This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hello Mike Peel. This might be wrong place to bring this up, but it is the way that I'm hoping for a good reply an it has become the way we ask in Norwegian wikipedia where I'm mostly doing my edits.
The page is semi-protected and you cannot update, edit and add information in Work. The content suggestion to add in Work is: One of the representative artists of the Basque scene. Biscayan creator who is part of the generation of Basque sculptors who were born and raised with the magic of mythology. The artist's work focuses mainly on Basque mythological sculpture. Although he is known for his work in Basque sculpture, he has stood out in the cultural sphere thanks to his different talents as an artist, sculptor, writer and designer. Like the old masters of the best known current of Basque art such as: Jorge Oteiza, Eduardo Chillida, Agustín Ibarrola, Néstor Basterretxea, etc. Surrealism differentiates him from those marked by abstraction and geometric schematism. Around 1990, with his employment in the forge as a Blacksmith, he started working with iron. He then began a cycle of non-imitative sculptures, increasing his concern for Basque art and culture. Each of his works raises a spatial problem that he tries to solve with the help of the material, according to its characteristics or properties. Amalur (2002) is his first abstract sculpture, a name of Basque origin which in Basque means "Mother Earth" and is inspired by the mythology of the Basque people. He flees from the imitation of nature and goes in search of creation and invention, combining wrought iron with stone. In 2005 a new stage of experimentation opened. Until then, curved lines predominated in his language and now he will adopt more moved and restless surrealist rhythms, easily understood sculpted in wood. The scale in Totemism had been approached at the end of the 80s with his artistic experience in wood, a material that, due to its lower weight, facilitated the increase in size and due to its soft texture and low ductility, opened a new experience in his ethnic-cultural plastic inquiry. At the same time, he developed an important activity in the field of literature. During the 90s he investigated the Basque language and the popular manifestations of his people. In 2016 he published "Basque Mythology". Interpretation book of Basque mythology, which would become his best known text. This book makes a defense of Basque popular culture and its identity. In 2020 he alternates and addresses graphic design with a series of illustrations that narrate and recreate an illustrated book in which he unites Japanese culture and Basque art. He has exhibited his work in national and international exhibitions, placing it as an important reference in the world of Basque mythology. It is important to add and update information, otherwise it looks like a quote from a dictionary.--Sorginak (talk) 19:31, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
As a general rule, each iteration of a station should have a separate Commons category, as that allows for more precise historical documentation. An article, meanwhile, will often discuss several iterations for a coherent historical narrative. I'll create Wikidata items with coords. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:49, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Happy new year 2021
Moin Moin Mike Peel, I wish you a healthy year 2021 and many exciting tasks. ;)
Any strategy on how to get even more categories an infobox? => I am currently going through a custom Cirrus search where interwiki links but no infobox is set.
@Crazy1880: Pi bot has just been working on 'Exterior of', 'Interior of', 'View of' and 'View from' categories, hopefully I've managed to catch most of those and bot-create new items for them, where a parent category is linked to Wikidata. I have no immediate thoughts for further bot editing, but will have a think. Mostly I suspect it needs manual work for now, and keeping an eye out for any trends. Let me know if you spot anything / have any thoughts! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:57, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
But the fact is, the discussion was evaluated by another chemist and closed as such over a year ago, and during the discussion time, someone else supported the nomination and nobody objected. The discussion specifically did note that they are not literally the same thing. DMacks (talk) 11:31, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It was also closed by a user that has since been blocked, it seems. I'm sorry I didn't see the discussion at the time. We can reopen it if you would prefer, to get other people's input. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 11:34, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Beçin fort
Hello, Purely by accident I noticed you had moved pictures I took of Beçin, indeed many of them of the fortress, to the category Beçin fort. In doing so you transported a nice medrese that served as a museum from below the hill on which the fortress is situated to within the fortress' walls. I distinctly remember how the medrese was below that hill, and how nice it was to spend some time there on flat ground, rather than climbing within the fortifications, nice though they were. Checking a site on my own I noticed I had several pictures I should have added, which is what I'll do. Part of the reason you moved some wrongly may be due to the unclear text of the article in the Wikipedia, which does not make clear what is in the fortress and what in the like-named village. I find again and again this is a problem, not just in the Wikipedia. First there is an unfortunate system where a town may be the capital of a district, as well as of a whole province in Turkey. This leads to all sorts of rural pictures being put in the category of the main city, and visa versa. Then there are people who do not distinguish a particular sight from the town (or other) it’s named after, as you did. I today spent some time on pictures of what was supposedly the Karakaya Dam, but in reality the lake that formed after the dam was built, two provinces further. In the end only one decent dam picture remained, amidst tens of a lake. Sorry for digressing, but don’t be surprised if one of these days more Beçin pictures appear of the village, not the fortress.Dosseman (talk) 18:46, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Dosseman: Thanks for uploading the photos! I tried to only move the ones of the fort, if I got any wrong then please revert the changes. It sounds like you have a lot of local knowledge that's really useful here for resolving the cases where there are things with the same name! Keep up the good work! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:16, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I do try to keep up my local knowledge which is a bit difficult, being in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. But my memory and the web help a lot. Dosseman (talk) 20:42, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Pi bot problem
Hi Mike - pi bot keeps on adding a category redirect Category:Anas versicolor to wikidata item Q55327057 even though it shouldn't be there. Can you do whatever it takes to stop the bot adding it, please? Thanks! - MPF (talk) 01:44, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
@E4024: Just for background, I've been creating uncategorized categories like this as they are 'phantom categories' (they have contents but the category doesn't actually exist), and they are linked to from a Wikipedia article, so I can create them with an infobox at least (either immediately or bot-added shortly afterwards), I don't normally mind if they are deleted/redirect/improved as appropriate though. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:40, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@E4024: In this case I could have added it to Category:Roads in Missouri, but I'm never sure if that's helpful or not as it would still need further re-categorization with research, hence why I've been using 'uncategorized categories'. I figure it's a step in the right direction at least. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:47, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please participate in the Universal Code of Conduct consultation on Wikimedia Commons!
Dear Mike Peel
Thank you for your hard work to create the sum of all knowledge that is freely sharable to every single human being across the world. As our diverse community grows, we need a guideline that will help all of our work collectively and constructively where everyone feels safe, welcomed, and part of a team. That is why the Wikimedia movement is working on establishing a global guideline called the Universal Code of Conduct, often referred to as UCoC.
After the months-long policy consultation, we have prepared a policy (available in many languages) that has been ratified by the Board of Trustees. We’re currently in the second phase of the process. During this round of consultation, we want to discuss the implementation of this policy. As a member of the functionary team of Wikimedia Commons, your opinion on enforcement is of great value. We want to hear from you on how this policy can be enforced on the Wikimedia Commons community and what might be needed to do so. There are a few enforcement questions so you can easily outline your answers based on them. Please do not hesitate to bring any more questions/challenges you think are not yet discussed.
The discussion is taking place on Commons:Universal Code of Conduct consultation. You can also share your thoughts by replying to this message (Please ping me so I get notified), posting your message on my talk page. I am aware that some thoughts cannot be expressed publicly, so you can always share your opinion by emailing me as well.
As a valued member of the Commons community, please share your thoughts, ideas, and experiences that relate to UCoC. Let us know what needs to be improved so we can build a more friendly and cooperative space to increase editor engagement and retention of new users.
Wikimedia projects are governed by you. So, it is you who needs to step up to ensure a safe, comfortable, and pleasant working environment.
Hi! It popped up on my watchlist that your bot added a Wikidata infobox to Category:Kemecse District, following my edit adding a sitelink—almost a year ago. Waiting a bit before adding the infobox (in case the sidelink was wrong/vandalism) is good, but a year is a bit too much… Is it intentional? If yes, why? If not, could you please look into this bug? (I didn’t add the infobox manually because I thought Pi bot would add it anyways, and it uses a much nicer edit summary than what I would’ve had patience to write.) —Tacsipacsi (talk) 14:26, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Tacsipacsi: The problem is phab:T233520, the normal way that the bot operates now is to do a query of the database ([2] - but it's now run directly on toolforge) to find where the category has a Wikidata item but not the infobox, via the page_props table, but the bug means that page_props isn't updated when the sitelink is added. It seems like the problem is when you add a sitelink on Wikidata but don't then make another edit on Commons. It's easy to resolve in individual categories by doing a null edit to the category, which will then update page_props OK. Recently I got fed up of waiting for the bug report to be investigated again, so I now have pi bot looking randomly through categories to check for cases without the infobox but with a wikidata item to add them. It's not efficient, but catches cases like the one you found - eventually! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 14:40, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) I ignore all those technical terms, but 1. I added the cat to where it should -also- be in WD. You always make "two" connections to WD, especially for those pages that do not have a "cat item" in WD/WPs, because the cat you create here, about "x" will become item "category x" instead of item "x" in WD. 2. Use ({WI}) in newly opened cats. A bot comes within 24 hours and opens this "WI" to "Wikidata Infobox". Then everything becomes visible w/o waiting for a year. Cheers. E4024 (talk) 15:00, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mike Peel: I see, thanks for the explanation! Isn’t it a viable workaround to check Wikidata recent changes and do a null edit on all pages connected to (and probably also on pages disconnected from) Commons? Maybe only in case of categories to reduce server load. For example my edit’s edit summary (at least when queried through the API) looks like /* wbsetsitelink-add:1|commonswiki */ Category:Kemecse District (as far as I recall it, this very same string is present in the database as well). Of course this wouldn’t help pages that have already been broken for months, but at least it would prevent future brokenness. (By the way, now I started a bot to make null edits to all pages about Hungarian districts, as I think there are more categories with Wikidata sitelinks but without infoboxes.) @E4024: I could have added the infobox, I could have added the statement and I could have done many more things, but why should I? The only thing that requires a human is to identify that the category and the item is about the same thing and record it somehow (e.g. with a sitelink). Everything else can be done automatically by bots. I mean if the system is not broken… If everything was recorded in the database the way it should have been, I wouldn’t have to wait a year for this bot edit regardless of not making any further manual edits. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 22:07, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Tacsipacsi: Thanks for the thoughts. I realised by this conversation that I could do a SPARQL query for all Commons sitelinks, and then run through those to add the infoboxes. Pi bot is currently doing that, it's added about a thousand more infoboxes so far. That should clear up the backlog. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:19, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please take a short survey regarding UCoC
Hello Mike Peel,
I would like to inform you that we now have a survey in place to take part in the UCoC consultation. It is not a long one and should take less than 10 minutes to complete. You can take the survey even if you have already participated in the on-wiki consultation. It has a different set of questions and allows you to participate anonymously and privately.
As a member of the Commons functionaries, your opinion is especially essential. Please click here to participate in the survey.
You are still welcome to participate in the on-wiki discussions. If you prefer you can have your say by sending me an email. You can also drop me an email if you want to have a one-to-one chat.
Hi Mike, I think you're going a bit too far here. Not only am I cleaning after your bots because they indiscriminately add links where there shouldn't be, but now you are yourself creating empty items and asking me to fill them! If you want to create items, great, but please do the research work then. I already created a category for the person and moved your infobox there, even if there is not much material to put in the category.
And then you created an almost blank item, with a P31 which is technically false (they are not from one artist but many) and an English label which is actually French. So not a single correct piece of data. And now you're just asking me fill the blanks? Either you have data for the item, or you should just refrain from having an infobox not displaying anything! Your stats can probably cope without one more infobox! Quality is always superior to quantity. And I have already seen enough projects totally rejecting wikidata just because a handfull of bullies forcefully spilled pages with half-baked wikidata-powered infoboxes. --Nono314 (talk) 17:26, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Nono314: Hopefully I got the commonscat link right at least? ;-) Seriously, I don't care about the stats (although the milestones are nice), the point is making information more easily available. Here, I got an email for the revert of Pi bot's edit, and the only content in the article is in French (which I know a bit of, but not much). So the best I could do is to create a short item and hope that someone (you?) with more expertise/language knowledge would take a minute to add more context. I've made some further changes on Wikidata, if you want to have a look, but I couldn't find the right P31 item for this concept (I added the closest I could find before).
Trust me that I spend more time cleaning up than I do coding the bot - the problem isn't the bot code, but the mismatched information between different wikis. At least things are getting better...! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:39, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I know the root cause is the data on the wikis, becaus it's entered by humans and humans think it's obvious when something is not an exact match, but a related concept. Bots do not. That's why having an army of fully autonomous bots causes a lot of issues. And one bot task picks up where another dumped something which already was far fetched, thinhs only get worse. But when you get a revert for something that was obviously wrong, why not just keep the corrected thing? You seem to always feel the need to create a new item to justify the existence of the infobox that just shouldn't have been there in the first place. I may at some later point enter data for that, but in the meantime the box will not make information more easily available, it will just be useless at best. --Nono314 (talk) 17:49, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Nono314: Thanks for understanding the cause. The problem was that it wasn't a 'corrected thing' after the revert, it was a monolingual category without much context, and I was hoping that starting the item would encourage you to add that context. If not, I'm happy to delete the item and remove the infobox if you want. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:52, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Mike. I am writing a self-published book about opera and was hoping that perhaps I could use your photo on Wikepdia of the London Coliseum in my book. Would you mind if I did this? Of course, I am planning to make a profit on this book. I would, of course, include your name in the photo credit/caption.
Hi Mike. In Category:Grünental (Namibia) we get the alert "There is a discrepancy of 3533 meters .... ". I now entered on the Category Page the Q-number Q12729616 and therein edited the coordinates to the same coordinates indicated on top of the Category:Grünental (Namibia). After having edited in the Q-page the coorinates in the Q-infobox on the Category:Grünental (Namibia)-Page do not change and the alert remains. Is that a question of time and synchronizing the servers or did I do something wrong? Regards, Hanspeter --Hp.Baumeler (talk) 10:38, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Hp.Baumeler: sometimes it is necessary to refresh the cache after modifications:
Hi Mike. Suddenly categories with this template are showing a huge white space alongside it with all the content underneath. It doesn't seem to have changed lately, not has the module. Any ideas? Rodhullandemu (talk) 19:53, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hp.Baumeler: About 50% of Commons categories don't yet have infoboxes, it's a big job! If you can help, you need to find the matching Wikidata item and add the Commons sitelink (like this for the first one on your list), or if there isn't a Wikidata item then create one. Pi bot should then add the infoboxes automatically in a day or so. For the ones without images, you need to add a image (P18) value to the Wikidata item, and then the infobox will show it. You can find more info at Commons:Wikidata infobox help. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 10:39, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Mike, the info box looks fine in the main Category:Friesoythe, but why do you want it in this certain subcategory? Do you want it in every subcategory of Category:Friesoythe or in every subcategory of Category:Views? And why views rather than streets, signs or houses? I can't see the system or guideline you are following. -- Ies (talk) 07:23, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ies: The aim is to have it in every category, so that they are described multilingually. Wikidata has category for the view of the item (P8989) and a few other similar properties, so pi bot can automatically set up the infobox for that kind of category (including this specific one). For others, I haven't figured out how to auto-create the relevant type of Wikidata items yet, so they only have the infobox if the Wikidata item already exists (or someone else has batch-created them, which happens for streets in Germany for example) and has been linked to Commons, so that can be a bit random. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 07:49, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Pasay has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
@M2k~dewiki: This seems to be a very big or open category tree, I stopped the bot after it had checked 40,111 categories out of the ~50k it had found so far, 1134 infoboxes added. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 07:40, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Mike Peel and Crazy1880: I checked a few of the categories and mainly found categories with infoboxes specified in the categories, but without a related wikidata object, e.g. Category:10e bataillon territorial de zouaves, Category:10th-century BC steles, Category:1173 in Spain, .... Should categories with infoboxes, but without wikidata object be listed in this maintainence category? Should they have no infoboxes at all (i.e. should the infoboxes be removed?) or should they be listed in another maintainence category, for better differentiation between the different cases? Should wikidata objects be created for categories without wikidata-objects but with infobox-statement or can they be connected to existing wikidata objects? For example, could a bot match and connect all commons-categories without wikidata object (but with infobox-statement) to existing category objects by name?
Moin Moin Mike, I found the Template:Інфабокс. Could you change your "Commons task 1" in "commons_wikidata_infobox_tidy.py", the Інфабокс will be changed to "Wikidata Infobox", please? That would be great. Thanks --Crazy1880 (talk) 19:02, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
File:The Laungewala Hall, Jaisalmer War Museum.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise,everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)
This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: License review NOT passed: Came via Facebook; their Terms of Use are incompatible with publishing here.
Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Hi Mike, please teach you Pi bot that this building is NOT a person. Unfortunately Pi bot added a wrong Wikidata Infobox again and again. Greetings, -- Ies (talk) 16:20, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Bislig has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Hello,
please stop to delete coordinates on commons categories. The infobox does not use the dim: command that the commons pages support.
Greetings Hans G. Oberlack (talk) 20:43, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mike Peel: Yes it is the zoom factor. Moreover, it is quite helpful to keep basic information like location and a short explanation on the commons. So for fast orientation you don't have to change to the infobox. Greetings Hans G. Oberlack (talk) 20:58, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Apologies if this message is not in your native language: please feel free to respond in the language of your choice. Thank you!
I am writing to you because we are looking for feedback for a new Wikimedia Foundation project, Structured Data Across Wikimedia (SDAW). SDAW is a grant-funded programme that will explore ways to structure content on wikitext pages in a way that will be machine-recognizable and -relatable, in order to make reading, editing, and searching easier and more accessible across projects and on the Internet. We are now focusing on designing and building image suggestion features for experienced users.
We have some questions to ask you about your experience with uploading images here on Wikimedia Commons and then adding them to Wikipedia. You can answer these questions on a specific feedback page on Mediawiki, where we will gather feedback. As I said, these questions are in English, but your answers do not need to be in English! You can also answer in your own language, if you feel more comfortable.
Once the collecting of feedback will be over, we will sum it up and share with you a summary, along with updated mocks that will incorporate your inputs.
Also, if you want to keep in touch with us or you want to know more about the project, you can subscribe to our newsletter.
What's the situation on Commons for the above? Looking into old sockers on Eng WP and have found recent Commons registrations that I feel are likely to be the same person/clique of persons (plus one well-stale). I think it's going to be difficult getting them to 'fess up, + the copyright declarations of course (which are glaringly obvious) - presently the central character is defiant. Other Eng WP editors are aware, too. Thx.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 20:54, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thx for the advice - forgot to mention its going to be a can of worms for the commons lot with new user claiming inexperience and already been very vague about the source from where the pics were obtained. Already has been lashing out in the typical way that rule-benders try to shift the blame on to their critics.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 01:42, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Your second revert
You revert a modification in a sandbox version containing a *tested* version, that solves thz problem that exists since long.
This removal of unnecesssary autocatergorisation (that are broken since long) were requested more than one year ago. They are NEVER needed at all (and alwways wrong).
I have made significant changes and tests to demonstrate (in this sandbox) that These 145 lines were wrong and MUST be removed.
The infobox template never needs to do that for about 2000 pages only (all broken), when it has much more seriosu things to do for many many mre pages: deleting these incorrect autocategorisation is THE solution.
And YES I had read the discussion that you pointed. But it is old, later than *more recent* discussion where I was explicitly asked to find a solution, and I found it. Your pointed discuission did not provide any solution, I provided THE solution.
Please remove these 14 lines from the Infobox, exactly like what I did in the sandbox! This is absolutely not an edit war (except by you not following what's going on).
verdy_p (talk) 17:50, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You pointed me to an older discussion (than the one in the CORRECT template), where another user was also requesting the same deletion. There has been 3 discussions (and at least 4 users) asking for these removals from the infobox (where the 14 lines were just asked by a single user, were never needed at all, were never discussed before they were intantly locked, and they have never worked at all; and they have unnecessarily increased the complexity of the infobox that breaks very often due to its expansion resources needed, notably in pages where the infobox retrieves lot of data from Wikidata).
My recent discussion (asked to me by another user) described the problem, located the problem in the infobox, and the sandbox in the inforbox was absolutely not abusive and demonstrated that this was correct.
Thank you very much, Mike Peel, for adding and filling many infoboxes to Wikimedia pages with ship photos.
I am not really sure what their purpose is except for showing data when opening a Wikimedia page. When including photos in the box, what I am currently doing, they make at least the boring categories of IMO and ENI numbers more interesting.--Wolfgang Fricke (talk) 10:30, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Wolfgang Fricke: Thanks! The idea is that they show the content in every language, so users can find out about what a category contains in their language without having to add manual translations here. Also, they show where images need to be added - since there are then Wikipedias that will then display these images in the same way as the infobox does, along with other content, expanding them helps everyone. :-) Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 11:05, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Stop
Stop adding blindly infobox on years categories, you are duplicating these infoboxes that are integrated in the "YearCategory" template, which is all what is needed in these category pages. verdy_p (talk) 10:02, 28 August 2021 (UTC).[reply]
Why??? This was the case for most year categories, and it was properly positioned. Now your unexpected removal from the template just complicate things again. (and the infobox is now no longer positiàoned cvorrectly where it should be (in the middle: after the "disambig links" at top, but before the subnav boxes at bottom). verdy_p (talk) 10:57, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You've only removed it from the template because of "Pibot" making blind edits on categories for year. It can make an exception: if there's a call to "Yearcategory", it is enough! How many false guses does this bot perform? It can ALREADY detect that the infobox is used (just looking at the list of included dependencies). Your two removes from the Yeart categories just complicates things for everyone. And the bot can be easily fixed ! verdy_p (talk) 11:00, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Verdy p: I could add an exception to the bot code, but it's tricky since templates can have redirects that the bot misses. (also, I can't do anything this week since I'm away from the raspberry pi running the code). My preferred approach is that the Wikidata Infobox is included separately so that it's clean, and exceptions are kept to a minimum. Not including it in templates also reduces the number of cases where the infobox is used without a Wikidata link. It should normally be at the top or bottom of the templates anyway, not sure why you want it in the middle for some reason. If you have a different template that isn't playing well with the infobox right-align, the best solution is to fix that template (there are a few around like that still). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 08:55, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mike Peel: Fixing the bot is easy, because MediaWiki tracks this usage (you don't need to parse the wikitest of the page/category with tricky code (handling whitespaces, comments, code generated by modules or other templates generating the name of a template to transclude, normalization and resolution of pagenames and namespages...) to identify which template inclusion would include itself the infobox); as the infobox is huge (often costly), your bot should ensure that it will not include the infobox once more when it is already present. The metadata is fast to access, Mediawiki (that has already parsed the page and fed the tracking metadata) also indicates (e.g. in Special:WhatLinksHere/FULLPAGENAME) if this is only a reference (by wikilink) or an inclusion. We have the same info when editing any page, below the edit box, showing the list of inclusions and references. That info is also accessible by Pybot using the documented Mediawiki API.
And anyway all year categories in Commons, should have an entry in Wikidata (also in English Wikipedia: it is easy to add the reference to Wikidata by using the "edit links" in "Other languages", and entering "enwiki", and the same category name like "Category:2000", it will also instantly list the other wikis having this category with the same name or localized; all these categories in Commons should be navigatable year by year and in decades (at least all years in the Christian era, up to the next few years: they already exist all for the next 100 years for planned or predictable events like eclipses, olympics and other competitions, coming elections, and their preparation, even if they are later cancelled or delayed with additional info and sources).
Placing the infobox correctly is not easy, because of its vertical layout that may interact with other contents on the page (notably floats, but also when some contents contain HTML "clears": if you place the infobox at top, it would create a huge vertical space before that "clearing" content. If you place it at bottom, it may not always show (e.g. with an unclosed "noinclude" section, or unclosed HTML comment). Placing the infobox is tricky, and there are contents that come before it, notably banners (e.g. Category in discusion, disambiguation, navigation boxes to other singling categories within the same ancestor category). As this placement needs to be tuned manually, you can avoid much troubles (and tricky code), by first checking if the infobox is already included (as indicated in page's metadata), before even loading and parsing its wikicontent: this is the reliable way to do that. verdy_p (talk) 12:43, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Verdy p: In general, HTML 'clears' should not be used in templates here - that's bad design, as seen by the interaction problems (the problem is not the infobox design, it's the other templates). 'Fixing the bot is easy' - really isn't true due to the redirect issue I mentioned above. The code is at [4] - feel free to send a pull request for a modification if you want! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 15:53, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mike Peel: Yes I agree (note that I refer to CSS "clear:*", but also templates generating them like the famous "{{Clear}}"; but clear are also used in the standard stylesheet loaded in Commons, notably for banners, or for floatting images (within classes "floatleft", "floatright"). It's difficult to manage clears and they are used in lot of places. This complicates where we can place the infobox... So it is not always strictly at top or bottom or a page (and at bottom we have the problem of unclosed comments or noinclude sections). This requires manual tuning, and there are some reasons why the Infobox should not even be freeely placed. For Years category, all is handled in the same template, and only the code "{{Yearscar}}" is needed; some pages my include additional top banners at top (for additional common disambiguations, or banners for pages in discussion) or extra text below it. I've passed lot of time to clean these catergories manually, removing what was no longer needed (handled without error inside the template, including all categorizations, and their sort keys) , so now it is fully navighatable and the code is reduced to the strict minimum, and yes the infobox is now inside it... in the middle). And actualyl there will nearly never need anything else that this single tiny parameterless template inclusion. verdy_p (talk) 19:25, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Donald Trung: Thanks! I plan to try again next year, but on the plus side, this does give me more time than I was anticipating over the next few years to edit Commons/Wikidata/et al. ;-) Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 09:17, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wikimedia Deutschland (WMDE)
Hello Mike Peel,
Excuse me for bothering you, but I don't know if you have any direct contact with anyone from Wikimedia Deutschland (WMDE, "Wikimedia Germany"). I am asking you as you are quite heavily involved in the development of Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons (SDC) and are very active at Wikidata. I actually wanted to propose some things to Wikimedia Deutschland, and while I have talked to some individual engineers that work for Wikimedia Deutschland I don't think that the propositions I wish to make are within their scope, namely for Wikimedia Deutschland to play a small but active role in supporting the Wikimedia Commons, perhaps with SDC or perhaps with a Technical Wishlist like they already have at the German-speaking Wikipedia where some of the features requested there benefitted all Wikimedians.
I wanted to propose limiting it to three (3) or five (5) proposals every two (2) years or perhaps just start with only three (3) and see if it might be a wise investment of their time and resources. I know that Wikimedia Deutschland is very busy with Wikidata, but I think that it could be of great benefit to the Wikimedia Movement as a whole if they would invest some of their resources in improving the Wikimedia Commons and SDC. What do you think? --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 21:07, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Mike, I just noticed SDC Discussion and that I am listed as one of the speakers. Unfortunately, Before I knew about the conference I signed up to be a judge in a climbing competition tomorrow morning. --Jarekt (talk) 22:07, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Jarekt: The important thing is if you can be there for your presentation, it would be good if you can join the discussion but it's not so essential. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:08, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh gosh so I have to watchlist the changes I make too probably. In this case the issue seemed to be in the "artwork/art technique/art occupation" sphere. A Wikipedia page like the English one for "painting" merges all three, and we have come so far since early merges that people often get it, but with art forms that don't have many objects yet (like micromosaic) that problem keeps recurring. Jane023 (talk) 10:00, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to take part in WSC2021, please consult this page. Only some national categories are associated to competitions with local prizes.
If you are an expert user, we remind you that images uploaded within the deadline can be included in any case in their national category even if not uploaded with the main interface.
Please keep in mind that there is a new category this year, that is "astronomy".
If you already took part in a country that has completed its upload phase, please consider improving the description in English of your files (click on the edit button), since such description is what the international jury will use to evaluate them. World finalists will be finalized after March 2020.
Sorry for bothering you and have a nice wiki.
Message discussed here. If you do not want to receive these messages in the future, please unsubscribe from this list
Subcategories of user categories must also be marked as user categories, and not be categorised under the main category tree. Furthermore, media files must still be categorised under the main category tree (i.e. files inCategory:Photos of the 2012 Summer Olympics by User:Example must also have a main category such as Category:2012 Summer Olympics or subcategories thereof).
ꯒꯧꯇꯝꯀꯨꯃꯥꯔ ꯑꯣꯢꯅꯥꯝ (وسيم) (chat) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Moin Moin Mike Peel, how are you, long time no hear. ;) I have two wishes: 1) Under the talkpage is links to other projects, is it correct what I wrote there and could I put it into the sandbox? 2) The Infobox is more for category pages, right, or how is it, when the people put it on a gallery page. How is the handle? 3) Could you purge all article in "Category:Uses of Wikidata Infobox with no instance of" (172.000 at the moment; it is no fun to work against this) Regards, thank you and if we not hear, a quiet christmas time --Crazy1880 (talk) 18:26, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Crazy1880: 1) I need to catch up with the infobox edit requests, will try to get onto that soon. 2) It should work fine on gallery pages, so long as they're connected to Wikidata. I thought about bot-deploying it there as well, but it's more complicated to identify where to put the call compared to the much simpler categories, and often galleries aren't multilingual. 3) Pi bot is going through them now. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:58, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Moin Mike Peel, thanks that the bot purges the categories he already find 2000 categories, thats good, like i thought. For your request on Wikidata i wrote an comment. Perhaps we can think here how to use the infobox at all? Regards --Crazy1880 (talk) 17:36, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Crazy1880: Just bear in mind that the bot purges are really expensive for the WMF servers, so we shouldn't do them very often! Not sure I follow 'For your request ... ' onwards, sorry! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:44, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ahh, yes, no problem. You wrote a request on Wikidata to use the Wikidata Infobox template on every categorie in Commons. Therefor a let a comment. Regards --Crazy1880 (talk) 18:03, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Moin Moin, the purge-process of "Category:Uses of Wikidata Infobox with no instance of" is really good this time. Over 5000 items to now, thats amazing. Only an update for you ;) Thanks --Crazy1880 (talk) 17:49, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What I can say is, that it can help if a dev is looking at this. Perhaps the Category is to big or to full, that it doesn't work well? If you will create a task, let me know, then i will support this. Regards --Crazy1880 (talk) 18:31, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Photos of the Day
As I mentioned at Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PhotoOfTheDay, I made many of the photo choices you don't like, but I'm happy for you to change or remove them. Also, I had always thought that "Photo of the Day" should mean the best or most interesting photo, not necessarily a photo of a significant event, but I agree that with the move to using Wikidata Infobox instead, significant events are preferable. I've started overhauling some of the categories, but I'm hampered by the fact that I can't figure out how to add the media legend to the Wikidata item, as you did for July 16, 1969. Thank you again. Gildir (talk) 05:00, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gildir: Thanks for your contributions - but I do think there needs to be a more tangible connection to the day than just the photograph being taken that day. If you disagree with any of the removals I'm making, feel free to add them back on Wikidata and they'll show up in the infobox. For the media legend, you have to edit the image (P18) value on Wikidata and add media legend (P2096) as a qualifier to it, you'll also need to specify the language it's in, then save the P18 value + qualifier. Let me know if there's any particular step you're struggling with and I can try to help. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 10:12, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Uses_of_Wikidata_Infobox_for_taxons has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.
When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.
Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.
We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.
@Crazy1880: I think there is a misconfiguration - the bot looks through uses of the template, but doesn't try to replace the phrase with the infobox. I'll double-check and fix it this evening. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 11:46, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Moin Mike, i know what you mean, the phone was ringing always and we had to solve many problems too. Thanks for fixing, I'm looking for the next million step from the Infobox ;). Regards and have a nice weekend --Crazy1880 (talk) 19:29, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:14, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Science&Wiki 
Science&Wiki 
Science&Wiki 
Wiki Science Competition 
_2018_103.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_104.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_112.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_113.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_114.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_115.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_103.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2018_103.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_103.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_104.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_104.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_104.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_112.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2018_112.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_112.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_113.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2018_113.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_113.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_114.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_114.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_114.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_115.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_115.jpg){kind=link}
_2018_115.jpg){kind=link}
