37, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I just found from your instruction page that maps fall under Data, and facts and geographic or topographic features of a map, and facts do not fall under copy right as they fall under public domain. I have to use only one photograph of a hill, Could I post it, otherwise what is the alternative? should I prepare a drawing of the hill and post it on the page. Sudhirkbhargava

Nope, data or features is coordinates and distances and such things. A satellite or aerial photo is a photo. You cant make screenshots and sublicense them under free licenses, see http://www.google.com/intl/en/help/terms_maps.html (2a, 2b). --Martin H. (talk) 17:56, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Redlink on Main Page

{{editprotected}} In the right column under "Content", there is a redlink created by a recent category move. That link should point to Category:Photographs by photographer now. jcgoble3 (talk) 15:29, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

 Done -- Common Good (talk) 18:03, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

email

How do I notify wikimedia of my change of email address..? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Photopanda (talk • contribs)

You can go to your preferences (click "My preferences" in the upper-right of your screen) or go to Special:ChangeEmail. Also, please sign your comments with ~~~~ so we know who commented. Happy editing! --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 10:50, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Picture of the day wiki link

Howdy all. This just a suggestion, but someone might want to change the wiki link to Kabocha to display the word "Japanese" instead. Some people find the current term being used offensive. I'm not saying I am one of them, but I'm just offering a suggestion.--Rockfang (talk) 03:54, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Fixed - that's definitely a pejorative term, and it should not have been there in the first place. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 04:18, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

I have also notified Dodo of my action. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 04:22, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Dear Logan, I am the one who first wrote that file description. I'm sorry that you find that term perjorative, that was not my intent. In fact, in Australian parlance this is simply the more common name for that species of pumpkin: [9] [10]. This is also how it is sold in shops and on the seed packets. (But it is not used for people.) Nevertheless, I have no objection to your change of the description. --99of9 (talk) 01:12, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Ah, okay. I was unaware of that. Thanks for letting me know! Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 07:22, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

POTD 10 July

I am not sure what is going on and why I can not edit Template:Potd/2012-07-10 (en), but please replace this machine translation with "Southern view of the Laufener Hütte, Salzburg, Austria". Thanks in advance.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:22, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Done, please check. --99of9 (talk) 12:18, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Great, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:50, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Fly video July 9th

The fly video caption says "Europa" instead of the correct English "Europe". In English, Europa is a moon of Jupiter! best, Sunil060902 (talk) 17:09, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

fixed, thanks. Rd232 (talk) 17:16, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Media of the day, July 17

"Media of the day" today is missing a caption. —Bruce1ee^talk 05:21, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

In what language? {{Potd/2012-07-17}} is where the current language captions are located. Killiondude (talk) 06:41, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

The Media of the day Template:Motd/2012-07-17 has no English caption template. —Bruce1ee^talk 06:54, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I quickly created something. --Mormegil (talk) 07:09, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. —Bruce1ee^talk 07:18, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

POTD caption August 4 2012

The caption says, "Today is the one-hundred-eleventh birthday by Louis Armstrong". Shouldn't it say, "Today is the one hundred and eleventh birthday of Louis Armstrong"?--Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 05:41, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

That would be better English! LynwoodF (talk) 09:21, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done This was done at the time, but I forgot to thank you for the report. --99of9 (talk) 00:09, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

POD caption for August 11

Hi,

Shouldn't the capitalization be consistent in the sentence: "The image is a beautiful shot of godavari bridge on the left and Godavari Arch Bridge on the right."?

Thus should it be changed to:

"The image is a beautiful shot of Godavari Bridge on the left and Godavari Arch Bridge on the right."? MathewTownsend (talk) 15:53, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Template:Potd/2012-08-11

Can some administrator change the photo? (and its description) The picture isn't featured. It was already changed, but then reverted. Tomer T (talk) 16:23, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry we missed the above two messages on the correct day. Pierre has reverted and I have now protected... but it's too late. --99of9 (talk) 00:08, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

POTD 2012-8-16

The caption makes no sense - the 'possible' and 'a' are the wrong way round! Mdann52 (talk) 06:34, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Another option would be to change "possible" to "possibly".--Rockfang (talk) 06:36, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done thanks. --99of9 (talk) 07:19, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

POTD caption, Aug 25

Hi there, the terms used for the German states are sometimes a bit imprecise, hence I'd like to suggest some minor corrections:

Wall map of Southwestern Germany, which includes the Kingdom of Bavaria, Kingdom of Württemberg, the Grand Duchies of Baden and Hessen, the Principality of Hohenzollern, and the Imperial territory of Alsace-Lorraine, 1875. Restored by Dr Heinrich Moehl. Best, --SEM (talk) 16:55, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Also shouldn't 2006 because of his security be 2006 for his security ? Mlpearc Public (Talk) 03:21, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for responding too late, but I was translating it in a hurry since I just at some point discovered that there is no English caption. Feel free to amend. Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:05, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Date format

I suggest 'on 26 August 1979' is better 'in 26 Aug 1979'. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:40, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments

Hi everyone, "Contribution by the Walters Art Museum" has been on the front page for quite some time. I would like to replace it with some information about Wiki Loves Monuments and a link to Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments upload in September so it's easy for new users (and existing ones) to find it. BTW Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments upload will be updated ASAP. Multichill (talk) 12:19, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Multichill, thanks for the idea! I went ahead and added the information on Wiki Loves Monuments. odder (talk) 22:31, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Too many butterflies keep coming up as the picture of the day, as pretty as they are a little more variation would be appreciated

Uploading a photo - full rights of use

Hello There,

I would like to upload a photo on to the Wikimedia Commons. I have full rights to use this photo but I am not the author. Would someone be able to tell me how I should go about uploading this? Also, Is there any other uploading options than the creative commons licences? Would I be able to lock a photo so it can only be used on one page? If you could please provide me with any information you have on this subject, that would be great!

Thank you.

Samanthajayne77 (talk) 21:48, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

• You have to upload the photo under the Creative Commons license and can not lock it. If this is essential, you should go to Wikipedia and upload it as fair use. Concerning the authorship, Commons:OTRS contains the necessary instructions.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:29, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 - Upload time is over

I am not suggesting to take down the information about the contest. But interests have changed. We shouldn't encourage any more uploads as part of the contest (uploads outside of the contest are of course still welcome). But many uploaders are now keen to find out how their images are appreciated. So now links to the overall contest and the national contests and the GLAM-contest are necessary, so uploaders can find out what is happening from here. --Wuselig (talk) 11:44, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Announcement has now been removed (so as not to confuse people). If an appropriate replacement text is written I can add that instead. /Lokal_Profil 01:32, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

POTD caption October 19 2012

The correct English spelling is "Baroque" rather than "Barroque". Ntsimp (talk) 19:25, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

It may be useful to note that the inscription is a quote of (Book of) Proverbs 9:1. --Concord (talk) 15:21, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Insects corpulating winning POTD again?

Ebaychatter0 (talk) 13:38, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

29 October

Spelling mistake "Fortress of the Îlette of Kermovan, Britanny (France)" (Brittany is correct).--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 12:06, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Add 15 millionth to main page

{{Editrequest}} Commons has reached the milestone of 15 million files and it would be nice to mention this where we put POTY and Wiki Loves Monuments. The 15 millionth file is at Commons:Village_pump#15M_milestone. Cheers, theMONO 01:11, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

•  Done in this edit, thanks for helping! odder (talk) 09:58, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Today's image

Could an adminstrator please add the Category "1963 in Germany". It is protected. Thanks in advance --Jerchel (talk) 18:24, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

popularity contest

This has become a popularity contest. It's not about good images, not even about images at all. This page, as far as i'm concerned has lost all credibility. Kleuske (talk) 14:06, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

• What are you talking about?--Ymblanter (talk) 16:27, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

POTY announcement

{{Editrequest}}Please add Commons:Picture of the Year/2012/Translations/Homepage to the main page in place of the 15 million files announcement. Mono (POTY Committee) at 19:46, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Done by Beria. -- Rillke^(q?) 12:59, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Needed image

Hi! Can anyone upload a picture of actress Sarah Peachez? I am making an article on her and I need a picture asap! Thanks a lot!

This page is to discuss improvements to the main page itself, and its content. Please see the help desk for further information. TBrandley ^{(what's up)} 01:35, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

POTY picture as picture of the day

Is it really fair to have one of the current POTY finalists given extra prominence as today's main page picture? Or will they all have their turn before voting finishes?  An optimist on the run! 07:49, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Quite unfair. There are only 6 days left now for voting. All images cant be displayed in 6 days. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:47, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

I've just noticed this. Indeed, I think this is inappropriate. Although I like the picture very much and have voted for it as POTY in Round 1 myself, I think it should now be disqualified from the contest. It's too late to change the picture of the day now, I think... Gestumblindi (talk) 20:43, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

• We do not plan on disqualifying this image from Round 2 of the competition. There was no indication that this image was in the POTY contest and voting is not possible from the image's description page. Many POTY voters may have never seen the main page, but it is impossible to gauge the impact it had if any and it would be unfair to disqualify a fairly-chosen image that received popular support. All the POTY images were presented in random order as well. We regret that this occurred and will make sure to address any problems with the POTD organizers in the future. Mono 00:29, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

POTY announcement

{{Editrequest}} Please update it to include results.--Praveen:talk 06:47, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I've created a new version with the results at User:Mono/Sandbox. Could an admin please replace it with that? Mono 16:30, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

 Done. odder (talk) 00:41, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Red link.

Someone should remove that red link to that journals page. Red links on the main page do 4 things. They bug people. They bug me. They confuse people who are not familiar with red links. They make us look bad. Scientific Alan 2 (talk) 01:12, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

 Done, replaced with Category:Media from scholarly journals and recreated Category:Images from journals as a category redirect, so that all language versions of the Main Page have a blue link there. --Mormegil (talk) 18:57, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

POTD caption: redundant period

{{Editrequested}} Hi, can someone please remove the period from the POTD caption? It is redundant (see en:Wikipedia:Captions). Thanks. --Eleassar ^(t/p) 11:29, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Done, thanks for helping! odder (talk) 20:45, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Featured Media

I have a media which i think would be interesting, but where should i nominate it?--Earth100 (talk) 01:02, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Urgent: Italicisation

"Vespa crabro", like all such binominal species names, should be italicised. Andy Mabbett (talk) 11:50, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

 Done by ~Pyb Penyulap ☏ 12:34, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Picture caption

{{editrequest}} Would someone perhaps alter "showes" to "shows" in the caption of today's picture? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:00, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

• Also, "Wood engraving" should be "wood engraving", with a small "w". §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 16:17, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

 Done, thanks for reporting this! —Mono 19:42, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

The period is redundant, because it is not a complete sentence (see en:WP:CAPTION). --Eleassar ^(t/p) 09:43, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

POTD Incorrect spelling/wrong tense

{{Edit request}} Become should be became.--Rockfang (talk) 01:28, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done! Killiondude (talk) 05:27, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

The new "From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository" header

I really like the new "From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository" header that Commons has just implemented, and I think it is certainly useful on gallery pages and categories. However, it doesn't look so wonderful just floating loose at the top of Main Page. I know that the English Wikipedia is able to suppress its own similar header ("From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia") on its main page, so there must be a way to do it. Anyway, I think the Commons Main Page would look much cleaner (and better) without it. Thanks for your time and take care! Michael Barera (talk) 22:23, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

POTD 30 April 2013 caption

The caption should read "Triumphal arch" instead of "Triumpharch". JoJan (talk) 15:38, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done by user:Mono 11:45, 30 April 2013

POTD 16 May 2013

The picture is upside down! Kiltpin (talk) 17:21, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi. It looks fine here. Perhaps someone fixed it since you posted? Killiondude (talk) 18:25, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, Killiondude, those flames are upside down. Rotate your monitor, you will see what I mean. Kiltpin (talk) 22:49, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Talk page protection

Hi. I'm not sure I like the idea of permanently protecting this talk page from IP edits. Perhaps we can just write abuse filters for whatever type of vandalism was happening before? Killiondude (talk) 18:26, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Mono, for unprotecting it. Killiondude (talk)

Delete request

Please, could someone delete this pic File:Camila_Giorgi_2008.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)? It's the same image of File:Camila_Giorgi.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log) and was loaded because wizard has not marked it as a duplicate. Thank you. --Mirandolese (talk) 06:55, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done by user:Túrelio 16:27, 22 May 2013

POTD 29 May 2013

Hi. Today's picture of the day caption is incorrect: it says "potrait", shouldn't it be "portrait"? Lester Foster (talk) 20:18, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done Yes. I've fixed it. Killiondude (talk) 21:33, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

POTD 01 June 2013

And today's (1 June) has no English caption. I've noted the issue on the English caption's talk page, but I could not edit the page myself, as I do not have the access to do so while the page is protected. --EncycloPetey (talk) 06:10, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Right. In the edit notice for this page and at the top of this talk page it says: * To request an edit to be made to the caption of the Picture of the Day, make your request here by using {{edit request|request here}}.. Edit requests are looked at more often than this talk page, unfortunately. I've fixed the template for today. If you want to double your chances you can post here and use an edit request template. Killiondude (talk) 07:12, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

POTD January 16 2013 caption

This church is called "Igreja de Santo Ildefonso" in portuguese. Please note that it is "Santo" and not "San" ("San" is a spanish word and not a portuguese one). So, the proper caption should either read "Igreja de Santo Ildefonso" (pt:Igreja de Santo Ildefonso) or "Church of Saint Ildefonso" (w:Church of Saint Ildefonso), and not "San Ildefonso church". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adriao (talk • contribs) 10:00, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done Evrik (talk) 03:35, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

POTD 6 April 2013 caption

Could someone please fix the formatting of the scientific name? Macroglossum stellatarum should be italicized, like all scientific binomials. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 20:22, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done Evrik (talk) 03:40, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

New header

Hi, in an ongoing effort to modernize the main page, I'd like to update the header to match [11]. I'd like to hear your thoughts; if no one objects I will implement it. —Mono 21:10, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I like it! Though it does jar with the rest of the page in the latter's current form, however. Ideally, the whole page could be redesigned to be more modern. I know a change of that nature might cause a big stir, but do you think you could do a mockup? I enjoy your work. Killiondude (talk) 22:00, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I think the best way to go about modernizing the page is bit-by-bit, so eventually everything looks better but it isn't painful. I built this prototype a few months back based on Pretzel's ENWP design; perhaps that is what you are thinking. —Mono 22:29, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I like it!--Steinsplitter (talk) 22:56, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Next change

[12] - thoughts? —Mono 00:56, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately this doesn't display too good on mobile devices. Would be great if the right column had a breaking point or uses a different approach on responsive design. I used h2 tags for the German GLAM page to improve the mobile experience. Regards, Christoph Braun (talk) 11:41, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I filed a bug to enable the MobileFrontend interface, which will solve this problem. The WMF is being slow about it (it's only Commons...) but it will come eventually. —Mono 15:35, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Do you have a link? Regards, Christoph Braun (talk) 16:32, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

[13], see [14] as well. —Mono 21:59, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

The current orange colour is quite striking and resembels very much to the one used in the "You have a talk page message"

Can it be toned down a bit?

§§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 15:11, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Agree—Kelvinsong (talk) 19:29, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Striking is good. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:13, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

At times. But its reflex and i think i have a message on my talk page. Use floroscent green for striking. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 18:42, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

THIS! please, I can't even change it with my personal CSS because the color is coded in-line. --Vera (talk) 22:22, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

I see that since then personal CSS changes do affect the color.--Vera (talk) 20:18, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Yellow is poor choice of color for two reasons: (1) the aforementioned problem of making users think they have a new message (I thought this too), and (2) the Main Page is now colored in yellow and blue, which are a color pair that should not be used since yellow-blue color blindness is an issue. While less common than red-green color blindness, it is common enough to be one of the two best known forms of the condition. --EncycloPetey (talk) 06:15, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

It's always been a shade of yellow. Not to discount your reasoning, but I just want to point out that it's not really Mono's fault that it uses this combo. Killiondude (talk) 07:14, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

• For the record, I like the colors regardless of the fact that it looks like the new message bar. However, if color-blindness is an issue then maybe it could be changed. Killiondude (talk) 07:14, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Today in images

What happened to "Today in images"? I see it got dropped last week. Did I miss a discussion? Evrik (talk) 14:11, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

yes. see above--Steinsplitter (talk) 14:25, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Nowhere do I see a discussion about dropping this section. I think it should be added back in. Evrik (talk) 16:32, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

• It was supposed to go on the right side to balance out the page, I probably forgot about it. However, we should evaluate if it is sufficiently used and updated to warrant placement on the main page. —Mono 16:35, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
• Thanks for putting it back! Can you format it at all? Evrik (talk) 15:03, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

POTD 24 June 2013

"Altipiano" to "Altiplano" please. Shyamal (talk) 10:27, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

 Done odder (talk) 10:42, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Suggestion to add "Earth sciences‎" to Content box

In the "Content" box on the right half of the page, there is a list of sciences. At the moment, the category "Earth sciences" is not included in this list of sciences. I suggest that "Earth sciences" should be added to the list by placing it between Chemistry and Mathematics in the "Content/By topic/Science" part of the page. Please would administrators give consideration to doing this as soon as possible. GeoWriter (talk) 19:04, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done —Mono 01:13, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Mono. GeoWriter (talk) 13:40, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

POTD#22

Image is great by why caption is in sv not eng ? Link is to sv page which has no eng version. Goggle translator fails to translate it . --Adam majewski (talk) 17:16, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Loving the Commons App

Thank you to those working on it, keep up the good work.  :) --SJ+ 22:51, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome :) Yuvipanda (talk) 18:43, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

I suggest rephrasing the misleading text for the Commons App on the main page to reflect copyleft. By uploading, users aren't donating their work to the Wikimedia initiative (which doesn't own any copyrights), but releasing it for free use. So, something like "Donate your photos for free use wherever you go:". — Yerpo ^Eh? 09:53, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

POTD 4 Aug 2013

I suppose its quite late now, but in future i think we should translate the non-English text of posters and write it in caption. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 19:07, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Link to category Plants

The "Content by topic" now links to Category:Plantae. This is a lower, exclusively taxonomic category of Category:Plants, which comprises more content on all aspects of plants. So I suggest to alter the link to Category Plants. --Thiotrix (talk) 09:17, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Redesign

(For reference, as I am getting tired of digging through the VP archives each time I want to find it :-).

Back then in April, User:Mono started a discussion about restyling the Main page − see Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2013/04#Restyling_the_main_page.

The mocks-up made:

• User:Mono/Sandbox/en
• User:Kelvinsong/Sandbox/en

Jean-Fred (talk) 12:37, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Jean-Fred for the link, I missed that discussion, both mocks-up looks quite nice. --PierreSelim (talk) 12:44, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I like Mono's version better for 2 main reasons. Firstly, it has less whitespace overall and secondly it seems more aesthetically appealing (seems less cluttered and more cohesive than the other). Thanks for posting. Killiondude (talk) 06:28, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

We could phase it in; I remember the issue was with POTDs in portrait orientation. Anyone have fixes? —Mono 17:15, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Poor processes

There needs to be a rethink about the mechanism for logging main page errors. It's absurd to have such obvious typos on the main page for hours. DrKiernan (talk) 19:17, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

“Updates”, Twitter, RSS

Copying my opinion from Template talk:Main Page Template

Why was RSS removed and replaced by a link to Twitter? While I consider heated discussions about social sharing buttons to be sometimes funny, adding only Twitter (why not Facebook? also, a feature used by ~1 person a day isn’t really necessary, is it), while also removing technology-neutral RSS feed seems quite wrong to me. --Mormegil (talk) 20:36, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

TLDR: Adding RSS back is OK, there are reasons why it was replaced.

I don't have statistics for RSS like Twitter stats, but AFAIK many people have stopped using RSS for sharing things. Wikimedia Commons has an active Twitter account; there's not an equivalent of that on FB and FB is more challenging to manage. (also people prefer to 'like' links on Facebook rather than spamming all their friends by 'sharing' a link - it's a subtle difference, but we can't add a like button because of privacy/copyright concerns - same reason why there's no actual tweet button there). Back to RSS, it doesn't work in most browsers (Chrome, IE, Opera, Safari?) which leaves Firefox and it just seems more logical to have a tweet & email subscribe button there. We could always add a 'More options' link or stick RSS there as well - I don't really have a preference. —Mono 21:09, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Why doesn't the link to Wikipedia work, when all the other links to projects do?

On the main page, I can click on Wikisources, Wikinews etc. but not Wikipedia. So I have to go th another project to get the link. This only recently started occurring. Thanks, Soranoch (talk) 18:38, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

I just click on a language on the left. LynwoodF (talk) 21:41, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

The sisterprojects template at the bottom of the main page somehow lost the Wikipedia link, should be back now. Although interwiki links are present on the left side I see no reason to remove it from the template. --Denniss (talk) 22:32, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks so much! I've never noticed the links on the left side, probably because I have the scroll over on my computer screen. But I'm glad to learn of that option. Soranoch (talk) 14:59, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Can't reach to my watchlist

Hi. What might cause this: Today, when I am logged in Commons and on the main page, I click upper right corner on my "watchlist". It takes me to [15] Wikimedia Foundation watchlist. R, -Htm (talk) 02:34, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

This problem with IE10. Everything works fine with Chrome. -Htm (talk) 04:49, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Try clearing the Browser cache, there was a server/software problem yesterday and your cache may still hold some invalid data. --Denniss (talk) 04:57, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, it helped! -R.,-Htm (talk) 18:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism on potd

"Poous Caeser (Copsychus malabaricus) male, Khao Yai National Park, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand." - there is no such thing as Poous Caeser - it should read White-rumped Shama, please see the vandalism on the photo history. Shyamal (talk) 13:14, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

What happend with Media of the Day?

Why has the MotD been "blocked" for this day? The this edit [16] by Mono.
Doesn't make any sense, thats nonsense.
--#Reaper (talk) 13:32, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

There was no MOTD for today when I looked yesterday - it must have since been added. I'm pretty sure this has been done before not to draw attention to the lack of a MOTD. —Mono 17:04, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be a good idea to put some of the "welcome" text on the main page?

First time visitors, who have never heard of Wikimedia Commons, I imagine, go to the main page through Google and get no idea of what the purpose of this site/project are. The Welcome page, as far as I can tell, is at least two clicks away (through the main page "Discussion", which most non-wikimedians would probably never think to click). I'd like to suggest that, at least, the "What is Wikimedia Commons?" text be added (maybe transcluded from a common page) to the main page. Klortho (talk) 18:09, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

The very first text on the Main Page is "Wikimedia Commons a database of 20,311,121 freely usable media files to which anyone can contribute.", which also directly links to the welcome page. I think this is pretty good already. --rimshot^talk 18:23, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Reporting main page errors besides just Potd -- How?

The big yellow box that appears when I try to edit this discussion page says, "If you want to report a problem with the main page, click here to file a report." That link leads to an edit request specifically for the Picture of the day, not the main page. I was trying to report an error in the Media of the day, not the Potd, but there doesn't seem to be a way to do so...

How come the method of reporting errors is different from Wikipedia? I understand it doesn't have to follow the same method. I'm sorry for doing this wrong somehow, because I'm not sure what to do. Sorry for my new-user ignorance @_@;;;

I guess I can ask at the Help Desk, but I thought I should mention it here instead as a kind of general request/suggestion to clarify things for reporting errors on main page stuff. Sorry, thanks, and have a great day~:) ZeniffMartineau (talk) 01:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

This looks like a mistake to me. The text in the blue box at the top of this page is actually correct: the place to discuss the Main Page is exactly here. If you see something that you think should be corrected, you can use {{Editprotected}} to alert an admin. As for Media of the Day, the list is at COM:MOTD. The captions are linked (click the language tag), and have discussion pages where you can bring up mistakes. You can also just post the problem here. --rimshot^talk 18:16, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree the blue box is correct, but I mean the yellow box which only appears on the "Editing Talk:Main Page" page after clicking on Edit on this page. Only that yellow box seems to have confusing wording. About the MOTD, thank you very much for how and where to ask about editing it~:) I'm sorry for my confusion as a new user over how and where to do things~:( I'm also much more cautious since it's the main page. ZeniffMartineau (talk) 04:22, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

No problem, actually that's what I meant with: "This looks like a mistake to me.": either the link or the text is wrong. I have found out how to edit it and changed the text for the main page and removed the box for the talk page. The wrong link had been there for quite a while, good catch :) --rimshot^talk 14:23, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Import a file button

Hi,

The link to upload a file is buried in the left menu. I suggest adding a more direct way to do it using {{Upload a file}} − see on the French main page.

Jean-Fred (talk) 20:35, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes, please make this happen. Contributors are valuable and we should strive to remove unnecessary barriers. With the upload wizard new users will get a short tutorial on free content. I hope nobody repeats that old "It should take effort to contribute, otherwise lazy people and morons will upload stuff"-argument... --Dschwen (talk) 00:39, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

 Support—not just for new users but old ones who don't like searching for tiny links too—Love, Kelvinsong talk 00:55, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

 Done —Mono 19:02, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Wonderful, thank you Mono

@Dschwen: I was more worried of seeing the argument "We should rather revamp completely the main page including a GuidedTour etc." - while I certainly look forward more advanced stuff like that, it does not hurt to take low hanging fruits when possible :-) --Jean-Fred (talk) 21:55, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Cool, if it is that blue button on right. Jee 02:32, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

POTD 29 April 2014

The caption of File:Sunrise at viru bog.jpg reads "Sunrise at Viru Bog, Estonia". But i can't actually see the sun rising. Should the caption be "Morning at Viru Bog, Estonia"? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 03:56, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Sunrise can also refer to a fairly specific time of day. The light on the grasses appears to validate this description. --99of9 (talk) 04:13, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

I guess the photo was taken at the moment of sunrise. So the sun is there and rising even if you don't see it. Current filename ok. -Htm (talk) 04:15, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

No! I wasn't asking for change in the filename but only..... whatever! §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 09:52, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Media of the day for May 8, 2014 - Buchenwald

It's in bad taste to have the video for Buchenwald on the front page showing the stack of dead bodies. Can you please find some way to change that keyframe or to remove it from such public display? -- Fuzheado (talk) 19:55, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Are there reliable sources, how many visitors do view the Main Page in this ↑ resolution? On my machines it looks exactly like this:(410px)

--BR, .js 14:53, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, .js. I reduced the original preview size. Jee 16:02, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

It's captioned to clearly put it in context, and you do realise that MOTD has a thumbnail option you can set to whatever you want, right? If you think it a poor time to show, choose another time. Commons:MOTD#8, under advanced options. Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:23, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

@Adam Cuerden: That's what Fuzheado et al were asking for ... a change to the thumbnail option. Ed ^{[talk] [en:majestic titan]} 22:04, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Dead bodies?

Christ, per the principle of least astonishment, do we really need to use a still frame of dead bodies in today's media of the day? Ed ^{[talk] [en:majestic titan]} 19:56, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

I have no problem with this movie on the front page. Now if we could change the keyframe, and add a warning that the movie may be disturbing, then good. Sometimes it is necessary to diffuse this kind of material, it has a high educative value. It is not too bad to remember that this really happended. Regards, Yann (talk) 20:40, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

@Yann: My comment was pretty clear in referring to the still frame of the video, which showed dead bodies, as opposed to the video as a whole... Ed ^{[talk] [en:majestic titan]} 00:58, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Ok, fine. May be ask the person who uploaded it? Regards, Yann (talk) 05:23, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

I already pinged Slick and Pristurus for opinion in a relevant thread at COM:AN. Jee 05:31, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

• I've started a discussion about the choice to feature this video in this way on the frontpage of Commons on Wikimedia-l. Posting here so that interested Commonites can join in. Kevin Gorman (talk) 02:15, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
  • @Kevin Gorman: I don't see the point in discussing this on the mailing list. Discussions should happen here. Regards, Yann (talk) 05:20, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
    • @Kevin Gorman: I understand that as an English Wikipedia regular, you just couldn't resist saying: "Additionally, I'm not sure that meaningful change can come from the current Commons administration without outside pressure, so I've started a discussion here". If there is the worst path to meaningful change, you're on it right now. odder (talk) 07:44, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
      • • My comment had very little to do with the fact that I'm primarily an ENWPian, and, er, a lot more to do with the combination of my previous interactions with Commons and Commons' prior track record in choosing what to put on their front page, and in general, what content to keep. I'd have to dig up the diff and have a feeling that the person in question may have since left the project, but I've previously been threatened with a block for disruption here for XfDing an image of someone engaged in a sexual act that had been uploaded quite clearly without their consent. So yes, I don't have a terribly high amount of faith that meaningful change can come from within Commons community without an outside impetus. If it were a relatively small project choices like this wouldn't matter anywhere near as much as they do, but Commons' decisions effect every Wikimedia project. Kevin Gorman (talk) 19:29, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
      • As far as I know, there is not much admin involvement in this matter. Just discuss at COM:MOTD. Jee 08:46, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
• The video is educationally useful but the choice of frame should be reviewed. It is only fair on uninformed readers that we warn them that it might shock them. Green Giant (talk) 06:44, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
• Commons:Video#Embedding_Video: “In case of Ogg Theora files, a frame from the midpoint of the video is used by default for the initial still image. To use a different frame, use the thumbtime parameter.” Jean-Fred (talk) 08:41, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

  See {{Motd/2014-05-08 thumbtime}} history. Jean-Fred (talk) 08:52, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

• I'm following the mailing list discussion and agree with those who say it should primarily be taking place here. On the list User:Pharos has said "maybe a simple solution to this is just having more process for which still frame to use for any MOTD video," and I agree. Personally I don't think the use was sensationalist, but a discussion should take place about anything that is likely to be contentious. Ham (talk) 08:42, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
• Well, I have deliberately selected this frame. And yes, it is a shocking picture of victims killed by the inhumanity of a totalitarian ideology. The frame shows exactly the result of such a belief. For me a "softer" motive would be a belittlement of the historical events in Nazi Germany. I'm sorry, but the world is often shockingly brutal, this is the reality in which we must still live (open your eyes in direction to Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, South-Sudan, Nigeria and so on and so on...). --Pristurus (talk) 09:55, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks Pristurus for your bold opinion. I fully agree with you. And, if there is a consensus to avoid such themes in future, we can think about it. Jee 10:23, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

• Well put Pristurus and I couldn't agree with you more, so sure keep the frame because your comment suggests you didn't blindly follow a protocol. However, let's add a warning note to such images, because it doesn't hurt us to warn people that they maybe shocked by what they see. We want to open people's eyes, not poke them in the eyes, if you get my meaning. Green Giant (talk) 11:33, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

• I'm not sure how a warning note could possibly be useful. "The image you just saw might have been offensive. If so, please travel back in time to stop yourself from looking at it."?
• Thank you for explaining your decision-making process, Pristurus, though I hope you appreciate that other users are likely to disagree. Emufarmers (talk) 16:22, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

• A warning for the video, not the image. Green Giant (talk) 07:51, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

• I can understand your decision-making process Pris although I still disagree with your choice of a still, but did you take in to account the fact that a majority of people who use the Wikimedia projects cannot view the video in question, and contextual information was only provided in 5 languages when we run projects in quite literally 287 different languages? For a large number of people who use Wikimedia projects, putting that freezeframe on Commons' frontpage just put a grainy image of a stack of corpses in front of them with no context whatsoever - they would've been unable to play the video, and would have absolutely no context provided to them. Kevin Gorman (talk) 19:29, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

  Thank you all for your opinions, they made me change my mind. When I first saw the still frame on my own page, I was shocked. I read the caption and was sure I don't want to see this video. Not now, not later that day. Perhaps much later. I did not watch it yet. I was thinking if it was a good idea to display the MOTD on my page and if I should change that, immediately, or later, or not. My thougts froze, my feelings too. I decided by not deciding it, so I didn't change it. I kept on wondering, if it was a tolerable choice for the Commons' Main Page, I was not sure, the whole day long. I was expecting some major discussion could start about it. And found it here, read some con's, many OT's, some positive suggestions and little pro's. Came back later and read more.

  All I knew was: I don't like the video (although I didn't see it yet). I don't want to watch it. Wrong! I don't like what happened then, and I don't want to see that. I hope that some day no more videos like this will ever be created, because things like the depicted will never happen again. But currently, violence and cruelty is still happening. All over the world. Every. Single. Day. Now I'm kind of glad to know, that this video is available here, where I feel quite sure that disgusting comments to it will be deleted. Where mostly encyclopedic texts are available, directly linked to it. Where most people discuss about it in a civilised way. I now intend to watch it. Later. Perhaps much later. Some day when my stomach is empty, and there is time to cry.

  Thank you, Pristurus, for choosing this picture. Thank you for being so reflected and so bold to do it, and to stand to your choice and explain it here, calm and well-founded amidst the storm. Thank you for choosing a very appropriate date and thank you for nominating it very well ahead for anyone to notice and react. Now I appreciate your choice beyond any question.

  Thank you all for changing my mind. (Sorry if my English should be inappropriate or offending in any way, that is not at all my intention. - I'm not a native speaker.) --BR, .js 16:38, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks .js for your thoughtful words. A small correction. In fact, it was suggested by Slick. He chose the date too. He didn't commented here so far. The still frame was chosen by Pristurus as commented above. Jee 16:51, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting me, an important detail, so my thanks certainly go to Slick as well! (I think I can leave my text unchanged, as it is now clarified, or does anyone want it fixed?) --BR, .js 17:05, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

No need to change as the matter is clear to understand now. :) Jee 17:14, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

If the still frame in isolation is horrifying enough that it makes you not want to watch the video, that seems like a good reason to choose a different still frame. Emufarmers (talk) 19:54, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

• This is mostly a duplicate of what I just posted to Wikimedia-l - I put it up there as a response to those who may not be monitoring this discussion (which didn't really exist until the Wikimedia-l thread started,) but it probably belongs in both places.

I'm not upset about the fact that we have a video of the aftermath of the liberation of Buchenwald on Commons - if we didn't, I'd go find one and upload it. It's an event (and a video) of enormous historic significance, and not one that should ever be forgotten. I'm not even opposed to featuring it on Commons' frontpage - in a way that adheres to the principle of least astonishment and provides viewers with context. That's not what was done here. A still image featuring a pile of corpses was put on Commons' frontpage with any context whatsoever only provided for viewers of five languages - and we run projects in 287 different languages. More than that, since Commons only supports open video formats, a sizable majority of people who use Wikimedia projects are literally incapable of actually playing the video in question. Is there enough journalistic or educational value in displaying a still photo of a pile of corpses that links to a video that cannot be played by most people that provides after the fact context in only 5 of the 287 languages we run projects in to justify putting it on Commons front page? I'm gonna go with no.

FWIW: I would explicitly support featuring this video (or an article about Buchenwald, etc,) albeit with a different freezeframe and appropriate context provided, on the frontpage of the English Wikipedia or any other project where it was actually possible to provide appropriate context to the viewership of the project. ENWP's article about Buchenwald - quite rightly - contains numerous images more graphic than the one that was on Commons front page yesterday. They add significant educational value to the article - and they also only appear past the lede of the article, at a point when anyone reading the article will be fully aware what the article is about and will have intentionally sought the article out - rather than, say, going to Commons to look up an image of a horse and being confronted with a freezeframe of a stack of bodies from a video your browser cannot play with context provided only in languages you do not speak. Kevin Gorman (talk) 19:29, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

You've made no case for a different freeze frame other than "I don't like it". The freeze frame was chosen specifically as representative of why this video is important. You're claiming "other people might not like it" when your true objection is really obviously that you don't like it. You're allowed not to like it, but that's not a strong basis for a claim, nor for forum-shopping (you went elsewhere before here), nor for trying to come up with new rules to enforce "I don't like it" - David Gerard (talk) 20:02, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Oh give me a break David. Both this section and the one directly above it were started by people I was actively talking to about the MOTD before I started the thread on Wikimedia-l, and both sections here as well as the one at COM:AN went without comment before I started a thread in a broader forum. The fact that I didn't explicitly post here is a pretty freaking trifling thing when those who did went unanswered. Without having started said thread on Wikimedia-l, in all likelihood the threads on-wiki concerning this would still be inactive. Do you honestly think "We probably shouldn't be showing tens of thousands of people a grainy freezeframe of black and white corpses from a video most of them cannot play while providing absolutely no context for anyone who doesn't speak the five languages that it was captioned for, since it's a drastic abrogation of the principle of least astonishment and goes against standard editorial practices and good judgment" equates to "I don't like it"? Kevin Gorman (talk) 20:53, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

You guys do realize this is no longer the Media of the Day -- right? Is there any compelling reason to continue a specific discussion of this one MOTD choice, rather than instead focusing on what it will take to make better decisions in the future? -Pete F (talk) 20:17, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

• Yes, we realise it's no longer the media of the day. However, based on the posts of those who decided which frame to include, the argument for inclusion was "I really want people to be upset!" In other contexts, we would call that trolling. A frame selected by an arbitrary process (x minutes in, or middle frame, or whatever) would at least be defensible. Deliberately choosing a shock image for the purpose of "educating" people isn't, and it does violate a Foundation resolution. Foundation resolutions aren't optional (in fact, aside from the principle of least astonishment, they're enforced quite rigorously on this project, q.v. free use) and they apply to all projects. Commons can't opt out of it. Meanwhile, it would be interesting to know what percentage of Wikipedias use the Commons POTD/MOTD on their main page, and whether that percentage has changed over the last several years. Risker (talk) 20:31, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Great -- I agree, drawing general lessons from a specific case can be useful. Do you have a suggestion for how this principle should best be expressed to future POTD or MOTD contributors, perhaps by adding a bit of text here and/or here? -Pete F (talk) 20:49, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
    • Any thoughts about what principles would apply best to tomorrow's (as opposed to yesterday's) MOTD? I would think the more important issue there is self-promotion, not the Principle of Least Astonishment. Should it be possible to put something self-promotional on the front page of Commons and many other Wikimedia sites without anybody else reviewing that choice? Doesn't seem ideal to me. -Pete F (talk) 21:11, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Fine, how about the following:

1. Any user, who has ever visited Main Page or the MOTD page and has done one or more edits between nomination and main page display is not allowed to complain about the chosen picture afterwards.
2. If the still frame of a video does not show the horrifying content waiting inside, then the video description and thumb has to display an internationally human readable explicit content warning.

• The new still frame is a grossly misleading one, making it look like a nice old family meetup film. – I hereby strongly request a change or the above mentioned international content warning. --BR, .js 22:07, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

I read the entire discussions here, in the mailing list, and the notification on the AN. Let me sum up my thoughts:

One complaint (by Kevin Gorman) is that Commoners initially neglect his complaint. I don't know anybody neglected it; but please note that here people live in different time zones and I'm (UTC+5.30) living almost opposite of the US time zone. The main page is in my watch list, and I started finding the users involved and notify them about the discussions on the moment I noticed this. Pristurus who had chosen that still frame responded in a timely manner. Slick didn't respond so far; but I don't think it is important as none have a complaint about showcasing that video.

Another concern is about the selection process (mainly by Peteforsyth). POTD has a strict guideline, and any POTD must be a COM:FP. That means all POTDs are thoroughly reviewed. I failed to see any chances of "self-promotion" there as Pete complained. MOTD has no such requirements. It is because we have not many featured videos; sounds are not reviewed so far. I don't know many people care or watching those MOTDs (I didn't). Any generic discussion on improving the MOTD is appreciated. That is why I suggested (earlier) to discuss it at COM:MOTD. We can consider:

Whether un reviewed MOTD is risky and it should be either pre reviewed or abandoned?

If we decide to continue MOTD, how we can set up a review process?

How can we improve the presentation, including translating to as many languages?

It seems the main complaint is about the chosen still frame. But we already got different opinions. IMHO, I see nothing wrong in choosing the most striking frame if we decided to showcase a video. Whether or not to showcase such a video is a different matter, and the consensus seems to showcase such videos in future too.

Pristurus is a great contributor of videos on organisms, and I always appreciate his efforts and thoughtful decisions. Jee 03:06, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Commons should not be censored. While I can agree there were better thumbtimes to choose (Commons:MOTD#8, click on advanced options) - we should never come up with rules that prevent people from seeing the actual truth about history. Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:27, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

I am a bit shocked that people who are hardly active here, come to complain when they see something they don't like... Yann (talk) 06:42, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

I sincerely hope yo will get over it. -Htm (talk) 06:49, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

I always find it funny that the people that are so against censorship are willing to let that principle trump a person's right to make a choice. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:01, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

First, let me say that I welcome this discussion. I think it must also be possible here to criticize my decision in a proper and fair way. And please be careful by using the great word "censorship". It is a killer argument and not very helpful to solve such more ethical issues. Well, in my opinion the use of such extreme pictures should be possible in some special singular cases but should not be a daily event on our main page. And I don't think that any formal restriction can provide clarity for all conceivable cases. For me, a possible solution would be to discuss all new (potential) problematic cases in the forum. --Pristurus (talk) 23:14, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

So, nobody thinks it's worth considering the promotional aspects of today's Media of the Day (not safe for work):

• File:Semargl - Tak, Kurwa Uncensored.ogv

Or, say, this Picture of the Day that ran a while ago:

• File:Robinhunicke 240x160 August2009.jpg

I don't think that either of these in themselves are a horrible abuse of our processes. But they clearly point the way toward a way of leveraging the popularity of Commons to get one's image out to the entire world. Are we OK with advertising as long as we are not getting paid for it..?! This seems like a weird principle to me. How will it look when every major PR company develops its own strategy for getting photos and music videos on the front page of Commons? Do we want to be out in front of that, or not? -Pete F (talk) 17:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

At this stage Pete, I see everyone in wikiland getting their grubby little fingers into the grubby monetary pie, whether that be editors who are otherwise unemployable in the real world getting jobs with the WMF, or people getting a cushy paid WiR position. The time seriously has come for Commons to be monetised. I've put in a heap of free time and energy into getting very relevant materials for our projects, and haven't been compensated adequately for my time nor energy. So I don't think it will be a PR company who develops such strategies in the future, but editors such as myself who really have had enough of donating our time for free who will come up with such strategies, and sell these strategies to those companies who are willing to pay for it. I could imagine there would be quite a few corporations who would like to see their materials here on Commons; what they need is people with the expertise who can help to guide them through the ins-and-outs of our projects. Am looking for business partners if anyone out there is interested :) russavia (talk) 17:42, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

• Both those files went through our processes and deserve to be featured. As Russ points out in a round about way... we ask people to donate high quality works and then when people work to get professionals do it we get all precious about it. That's hypocritical. I am happy for any top quality work to make it to the front pages but we shouldn't force people to see images where a reasonable person would surmise the content would be disturbing or not welcome in such venues. Editorial judgment is not a crime nor is it an assault against freedom from censorship.Saffron Blaze (talk) 19:21, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
• I had notified it at AN; no admin respond to it. From the comment of Mattbuck I quoted there, I assume "some contents" should not be showcased on our "main page" even if they are worth to "feature" in relevant sections. But I failed to find any supporting policies; may be good to define to avoid future issues. Noted the opinion of Pristurus above too (discuss all new (potential) problematic cases in the forum). Jee 04:45, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello there. Sorry for my late comment, currently I am very busy. I just suggest this video in mind of the date and the EV. I do not think about maybe shocking pictures. I am from Germany and this is a part of our history and we will remember all the day. (i.E. in school or museums). Ok, its only ~80 year ago, but what is the different so other historical images where (a lot of) dead bodies displayed? Just because it is not a painting or picture? I dont know if it possible to select another frame for preview, but thanks to @Pristurus: to solve it. Another opinion about MotD is, please check the change history of the MotD Talk page [17]. Sometimes it looks like @Pristurus: is the only one who active work on the MotD. So it is a little wonder we have a fresh video every day, thanks to @Pristurus: . So I think any suggestion is welcome and a single person can not think about all possible opinions about a video. --Slick (talk) 11:11, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Maybe an additional nice hint, the video was nominated since 2014-01-07. [18] Where was the opinions about this before it was on the mainpage? Who was interessting in this? --Slick (talk) 11:26, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

@Slick: you are right @Pristurus: has done a fantastic job, and I hope he will continue to do so. It is, of course, disappointing that The ed17 (talk · contribs) has simply used the hard work you both have been doing as an opportunity to take an ill-formed and sensationalist swipe at Commons and its editors. Keep up the great work guys. russavia (talk) 11:58, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Ill-formed and sensationalist? It's completely neutral except for the quotation from the mailing list, which is clearly marked as one user's opinion. Powers (talk) 12:39, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Oh please, Russavia—you and I both know that I'm not taking any swipes at any Commons editors. Ed ^{[talk] [en:majestic titan]} 19:50, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Powers and The_ed, this was a pretty straightforward notification about a topic that drew a lot of attention. I don't see how @The ed17: took a position here. -Pete F (talk) 19:57, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Oh, but it was not a straightforward notification @Peteforsyth: . Instead of simply asking the question and waiting for a response from those concerned, first the Signpost crew had to try and stir up drama via Twitter, then he @The ed17: came here to post starting off with "Christ", then after the Kevin Gormans incoherent and totally tl;dr rant, they had all they needed to "go to print". They didn't even wait for a response from those responsible, and you can be sure it's not their intention at all to "print" that explanation now. It's simply yet another mini-Commons-bash by @The ed17: and crew, and what Ed needs to understand is when he bashes Commons, he bashes our editors too. I really have nothing more to say. russavia (talk) 20:55, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

That tweet could have used more thought before publishing, sure. Is it stirring a pot? No, it's driving readers to the article. You're getting rather paranoid if you think I based the entire Signpost's publishing time off this discussion. I published because we were (a) already late, (b) all of the sections were done, and (c) I was running short on wifi time at the local library—I don't have Internet at my house at the moment.

I have absolutely nothing against Commons, but it's apparently your view that noting anything that happens on Commons and could be construed as negative is offensive to any and all contributors here. So thanks, but your suggestions are rejected, and that's really all I have to say on the matter as well. Ed ^{[talk] [en:majestic titan]} 21:03, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

@The ed17: A true professional would not have rushed to press with an "in brief" without waiting for comment from those involved. There was no pressing need for this to be rushed as it was. And the sensationalist tweet you put out, I can only support what @Nick: had to say...it's fucking vile. So yes, I think people have every right to see what you did as bashing Commons; especially since the person you quoted doesn't even participate in this project in any great way. And as a result of this, still has not put his money where his mouth is.... Does anything else really have to be said? *taking off watchlist now* russavia (talk) 21:44, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

And there go your anti-censorship credentials. "A true professional would not have rushed to press with an "in brief" without waiting for comment from those involved". Err yes they would actually. If you don't know why you must have missed the super-injunction mess.Geni (talk) 04:05, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

It's an in brief. People click the links to learn more. I am not beholden to give all information in a brief note that is normally held to three sentences or less. And as a side point, great argument about Kevin Gorman: "he doesn't participate here". Bullshit. Everyone who edits or reads a Wikimedia project uses Commons in some way. You're the image repository for the entire movement—just in case you've forgotten that. Ed ^{[talk] [en:majestic titan]} 22:00, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

@The ed17: I can understand the importance of timed delivery for a publication like Signpost. But I have to agree with russavia on "you must wait or ask directly to the involved first". You posted on 20:00, 8 May 2014 (UTC) at AN and notified "the involved" at 05:03, 9 May 2014 (UTC) as my first job in Commons on that (new) day. So you have no excuses on not waiting for their reply. You may not aware of the internal structure of the pages; this discussion is not watched by many as not many watches (especially people related to POTD and MOTD) the "main page". That is why I pinged others. (But I disagree with the "quick nomination on the very next day" which was very pointy, IMHO.) Jee 03:06, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

We published at 20:00 on 9 May. Am I wrong to think a full 24 hours is plenty of time? Ed ^{[talk] [en:majestic titan]} 22:00, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

@The ed17: It was weekend. Some of our volunteers are active only on weekdays; some only on holidays. I afraid this coupled with the timezone differnce made the situation even worse. (I remember a case when a Wikipedian was indefinitely banned from EN wiki per the discussion on ANI. He was from UTC+8, and the discussion was carried out at 01:00AM! without giving him any chance to properly respond. I don't know when some Wikipedians (EN) understand not all of them are living in US.) Jee 06:52, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

@Slick & Pristurus: I know both of you and there is not even any slight doubt about your intentions. I too hope both of you continue your contributions. Jee 12:31, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

I feel quite comfortable here in our wiki-universe. Objective criticism and different opinions are part of a living community. So things must and will go on, I don´t see any reason for a resignation... --Pristurus (talk) 14:05, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

As I stated elsewhere, it is not appropriate to surprise an individual with content they may not be intellectually or emotionally prepared to see just because someone has decided the subject is important. In fact doing so is rather arrogant. Saffron Blaze (talk) 03:15, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes; and we should implement a mechanism to avoid it in future considering the importance of the main page. What about setting up a team to preview MOTDs? People should not be allowed to make a nomination just before the UTC new day as happened recently. What about locking MOTD and POTD templates three days before display? Expecting more suggestions and opinions. Jee 03:28, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Except as is typical we see people arguing ad naseum over side issues and forgetting the principle. 04:41, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

First of all we should clear the fundamental question "What kind of content should or should not been shown on the main page?". In the concrete case we saw a few people feeling bad with the selected motive "dead bodies". So for example, making a rule "pictures of dead human bodies are not allowed" would result in making it imposible to show a crucifix on the main page. And not all people here are coming from western countries. So I think a Muslim would have the same right to require that (at least) all hair of a women shown on the main page must be covered. Or in many parts of the world the public showing of homosexuality is absolutely unacceptable, however in other countries it is normal part of the social life, so media about demonstrations for sexual tolerance may be problematic. Looking back to the past some of the most controversial discussions her on commons were related to different aspects of human sexuality and how to handle it on commons. And we have to accept that we are unable to find a general accepted result in some cases. So in my eyes a discussion here about the formal procedure of the selection process should be the second step, not the first! I would expect from Saffron Blaze (and others) to formulate some orientation for the decision-making process and present it the community for a formal proposal. --Pristurus (talk) 14:42, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

I can't help but feel there's no progress being made here. There are suggestions about changing keyframes on the video in question (now long since expired as the Media of the Day) and suggestions for a group of editors to decide the MOTD three days beforehand (a very sensible suggestion, since a nice calm and collegial discussion could be held in the 72 hours before an image goes on the main page). The worry I have is that without clear guidance (and this need not be lengthy or overly bureaucratic) any of those editors responsible for the Media of the Day will at some point be subjected to the sorts of criticism prevalent here in this discussion. We really need a very brief and to the point policy about what can appear on the Media of the Day, what needs to be done if there are upsetting or distressing scenes within the video, how to decide on the keyframe to use and how concerns shape future Media of the Day. It shouldn't be the discretion of one editor to decide all of this, with the attendant blame if a few people think they got it wrong, whoever puts a video up on MOTD should only be following clear and sensible policy. What we absolutely do not want, under any circumstances, is videos of the highest possible importance and historical significance, such as Holocaust material or material related to genocide, torture, war, political unrest or any of the myriad other topics out there, to be dropped from the Main Page here at Commons, because of some poorly expressed concerns and typical internal Wikimedia wranglings. My feeling is that we should look through various national and state broadcasters (BBC, CNN, ABC, Al Jazeera etc), and see what their editorial policies are on choosing keyframes and displaying warnings on their web content. That way we can have a level of consistency with similar websites. I would also add, whilst I'm making such a suggestion, we add similar warnings for images containing flash photography or flashing images, for the benefit of photosensitive epilepsy sufferers. Nick (talk) 10:29, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Seriously,though, noone's answered the key point: What's the actual harm? It's a highly educational video about Birkenwald, that we should want, if we have an educational purpose (and we do), everyone to see. If you open any encyclopedia to a random page you might well see something shocking. If you open the Bible to a random page you might find something a bit shocking. If we censor history down to its sweetest and loveliest moments, then we're doing a damn bad job at presenting the actual content of history. Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:34, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Leave that case Adam; it is already discussed too much. Now the point is whether it is safe to allow unreviewed media on main page. I think it is very risky and so we need a guideline and procedure. Jee 11:46, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Adam's want should not trump someone else's judgment on their need to see shcoking content. The main page is not a random page. When I sit down with a religious book I know it is a religious book and there may be shocking content inside. His comparisons are therefore lacking. Moreover, providing editorial judgment, context and choice is not censorship. Imagine walking into a library and finding that same image as a poster in the foyer. My wiffe would faint and my daughter would have nightmares. However, if the library had a notice on the door that they are displaying material on the holocaust then people would know what to expect and prepare themselves or choose another day. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:03, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Saffron, seeing the amount of violence people, including children, see every day on TV, movies, and video games, I find quite hypocritical that some people complain about this. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:32, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

• Yann obviously you are not a parent. That aside, suggesting because there are bad parents out there it is OK to follow their example is a rather lame argument. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:22, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

• Saffron, don't assume who I am or not. I am a parent, and a grand-parent. ;) And I don't see your point about being a good parent or not. Back to the subject, I agree that editorial judgment, context and choice is a good thing. It could always be better, but I think we usually do quite well, including that video. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:42, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

• Well, as a parent you should know the scope and scale of managing content exposure for a child is a monumental task. Managing a main page should be simple by comparison, but have many of the same goals in mind. I don't care about the petty politics of who said what and their agendas. I do care that an individual placed a video with a deliberately selected slide on the portal page for our entire project in order to shock people. It does not matter that the intent was to forcefully educate when it was reasonable to surmise the main effect would be to shock when presented without context or choice. It is a poor way to educate and dismissive of how people may feel about seeing such content as they walk into the main door of any venue. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:56, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

TELİF HAKKI SORUNU

Her yüklediğim fotoğraf telif hakkı nedeniyle silinyor.Başka Şimdiye kadar yüklenen resimler sılınmıyor bazıları kaynak yazmamış silinmemiş.Siz benim yaptığım tasarladığım fotoğrafı bile silmişsiniz telif hakkı nedeniyle bir çözüm söyleyin lütfen.Kendi yaptığım logo'da silinmiş. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohaorhan (talk • contribs) 19:39, 9 May 2014‎ (UTC)

translation from the Turkish:

COPYRIGHT ISSUE

I have installed on each photo uploaded so far because of copyright silinyor.başk not delete photos I've done some sources silinmemiş.siz design has not delete the pictures I've even said a solution because of copyright logo I made was deleted at the lütfen. (automated tranlsation by Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:35, 10 May 2014 (UTC))

Another Google translation: I have installed siliny Each photo is copyright grounds. Until now, some other source has not uploaded files are not deleted undeleted. You can even delete the pictures I've designed what I do because of copyright, please tell a solution. In my own logo deleted. -Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohaorh the (talk • contribs) 19:39, 9 May 2014 (UTC) - Added by -Htm (talk) 06:57, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Media of the Day

Hi , does anyone know why trains are commonly the media of the day ? They seem to be very popular even in past videos . Thanks, Automobililamborghini (talk) 20:56, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

"Jerusalem Light Rail" was selected by me. My criteria for this selection: it was recently uploaded, it comes from a country of the middle east (not from Europe) and the video quality was nice looking for me. If you want see other videos (or hear other audio files) feel free to make a selection of your choice and use the templates to present it on an "empty" day. Alternatively you may use Commons_talk:Media_of_the_day to nominate a file (without filling templates). It would be a nice development to see more people engaged in this area... --Pristurus (talk) 23:11, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Interwiki sidebar

I notice today that the links in the sidebar are linking to Wikipedia, no to Commons, and I don't know how to fix, and I can't remove either. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 19:30, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Commons is a multilingual project, therefore we cannot link to other language versions of Commons – like Wikipedia does – in the sidebar.    FDMS  4    19:32, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

The sidebar links, like FDMS4 said, are interwiki links to other Wikipedias. The links to the main page in other languages (within Commons) are there near the bottom of the page. On most Commons pages, e.g. COM:FP, these links are at the top. I guess it wasn't done this way for the main page to reduce clutter. --rimshot^talk 09:05, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

@Rimshot and FDMS4: what I'm saying here is:

The links induces the reader to one thing, but the link let then to another thing totally different.

If we can't use the sidebar to change the language of the main page, IMHO, is better to remove that, it is not saying "Wikipedia links" it is: "In other languages".

Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 22:03, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't see the need. Interwikis are standard on all wikimedia main pages. --Steinsplitter (talk) 22:06, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

In my opinion, interwikilinks in the sidebar are especially useful for linking from Commons categories to Wikipedia articles (or categories) …    FDMS  4    22:16, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

@Steinsplitter: , it's okay to have interwiki, this is not the problem. The problem is the not clear indication.

In other wikis is "another projects: Wikipedia, Wikibooks..." it is not "In another language"; "In another language" means "you gonna still inside this type of community, but in another language".

And @FDMS4: I'm only talking about the Main Page, but, if you take a look at WY-en, ie. voy:New York City, you will see that they make clear for the reader are they are going.

Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 22:21, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

The English user interface currently says "In Wikipedia", and not "In another language".    FDMS  4    23:12, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Okay, sorry, I did not know that, because I see as that. But I think only people who uses en interface as default will see that and people who will try to change the main page, maybe is not using en as default. Just thoughts... Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 23:22, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

This looks like a translation oversight. The heading should be "In Wikipedia" or its translated equivalent in all languages. It is e.g. in German and French, it's not e.g. in Spanish. This would make the purpose of these links clearer. --rimshot^talk 06:20, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Translation for en-gb created. --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:15, 28 May 2014 (UTC)