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.
I hope you can confirm this image. I am actually a bit pissed off because I have sent three emails (the first at least 2 weeks ago) to OTRS with the permissions message for the parent imageand have not recieved a reply or confirmation. I also contacted several users with OTRS access, none of whom seem to have confirmed the image. Anyway, you can look at the confirmation here as a screenshot. The "Please excuse me... clarification" text was from the email I sent him. He just filled in his name and date on the bottom. If you need any other details, such as the email correspondence between the author of the image and me, feel free to ask.
Hi. I have searched OTRS for the keywords "Goodrem" and/or "Shelton". Neither gave hits in the past month. Could you please inform me of your emailaddress as sender per the links "Email this user" so I have a more definate search term? Cheers! Siebrand08:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
I misunderstood you and gave you my address instead of Mr. Muller's. The correspondence between Muller and I took place over flickr. The three messages I have sent to OTRS contained a copy & pasted text confirmation from Shelton Muller. I don't know where they went, since I did send them. He released the image under the GFDL over a series of messages exchanged over flickr. I don't have his personal email, but his business email is shelton@total-image.com.au. If you want confirmation, contact him over flickr or with his business email. I have all the messages over flickr. Here is the entire correspondence between Muller and I. I hope this is sufficient. I have numbered the messages in chronological order. Collage here (It is heavily compressed to reduce size, so please excuse the poor quality)TheKillerAngel21:41, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I tried to change the names of subcategories in Category:Electric locomotives of Germany. The category names are rather inconsistent. I started to equal it manually, but this is a lot of work. ;-)
I'm of the opinion that all subcategories beginning with railway company name (DB, DR, DBAG) should be followed by the English word Class and than with the class number (e. g. 103, E410). In the moment sometimes the English word Class is used, sometimes the German word Baureihe and sometimes nothing.
What do think about it? Can you help to rename all different named subcategories and to sort all belonging pictures in it?
For example: DB Baureihe 111 should be named DB Class 111.
In Category:Diesel locomotives of Germany there is the same problem. In Category:Steam locomotives of Germany the names of subcategories are consistent and no change is needed.
If you created this image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Hello, maybe you are the right person to answer my question. Together with Maire we've made some translations of uploadtext-sites into Polish [1], [2]. We also translated the menu with licenses into Polish [3]. This translation is on my user site yet. Could you help me tu find the page where it must be pasted ? I also realized that if you choose "Own work", "From Flickr"... the menu with licenses is shorter than on Special:Upload. Could you help me to find the MediaWiki page with the shorter menu ? I want to translate it for the Polish version. Thank you very much. Regards. Pimke10:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Best thing to do is put the stuff on the talk pages of the pages you would like this to be published on and add the template {{Editprotected}}. An admin watching the pages in that category will then address it. I would like to help, but I really have a lot on my plate at the moment. I may even process your edit protected requests, but I cannot be certain. Thank you for your work, by the way! Cheers! Siebrand10:09, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Siebrand, unfortunately my ability to express myself in english is (still) limited. But I'm sure I was clear above. I found many copyright violations. Now it's up to you. Gridge13:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC).
Dude! :) I do so many things; unfortunately I cannot be everywhere all the time. If you need urgent administrative attention for an issue, please use COM:AN. This forum is monitored by many Commons admins and you are more likely to get a quick response for cases where prompt action is required. I'm taking a look at things now... Cheers! Siebrand14:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
(The file Image:WWI6.jpg has been replaced by Image:Prokudin-Gorskii-22.jpg by administrator commons:User:Siebrand: Was in category "Duplicate", although NOT an exact duplicate. Translate me!): Considering this is not an automatable replacement, as it invalidates the caption, and considering this replacement has a doubtful copyright status, meaning it should probably be dropped altogether, I can't help but notice there's something missing from that explanation, or rather precisely that is missing. Could we get an explanation of why these images are exchanged if they differ? Aliter17:51, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
They can differ in for example size. I doubt that the differ in subject. So your statement that the caption was invalidated is incorrect. Cheers! Siebrand17:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
GOEDEKE / GOEDECKE
Hi Siebrand there is a bigger fault in this upload, I've ti check it it seems as if the first 50 pages are loaded two times wiht different filename. i will check this within the next days, and delete the correct duplikates.
Hallo Siebrand via de volgende link zijn erg veel antieke prints te vinden, die echter te koop staan, kunnen deze afbeeldingen echter worden gebruikt voor commons??
Ik bedoel dus dat de afbeeldingen duidelijk ouder zijn dan 70 jaar, en dus eigenlijk scrupileus gecopieerd kunnen worden maar ik twijfel, secar one22:41, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Zij verkopen afdrukken en/of reproducties van materiaal dat zich in het publieke domein bevindt. De regels voor PD zijn van toepassing. Dus als de auteursrechten verlopen zijn, kan dat ook niet geclaimd worden op de 2d-afbeeldingen. Let op dat hier de normale uploadregels gelden. Ik hoop dat je beseft dat je een gewaarschuwd man bent. Groet, Siebrand23:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi, you deleted the above mentioned image a week ago as a duplicate. It is not. The version with the aaded "-2" was created by the de-Bilderwerkstatt (graphics atelier) as improved version, with a better contrast and optimized colors. We used both versions next to another in a before - after - comparison page to showcase the possibilities of the graphics atelier. Please restore the file. Thanks --h-stt!?22:31, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I won't bother with the edit summary. But in fact I waste most of my time assessing what info needs to be copied across from one dup. to the other, and which is best to delete - I complain about others deleting useful info so I want to do it properly :-). I am a little disappointed that not many others are helping tag the duplicates :-(. One thing I note is that a few duplicates are from SieBot transwiking images from other wikis that are already here by another name. Is it possible for SieBot to do a dup. check before transfers? (keep up the good work :-) --Tony Wills11:29, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
I do not think it would be a good idea to never transfer media that are already on Commons here. Very often not all required information has been transferred, and by tracking the duplicates down, this will get more clear here, IMO. Cheers! Siebrand17:47, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
I agree that the automated bots do a more consistent job of transferring images, but is the same image going to be transferred time and time again unless it is here by exactly the same name as the original image? Often people have transferred an image here and 'fixed' the filename (eg just changed *.JPG to *.jpg or added a more descriptive name) and so a bot has transferred the image again with the original name. Is the only solution to keep the version with the original name and delete the duplicate that was uploaded with a 'better' name? --Tony Wills09:46, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Please link the edit. It is possible that if a miniature version was replaced with a larger version, the image is indeed shown larger. Instead of reverting, you'd better add "|250px" or something similar. Cheers! Siebrand19:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Hallo Siebrand, tot wie moet ik mij wenden voor hulp bij mijn eerste archiveringspoging?
Ik wil graag mijn pagina User talk tot Oct. 1, 2007 in archive1 stoppen, maar heb eerlijk gezegd geen idee hoe.
Graag advies/hulp.--Gerardus08:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Kopieer en plak het deel dat je wilt archiveren in de nieuwe pagina, verwijder het uit je overlegpagina... Meer is is het niet :) Groet, Siebrand10:33, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Siebrand (nog 1 keer), Ik heb een nieuwe pagina gemaakt: User talk:Gerardus/Archief 1. Te archiveren deel geplakt en
uit de overlegpagina verwijderd (tot en met Oct. 1, 2007), maar hoe krijg ik nu in mijn pagina: User talk:Gerardus een verwijzing naar de archiefpagina? M'n verstand staat even stil cq werkt niet meer.Een zich doodschamende--Gerardus14:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Schaamte is een bijzonder vervelende emotie. Probeer die niet te hebben. Plaats iets als [[User talk:Gerardus/Archief 1|archive 1]] Bovenaan je overlegpagina. Groet, Siebrand14:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Beste Siebrand, Maandag heeft Oscar je een mail gestuurd over bovengenoemde gebruiker. Zou je daar even naar willen kijken (en liefst een OT blok instellen)? Het gaat om een ingelogde crosswikivandaal op NL-wikipedia en Commons. Alvast bedankt, Ninane12:01, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Good morning,
I would like to know why it has been decided to move the category Zeyrek Mosque to the new Category:Church of Christ Pantocrator (Constantinople). This move is wrong for (at least) the following reasons:
The complex is made of three churches, the Pantocrator is just one of them, and many pictures does not portrait this church;
The voice of English and turkish Wikipedia refers to Zeyrek, not to the Pantocrator;
The building as of today is still a mosque, and not a church or a museum;
The most important byzantine scholars (Krautheimer, Müller-Wiener, etc.) refer to the building in their works always as Zeyrek, and not as Pantocrator;
Due to this, please move back the media to the old category.
Regards.
P.S. The same request refers also to all the other categories affecting ancient byzantine churches in Istanbul that you eventually changed.
Sorry I missed this twice. It was probably the layout that made me think it was a done topic. Going to look into it now. Cheers! Siebrand08:39, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! I tried myself to do a redirect, by I did not know how. Anyway, I have to talk with that guy... Thanks again, cheers! alex200609:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
The above image was deleted some time ago due to being marked as unfree by FlickreviewR. However, it was there, under a free license, when I uploaded it over two years ago. I was never notified about the impending deletion, and only found out about it by going to the article where I'd placed it (nn:snaragadd) and finding it sad and lifeless, devoid of illustration. Checking out the uploader's Flickr account, I found that he still licenses all his work as cc-by, but that his older photos are no longer there, probably because he doesn't have a paid account. So, in short, do you think the photo could be undeleted? --Ranveig00:00, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
CommonsDelinker on it.wiki
Hi Siebrand. Please have a look at this. Seems like the bot did something wrong. I reverted the edit, in the meantime can you check into it? Many thanks in advance. --Kiado09:48, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Hello Siebrand, you deleted the Image ISS-14-Korolev.jpg and your Bot Commonsdelinker replaced it with Commons:Image:Mk_Frankfurt_Merian_Stadtansicht.jpg. Your Bot did so, because the Image should be a duplicate. But it isn't. Can you restore the Image ISS-14-Korolev.jpg and revert the edit of your bot? See here
[9] --Rosion18:13, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, I an truly sorry about that. There was only one usage and so only one replacement. I reverted that and restored the image. Will probably be replaced with a true duplicate. I think this was a copy/paste error on my side. Cheers! Siebrand19:18, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
19 November interwiki mistake in BG WP
Hello, Siebrand. I report for a strange mistake made by SieBot two days ago, which I didn't notice in my brisk investigation of other wikis. What might be the reason and can you (automatically?) check whether similar mistakes have happened in the same period? Thank you in advance. --Spiritia06:47, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
We have gotten one other report on this (see this page User_talk:Siebrand#Vandalism_ru:User:CommonsDelinker). We think it was a TCP disconnect and the pywikipedia bot framework would be causing this (breaking connection before all data sent and the wiki software does not know any better). As far as I know some coders are working on it. Cheers! Siebrand10:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Okay, thank you for the explanation and sorry for bothering you. I hope the problem will be resolved soon. :-) Nazdrave! Spiritia22:19, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Image Licensing Problems: Ehecatl images
Hi Siebrand, I'm a new user here at Wikipedia, recently I inserted five images in this Wikipage: Ehécatl (airplane). As you can see, they belong in the spaces lacking them. Despite that the proper procedures were accomplished to make the pictures stick, you have deleted them due to copyright issues. I forwarded the mail necessary from the creator and sole owner of the images, Hydra Technologies, to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. I was wondering if you could check the e-mail out to clear their licenses -the exact heading is "Hydra Technologies Image Licensing". Thanks in advance and cheers from Mexico, let me know what proceeds from here, I am kind of desperate.
Hi, I am worried that the duplicates listed on your dupes(1 2 3 4 5) pages are been deleted with too much haste. I was half way through dupes5 and now find the rest of the images have been already deleted. Very efficient, but is care being taken to not lose info from the deleted version? Now it is difficult for me to be sure because they are deleted :-) but for example, I know Image:U_280.jpg contained a info summary box whereas Image:U280.jpg does not. I think Image:U_280.jpg also linked back to the source image on sv.wiki (I can no longer be sure ;-). This is just an example, I had not looked at many of the rest and have to trust the right thing was done for them ;-). I hope you do not think that deleting duplicates has some urgency - it does not. It is a process, it will never be complete while people keep uploading images. I think it is more important to the project that images contain the best information rather than we have no duplicates (deleting duplicates is just a tidiness thing) --Tony Wills22:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Tony, the image you are referring to did contain an infobox. That image was moved here from sv.wp. However, the image that was kept was uploaded by the same uploader that was credited on the sv.wp version, hence the current image was kept. Please be assured that this process is taken care of in a manner as careful as possible: media are being replaced and only when media are no longer in use, they are deleted. I do check that information is retained. Non-relevant information like referenced above is not retained. Cheers! Siebrand23:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for the assurance :-). In this case someone had gone to the trouble of creating an info summary box (as is encouraged), which I would have copied across to the retained version. --Tony Wills00:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that the bot deleted an image of Camaderry Mountain because the version was deleted from Commons - but another version ("the duplicate") was left - the commons deleter didn't bother to relink the remaining version and the bot removed the evidence. Not exactly much encouragement to place images in Commons rather than en:Wiki as I was repeatedly asked to do! (Sarah77723:59, 15 November 2007 (UTC))
The bot is working great. It appears that am admin, against policy, has removed media that had not been fully replaced[10]. Please complain with User:Deadstar. The bot just does its job and does not know why admins delete media. Cheers! Siebrand08:22, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Done As discussed on IRC. This file will be added to the extension files to prevent this form happening again. Cheers! Siebrand10:28, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Fortunately, we just had a scap today after I commited the change. Everything seems to work fine, so you may delete these icons now, if you think they need to be deleted. thanks. ThomasV17:05, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
In most of the wikis where this change has been made, we have now 1leftarrow.png and Nuvola actions next.png which ist extremly clear use- and helpfull.
There are a few cases like this where the image is trivial (and the size small) (eg location maps) where the file is part of a set, and it seems more useful to retain both copies. I have left these untagged while I consider the alternatives (what would be nice would be to have the Image:xyz1.jpg and Image:xyz2.jpg pages both point to the same image xyz.jpg). --Tony Wills00:37, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Yep. I was thinking the same thing. We need a separation between media name and wiki name, which would mean that multiple names could point to the same resource. Being able to natively rename media is a long standing feature request the we more and more direly need as Commons grows... Siebrand08:13, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
I disagree. Please take care of orphaning the other image then and remove it asap. You cannot protest, revert and do nothing. Cheers! Siebrand10:29, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:A8_Alpaufstieg.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multilicense GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Siebrand21:21, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
my name's ecemaml and I'm an administrator in the Spanish Wikipedia (I'm also a ). Jorab has asked me to help him with regard to the images he's uploaded. He's not very fluent in English and has not a deep knowledge about the templates needed to show the license status. I'll update them. Is that a problem? Or should he update the description by himself? Best regards and many thanks in advance. --Ecemaml (talk to me/habla conmigo) 21:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Please have him put a statement (in Spanish is OK) on his user page that you are tidying up for him. That's is probably most transparant. Cheers! Siebrand09:56, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know :) Someone on Wikipedia (who is helping me) let me know too. I have corrected it with {{PD-self}}. Take Care and Have a Good Sunday....NeutralHomerT:C07:04, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
could you please also correct the {{Commons}}- and {{Commonscat}}-links in de.WP to the categories your bot moved? This would be very kind (I have no idea which categories have already been moved).
Moreover you should correct [Special:Whatlinkshere/Category:Images_needing_categories|the links]] to Category:Images needing categories (with your bot :p) before deleting this cat, shouldn't you ?
Hi, I noticed that recently Category:Images requiring renaming was moved to Category:Media requiring renaming with a new description claiming that a bot is assigned to clear it out if the request was made by a trusted user. My questions, which I think should be documented on the category page, are:
What bot (username) is responsible for this, how often is it run, and at what rate does it complete renamings?
What is a "trusted user"? Is there a special list or is that synonymous with administrators?
The bot is not there yet. A description of what the bot will be doing and how is at Commons:MediaMoveBot. User:Betacommand promised to write it, but he has unfortunately been silent for over a month :( Trusted users will be equal to sysops and users that are added to a list. Siebrand10:38, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I´m Spanyard, my English isn´t good
Can you speak Spanish or someone knows my language?
If you have added the required information, please feel free to do so yourself next time. Thanks for the help. Cheers! Siebrand09:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Dudas sobre cómo calificar un/os documento/s
Quiero subir un documento escrito por mi abuelo, Julio Martínez Hombre, que murió el 4 de diciembre de 1945, que mi madre lo encontró en un libro de Filosofía en casa. Mi abuelo lo escribió para comentar alguna de sus ideas sobre un libro que estaba leyendo. Vamos que no es un artículo de un periódico, ni de ninguna revista o formaba parte de un libro. Era algo que escribió él. Pues bien, la duda es la siguiente, ¿cómo lo califico para subirlo?
Sorry, I am not able to read Spanish. Please either approach a Spanish speaking admin (COM:ADM) or translate this to English, German or Dutch. Cheers! Siebrand13:24, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for speaking in Spanish but I can explain better
En primer lugar, creo que los he puesto duplicados, y no sé como borrar los primeros, que están mal colocados.
Segundo, son copias escaneadas de unas fotocopias que nos hicieron llegar de Argentina, en donde se publicó un artículo que mandó mi abuelo, Julio Martínez Hombre, en una revista, llamada ASTURIAS, del Centro Asturiano de Buenos Aires.
La revista es de, como mucho, el año 1930, ya que el artículo lo acabó de escribir mi abuelo en 1929, y luego lo que tardase en llegar la carta a Argentina, en donde se publicó.
Si hay algún dato más que quieras saber, me lo comunicas.
Hoi Siebrand, ik zie dat je geen Spaans bij je gebruikersboxjes hebt dus ik ben maar even zo vrij ... ik heb geen idee waar het over gaat, maar dit is wat hij zegt (vrij vertaald):
Ten eerste denk ik dat ik dingen dubbel geplaatst heb en ik weet niet hoe ik de eersten weer moet wissen, die verkeerde zijn ondergebracht.
Ten tweede zijn het scans van fotokopietjes die ons uit Argentinië zijn toegestuurd, alwaar men een artikel gepubliceerd had dat mijn opa, Julio Martiínez Hombre, had ingestuurd naar een krant, de "ASTURIAS", van het "Centro Asturiano" in Buenos Aires.
De krant is van het jaar 1930, al had mijn opa het artikel al in 1929 geschreven, maar het liep vertraging op bij het versturen naar Argentinië, waar het gepubliceerd werd.
Als je nog meer gegevens nodig hebt, laat het dan even weten
Hoi Pudding, lang niets van je gezien. Ik hoop dat alles goed is. Zou je willen antwoorden dat we brongegevens ed. nodig hebben (precieze datum, naam krant, etc). Gezien de bovenstaande gegevens is het dan waarschijnlijk PD-old. Groet, Siebrand20:09, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Hoi Siebrand, alles is goed hoor, dank ;o) (druk geweest met andere dingen). Was een paar dagen onderweg en het zit nu zo'n beetje op de deadline voor verwijdering dus heb ik maar even op de image-pagina's ingevuld wat er te weten valt (zie o.a. Image:Pedrayes_1.JPG). Ik weet niet hoe het volgens Argentijns recht in elkaar zit (wat de termijnen zijn voor PD-oud van krantenpublicaties en/of overlijden auteur etc.), maar er zijn denk ik twee insteken mogelijk:
- Publicatie ouder dan 50 jaar (zie {{PD-AR-Anonymous}}), rechten bij de uitgever dus verlopen.
- Auteur minder dan 70 jaar geleden overleden (1945), maar nabestaande geeft toestemming.
Mogelijke struikelblokken:
- Het werk is niet anoniem gepubliceerd.
- Onduidelijk of alle nabestaanden toestemming geven.
Indien PD-oud niet kan vanwege niet anoniem, dan zou de "nabestaande" aannemelijk moeten maken dat hij de auteursrechten mag beheren en zou een geschikte licentie gekozen moeten worden.
Maar dat is allemaal mijn IANAL-geneuzel en ik heb de Argentijnse eigenaardigheden er niet op nageslagen.. Als je nog concrete dingen moet weten wil ik het natuurlijk graag vertalen/voorleggen. Groetengedoe Pudding4brains00:42, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
P.S. Termijn voor PD-oud schijnt in AR idd 70 jaar vanaf 1 januari van het jaar direct volgend op het jaar van overlijden te zijn. Pudding4brains01:03, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Files now deleted
Hoi Siebrand, User:Zirland heeft de bestanden, ondanks aanvullende info mijnerzijds inmiddels gwist. Ik heb daarom ook aldaar gevraagd hoe Zirland de licentiemogelijkheden beoordeeld heeft alvorens tot wissen over te gaan. Als één van jullie aan zou kunnen geven wat uiteindelijk de doorslag gaf, dan kan dat aan de ongetwijfeld goed bedoelende uploader worden gecommuniceerd - lijkt me wel zo netjes. Groets Pudding4brains17:52, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Anyway, I've once again added {{Information}} with as much source/permissions info as I could find.
The uploader, User:Jecarreroblancomartinez, had already added {{PD-AR-Photo}} - which is probably incorrect (it's not a photo but text). A better option might be {{PD-AR-Anonymous}}, although the work is not really anonymous - but the essence of it would be that the publisher's rights only lasted until 1980 according to Argentine law. The Author however has not deceased more than 70 years ago (hence not PD-Old), but the family grants us usage rights. So, in the end what's probably needed is some statement that they hold the rights and that they license the article as PD, CC-something or GFDL. If you agree, or have other opinions about it would probably still be good to inform the uploader about this (if needed, I would gladly translate). SAME MESSAGE WENT TO User_talk:Zirland. Cheers Pudding4brains02:43, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi Siebrand, Re your notice to Minorhistorian on the Hawker Typhoon images. I initially had some problems finding the templates I needed to sort out the licensing. With Bzuk's help I've been able to upload a properly licensed copy. Please feel free to delete the images that aren't covered.
Regards Minorhistorian01:47, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Your deletion of my "duplicate" image
Hi. I notice that Image:Aryan Guard 09.jpg was deleted by you because you said it was a duplicate of Image:AryanGuardinKensington.jpg. Now, I took this picture and uploaded to both FlickR and Commons directly myself. In FlickR, I could only specify it's licensed as "CC-BY-SA" exclusively, which carried over into the tagging of Image:AryanGuardinKensington.jpg. In commons I licensed it "dually" as CC-BY-SA and GFDL, specifically the most recent version of those licenses (including future versions). So, this is best for Commons (e.g. the dual license). Also, the image uploaded by me, appeared in my category of pics I took, and is listed with other images, in "user gallery" feature. Also, as a rule, the first version uploaded, should be the one actually kept. So, as a courtesy, I would request you please delete Image:AryanGuardinKensington.jpg and restore Image:Aryan Guard 09.jpg. --Rob03:52, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Note to Rob: I have been helping reduce the thousands of duplicates too. It can often be difficult to determine which image to delete and which to keep. The rules of thumb I have been using are:
If one of the images is uploaded by the image's author, then keep that one (regardless of which was uploaded first). This helps validate the image licensing and maintains the image in the authors upload gallery.
If both are uploaded by the image's author, then keep the latest UNLESS it has been changed to a more restrictive license.
If neither are uploaded by the image's author then keep the one with the best trail to the original image.
But sometimes if the file has a very poor filename (eg a cameras sequenced number) and would need renaming (which can currently only be done by re-uploading the image and deleting the original), I choose the better named version.
In all cases, I copy any useful data from the other, especially info relating to the origin and licensing of the image
Siebrand might like to mention any other criteria he looks at too. So there is a bit of work involved, and some mistakes are made.
If there is some reason that Siebrand can't restore it, then your best solution might be to re-upload it and mark this one {{duplicate|your new file.jpg}} :-) --Tony Wills07:59, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
You delete my photo
Hey, I had a photo called Explanada.jpg that appeared in the Spanish and English article about Chetumal (México)and you deleted it cause "it's Possibly unfree Flickr images". Man, read the description first >=(
Saludos desde Mérida Yucatán, el culo de todo el mundo, saludame a tu jefecita por favor y deja de estarme chingando las pelotas, jodido holandés droguetas =)
Hi! Can you help me out with this, because I don´t understand the Wikipedia licenses. The thing is that I have emailed the architecture office of the architect on the picutre who emailed me this picture. They gave me permission to use it on Wikipedia, but it is a picture taken by a professional photographer - a press image. How should I tag this? I have permission, I am not the creator and I have permission to use it specifically on Wikpedia. Erik031
You placed a deletion tag on the image Nitslonden.jpg because you thought essential information was missing. That is not true, if you look at the original upload logo you can read the following: Permission= Picture by Sébastien Demery: "You can use any pictures of mine you like" (Email, Monday, December 26, 2005 18:37)
There is missing information: with which explicit license have the media been licensed? On Flickr, the image is "All rights reserved". Cheers! Siebrand16:05, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Estatua_Duro Image
Hi!
In the photo "Image:Estatdua_Duro.JPG" I think that all it's good. His author (member of the wikipedia in Asturian language with the nick "Astur1") has given me his permission to use this photo, which is his, and I have written the permission textually. The problem probably is that the information is in Spanish. Do you understand the language?
Thank you ;-) --Yandrak20:11, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
I would very much appreciate if you would let me know the exact name of the file, as stated at the top of this page. I am not a detective... Cheers! Siebrand16:06, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Uploaded pic
Thanks for warning me about the pic I uploades. I forgot to put some info on it. Unfortunately I don't know how to fix it =/
User:Mizunoryu 21:03, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Second. I want to say in Spanish what my Grandfather, Julio Martínez Hombre, wrote a opinion about philosophy and his daughter, my mother, found that paper in a book a long time ago.
Third. Never it was published.
Fourth. The question is what permission I have to put?
Hi, Siebrand.
I uploaded the image above by mistake, that image its already an existing one. Since you're an administrator, i'm asking you please delete the image. I don't know if that's what you do when there are two equal images. Anyway i think i should report my mistake. I'll be more careful next time.
{{universal replace|Glcm.jpg|BGM-109G Gryphon - s=DF-SC-83-01375.JPEG|reason=pic one is unsed on en.wiki, but pic two is about higher resolution}}
turnes to
CommonsDelinker: Replace File:Glcm.jpg with [[:File:{{{2}}}]] across all Wikimedia projects. Reason: pic one is unsed on en.wiki, but pic two is about higher resolution
I would not duplicate to an image name with an "=" in there. That looks like asking for trouble... Best re-upload under a better name. Cheers! Siebrand15:52, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Go to the image page (linked about), click "edit", remove {{No license}} and replace it with {{PD-self|author=I, [[User:Groteddy|Groteddy]]}}. Cheers! Siebrand15:56, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
About an image being removed
Hello! You removed the image Gert_wingard.jpg. I put information about license, source etcetera on it. The image is from the architectural firm of Gert Wingårdh, and they gave me permission to use the image on Wikipedia (free of charge of course) - they emailed me the removed low-res image for Wikipedia use. Below is the permission in Swedish. Tell me what to do? If I was a journalist I know the email would have given me a permit to use the image in a newspaper without making copyright intrusions. Then how should I tag the image?
"Hej Erik!
Här kommer en bild du kan använda!
Bilden är tagen av Hans Gedda.
Hi, Siebrand. Although I wouldn't have corrected the data concerning cayenafull.jpg, because it was obviously an error of mine when I was new to the Wikipedia, the link no longer worked.
However, I wanted to ask you: what type of license should be chosen when I take a picture from a newspaper, then extract an image and change its format? Thanks,--Jdvillalobos15:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
picture 'Rivetage_Europe_eccidentale_cotte_de_mail.JPG' has been delete by you. Why ?
Hi,
The picture 'Rivetage_Europe_eccidentale_cotte_de_mail.JPG' has bee remove by you with the comment 'Dupe of Image:Rivetage Oriental cotte de mail.JPG)'.
My english is no good, i think Dupp signifie the image is the same.
but the image is not the same.
In oriental picture you can see a rivet for close the mail.
In Europ whe use a coin (a triangular piece).
Hi CommonsDelinker.
Can you explain to me what specific reasons makes Babangida photo to be deleted. Kindly I need to know about it, and what kind a picture are ligible to be uploaded? --Muddyb Blast Producer08:40, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Dunno. Maybe the description didn't make that clear, possibly I didn't tag it myself. Feel free to fix. Cheers! Siebrand17:43, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
It seems as though someone had removed the "bad name" tag from "Image:Flag of Chechnya.svg", can't check the history of Image:Flag of Chechen Republic since 2004.svg but I'm guessing someone moved the tag there instead. Anyhow I've reuploaded the image and retagged the oter one as dupe./Lokal_Profil18:07, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi, CommonsDelinker replaced Image:Flag_of_Northern_Ireland.svg with Image:Ulster_banner.svg. The problem is, this image is used in a template that needs the structure "Flag of...", otherwise this would mean to modify 300 subpages of the template. Is it possible to have some sort of redirect from the "old" name? If you can answer here, I will come and check. Thanks. --78.12.66.6911:17, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Most of the templates and articles that used this image have already been updated by Sieband bot or manually by editors on wikipedia.--Padraig3uk11:26, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Hello CommonsDelinker, as told by others here above, also in the italian wiki the structure "Flag of" is used in some templates (for example Template:Naz|CA|NIR (were it use a part of the name to build the flag image of the Northern Ireland football team), so please don't cancel the Flag of image or if you prefer rename Ulster... one in Flag of Ulster...--Actarux18:53, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
#switch: can be used to fix differing cases. If you do not do it, someone else will do that for you before the file will be deleted. No current functionality will get lost... Cheers! Siebrand19:05, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, we cannot use switch in that particular Template. This because the different national team are encoded as subpages containing the rest of the image name only and we cannot change the main template inserting the switch because doing so, we completely change every linking to that template in all the sports pages. However, if you will cancel the flag of N.I., perhaps we could upload it only in our wiki.--Actarux19:40, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, my mistake; the flag is still available, but as you can see from the abovementioned example, we have some problems: your edit here is not resolving the issue, as the template automatically adds "Flag of" before the "a" field, so the result is "Flag of Ulster banner.svg". So, before changing 300 subpages, do we have any other possibilities? Thanks. --78.12.69.23909:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I am of the opinion that a mistake was made setting up it:Template:Naz by assuming that a file will *always* start with Flag of (unnecessarily cheap). Even though it may be a lot of work, the best thing would be to change that template and its subpages, to make the system more flexible... Cheers! Siebrand09:58, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Please note I have reverted your change of the image link on my userpage. There is a dispute as to the correct name for the image and until that dispute is sorted out then the image should remain. At the moment you appear to be getting drawn into an edit war and used to push a personal point of view. As these changes may need to be reveted it may be better to refrain from further changes of links. See Rianas talk page. Richard Harvey14:32, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Whatever happens, the disputed image is *not* the flag of Northern Ireland. It is however the Ulster banner, to which it is being renamed. What happens to pages after that is not my concern. As far as I can determine, Northern Ireland's flag is the Union Jack. But as I choose to stay out of edit wars, I replace a duplicate. Editors in the various wikis should decide if they want to use the Ulster banner or the Union Jack. Cheers! Siebrand19:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
P.s. you will probably get a red link on your user page somewhere in the coming week.
Deutsche Bundespost - Bedeutende Deutsche - Ludwig van Beethoven - 70 Pfennig - schwärzlichgrün.jpg
Hi. I have checked after your request. The media have the same dimensions. They are depicting the same stamp. The one deleted has a very ugly stamp over it. I see no additional value in keeping it. Cheers! Siebrand10:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I'm writing you because of the Nanda Devi images. You told me their are missing some information, wich I think is the license. I'm confused, because I remember putting their licenses. Well, I can tell you that I found both images in the English Wikipedia and I they were in public domain, here are the links: en:Image:NandaDevi.jpg, en:Image:DSC00297.JPG. As you can see, both of them were free. I don't know how to solve the problem, though, could you help me? Thank you. Poromiami06:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello, Siebrand! What need I do more about RenatoTeixeira1.jpg upload, as I have just referred there the photography was given to me for Wikipedia purpose, free usage. If needed, I own the e-mail sended by Agência Produtora to me, with its authorization ad causam. If possible, answer me by egidiofc@gmail.com. Tank you. Egidiofc18:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Commonsdelinker - pl.wiki
Hey, I pass a small request on behalf of my friend - could you pls take a look over here [13] and check what's going on? We're not sure if everything is working properly - bot has removed part of the text. thx in adavnce. Masur11:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I really can't see any good reason for your order. Is there a policy that says that file names can't be in portuguese? Is there a policy that says that they should be translated to spanish? Why was my original file deleted if they were NOT exactly the same (your words). Regards. Paulo Juntas15:54, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I restored the original file and tagged the newer one as duplicate, could you please set up CommonsDelinker to replace it? I don't know how this happens, but we should really be careful with this kind of deletion; suddenly, the source file didn't exist... Cheers, Patríciamsg16:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
We/I are/am careful. That just does not mean that we/I are/am without error. Thanks for fixing it. If you tag the image to be replaced {{duplicate|new name}} it will happen at some point in time. Cheers! Siebrand18:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
As long as we do not have a bot to do this, you will have to do this yourself. Download image, upload image and copy the page description. The mark the old image {{bad name|new name}}. Cheers! Siebrand23:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
You are deleted the imageImage:CZ-A23_Kolona.jpg. The german sign 124 (Image:Zeichen 124.svg) has the diferent source and categorisation from the czech sign A 23. That is why isnt right to delete one of them. If you are absolutely sure that the signs from different countries are exactly identical, then the description and categories must be kept and merged, no deleted. --ŠJů23:19, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Commons Talk:Licensing
Beste Siebrand, ik heb een m.i. voorzichtige poging gedaan een paar van mijn probleempjes t.a.v. sculpture/Fop en No-fop/fairUse (je herinnert je misschien mijn problemen /gedachten hierover)in het genoemde overleg orgaan vast te leggen . Ik ging hierbij uit van de vaste overtuiging, die overigens eerder ook nog door niemand is weersproken, dat in Nederland zoiets als freedom of panorama geldt.
Ik ontving tot nu toe slechts 1 reactie (nou ja, beter dan niets) en wel van je collega-admin Bryan. Deze beweert stellig: in Nederland is geen FOP (slechts voor architectuur). Dit blijft me maar achtervolgen. Wat moet ik hier nu weer mee? Is er zoiets als een admin-overleg (NL)?
Graag je reactie. Groetend--Gerardus09:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Er is Commons:De Kroeg. De Nederlandstalige gemeenschap op Commons is vrij beperkt, hoewel het aantal uploads vrij groot is. De FoP in Nederland geldt bij mijn weten voor alle permanent in de openbare ruimte geinstalleerde objecten. Groet, Siebrand09:47, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Bot deletes adjacent content
The bot deleted adjacent content from the image it was removing. See my personal page history on Wikipedia for the example.--Primalchaos20:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
"You can use the images of ArmeniaDiaspora.com with proper copyright notice and link to ArmeniaDiaspora.com." Dat klinkt als Fair use. Siebrand18:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I have integrated the source, author and type of license for the image above, as you asked me to do. Is it OK? I really could appreciate if you told me if there's still something wrong. Diego Fernández 7:42, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
If you claim to be an heir of the deceased copyright holder of the above image, could you please sent permission to OTRS? I have for now tagged the image with a permission missing tag. Thanks. Cheers! Siebrand01:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
concerning cleanups on User:CommonsDelinker/commands
hi Siebrand,
concerning your comment about wtf I never cleanup after a move, my experience on the English Wiki as a sysop has shown that being accused of POV actions come very easily when doing jobs by yourself. I normally do not delete or remove my own cat. moves, because I see it necessary to have my actions basically cross-checked by another sysop like you, to have a system of checks. So please don't take this as me being too lazy to remove my own edits. Likewise, if there was another sysop who moved cat.s, I also delete the old category and remove it from the bot when I get to it. If you are overwhelmed with work however, let me know and maybe we can figure something out. Gryffindor09:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Basically it is annoying to have to paste stuff below a list of things that has already been done. I am currently quite busy in real life and on Betawiki. Here I just run a couple of bots and take care of duplicates at the moment. I have had the habit of removing my own cat moves in the past, and aside from the occasional fsckup, that goes quite well. I wouldn't be too avoiding in taking responsibility for these types of action. If the job is done, just finish it, as far as I am concerned. Now that I actually know how you look at it, I'll probably just process the done cat moves anyway. In my book is was a matter of seeing admins not cleaning up after themselves, which in turn annoyed me. Anyway, thank you for the explanation. Cheers! Siebrand01:53, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Oh I see. No I'm sorry, it didn't mean that I was too lazy to clean up after myself, I just thought it best for all to see that I am not just unilaterally deleting categories but that there is a four-eyes check-system so to speak. How about this: after a category has been moved by me, you (or someone else) can delete them. Once I see that that category has been deleted (basically signaling to me that move has been approved by another sysop) I will clean up the now red links from the bot after a while (say a couple of days). Is that a compromise we can agree upon? Gryffindor13:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I don't know if there's some procedure for this. The bots would tend to readd them (all the pages must be manually changed?). Also, i'm guessing a lot on the page contents, there might be a good reason to have them linked.
If interwiki entries have been messed up, manual corrections or manually operated interwiki of all involved articles if the only way to get rid of it. This is one of the huge disadvantages of the current interwiki system :( Siebrand10:34, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
It looks to me like the name of the kept image is a whole lot more descriptive. Sorry, not going to act on your request. Cheers! Siebrand10:32, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Haha, sorry! I didn´t mean that...I don't speak English very well... so I misunderstand the concept of "heir". I had made the corrections again. Obviously I have changed the license. Thanks for your help and if anything is still wrong, please tell me.
Diego Fernández 4:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I see I uploaded the incorrect version, I have re-uploaded the full high-res version to the proper name. However, wouldn't it have been more prudent to drop a note on my talk page about the issue instead of changing the tags? -- Avi22:19, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
I received your message about the image file Image:Totatzin.jpg (here) The original website this image comes from is Christus Rex Pater Noster. There are some pictures from the same website added in Commons and apparently there is no problem to use these pictures Lord's Prayer in Lingala. If there is still a problem, or if a special permission is required, please help me. I'm a new user here in Wikimedia Commons and I'm starting to get familiar with all these procedures. --Cuxlejal02:28, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Broken CommonsDelinker removal
Hi!
I tried to contact you on IRC, but you probably did not receive that. So once again: this CommonsDelinker edit is obviously broken. (Also: note that CommonsDelinker edits redirects to deleted images, changing them to an empty #REDIRECT (just removing the image link, which is quite understandable). It should probably replace them with {{Delete}} or something.)
Reporting to RenatoTeixeira1.jpg image uploaded at this WikiCommons by me, I have a question:
How do I do to add supplementary information at RenatoTeixeira1.jpg complete file, so the box containing the warning sign may be removed? I just wish to include both the e-mail texts (first from mine, second from Agência Produtora), so the full permission criteria may be done.
El Samán de Apure is a small town on the southern bank of the Apure River. Therefore, its name could be El Samán del Apure. However, it is not the name of the river, but the name of the Apure State which is referring to in the town's name. Since most names of countries, regions and states use no articles, it is not convenient to use "del" (de+el) in this case. It is not the same case as Miranda de Ebro in Spain, a city whose name should be Miranda del Ebro because Ebro only refers to the river. However, we can't go back to the correct name now, since it is a name used several centuries ago. --Fev21:10, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello
Greetings, sir. I am new here and I have been seeing different images in different places. Hre is where most of the art is and I wanted to donate an image. This one and this one. And I would also like to share it with Wikipedia. But I don't know how to. And I don't know about liscensing. Can you tell me how to add this image and tell me what liscensing is it. It's legal because it's been found in many places in the internet.--David Angel17:38, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
What is going on in CommonsDupes when the same is on both sides, the names, type, and pixel size are all the same? — Rlevse • Talk • 18:04, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I already dealt with them, some were tag errors, some I am not sure why it showed that way, but I resolved them all, but look what happened here when I did a replace. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:52, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
This happens when media are used through templates: it is impossible to determine on which page exactly media are used. So CD reports all pages with usage where it could not replace. Large lists are almost always a sign of usage through templates. Siebrand10:21, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
So do we go ahead and just delete the image we'd normally delete when CD can't replace them (when we can't find the template in question)? — Rlevse • Talk • 12:43, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Image:Grafmonument oscar wilde in parijs.JPG has been marked as a copyright violation. The Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.
The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this image is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the image description page.
Can you help me? (I dont know the procedures an I am angry) I loaded up 300 pictures of Minieurope and now they are all with deletion request. I am not amused. I agree, that it is a copyright violation to show pictures of models. So we should delete all pictures in Category:Miniature building exhibitions and Category:Models? Could you please try to get a Copyright-permission from the administration of Minieurope? (Mini-Europe, Infoline: +32 (0)2/478.05.50, Tel. +32 (0)2/474.13.13, Fax +32 (0)2/478.26.75, e-mail: info@minieurope.eu, www.minieurope.eu). Every tourist there takes photos and there is no sign restricting taking photos or there use. They really should have an interest to show pictures of there models in Commons and Wikipedia - it is kind of advertising. Pictures of Minieurope showing parts of the nearby Atomium are totally different, they should be deleted, because they are very strict with there Copyright. If the pictures are not deleted I would continue to categorise them with the famous buidlings all over Europe. Thank you for your help! --RosarioVanTulpe10:41, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
As uploader you are responsible for getting permission *before* you upload media. Please obtain the permission for a free license - in writing - yourself and have it archived in Commons:OTRS. Once that has been done, please let me know that you have sent the mail containing the permission so I can help you to not have the media deleted.
I understand your frustration, but please understand that is comes from your not following the Wikimedia Commons guidelines regarding copyrights and licenses. I know it is complex, but especially when uploading the large number of media you did, you really should have made yourself aware of Danish copyright law. Cheers! Siebrand11:50, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
And what have the danish copyright law to do with MiniEurope which are situated in Bruxelles, the capital of Belgium? If you not even know or examinated such a simpel fact I am affraid you are not the right to say about whether the pictures should be allowed or not.
...actually signs with that they want people to take pictures. - For copyright is that completely irrelevant! There are individuall designs, patterns,... short creative work of formers/sculptors and that is copyrighted. You are allowed to take photos for your private use - for private use copyright can be seen on a (very) lower level than for public or commercial use!
(http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fotos_von_fremdem_Eigentum is a very interesting discussion about that theme, but you have to differ between for example museums that show "works of art" and "no work of art" for example "technical exhibits" or nature (zoological gardens)) --217.231.244.11515:03, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that you uniformed some of the messages in MessagesEn.php. I found several messages which use "this wiki" wording. I think SITENAME is better and more precise alternative. --EugeneZelenko17:11, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I'd rather you take this to betawiki: as that is what this is probably about, although I have no recollection of making this change... I think I can agree with your assessment. Could you get me a SVN revision in which I committed that change? Cheers! Siebrand20:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry about not to be clear. "This wiki" text exists for a long time probably since MediaWiki didn't have support for SITENAME variable in system messages.
I ask you to review my proposal since I noticed that you made other kind of standardization like article to page renames.
Hmm. This concerns 10 messages. That means that we somehow have to get those 10 messages updated in all the languages that currently have a localisation for those messages. That may be an issue. I'll discuss this with some other people. Thanks for your clarification. Cheers! Siebrand23:29, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Dupes Autoload
Is there a way to automated uploading your dupes into the dupes tool? It'd be way easier than going through your list manually. The cat:duplicate is actually empty right now. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:14, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Momenteel is het nog zo dat geluidsbestanden (uitspraak van woorden) nog direct op de lokale wiki worden geupload. Zou je even kunnen kijken hoe we rechtstreeks kunnen uploaden naar commons. Wat moet ik doen om de recent geuploade geluidsbestanden te verplaatsen naar commons? Heb je hier een scriptje voor? Alvast bedankt voor de moeite
Hoi Annabel, ik heb een script om bestanden te kopieren en te taggen, en ze eventueel daarna te verwijderen met een script. Daar is wel een admin-gebruiker voor nodig. Voor wat betreft de eerste stap: dat zou SieBot kunnen doen. Laat me maar weten of daar interesse voor is. Cheers! Siebrand15:22, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Het gaat eigenlijk om slechts de laatste 3 mediabestanden van Tvdm die naar commons verpastst zouden moeten worden (is met zijn toestemming; de andere mediabestanden waren al op commons geupload). Het is slechts een klein werkje, maar omdat ik niet weet hoe het volgens de regels van de kunst gedaan moet worden, vroeg ik het je. Zou je het script kunnen draaien? Laat maar weten als er iets verwijderd moet worden.
Om standaard naar commons te uploaden, moet enkel MediaWiki:Uploadtext van nl.wikipedia geïmporteerd worden op nl.wiktionary? Is het dan tevens nog mogelijk om lokaal te uploaden, voor het geval er dingen zijn die enkel op nl.wiktionary gebruikt zullen worden, bv. voor tijdelijk een afbeelding weer te geven?
The same person under 2 different IPs (he's doing the same on a WP article) is vandalizing my personal page leaving wrong notes on 2 images. I warned him to stop because I didn't allow such actions. I would like to ask you if you can protect my page against this kind of vandalism, from IPs' editions, or teach me how to do it. Dank je wel. By the way, have a nice Xmas and a happy New Year. Trebaruna01:24, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi. It's no use. I left him this note but I'm sure that he will vandalize my personal page again. He says that Loriga's coat of arms isn't legal but it's the only one and is used by official organizations, for example, in the town administration documents or newspapers. I'll wait to see what happens. Bye. Trebaruna01:39, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
As I predicted, my page was vandalised again.
Even if you can't do anything about it, tell me where I can get help to stop seeing my page modified, day in day out, by someone hided behind an IP, without my knowledge - protect the page against IP editions. He won't stop and will not care about nothing written in his page. Bye.Trebaruna16:09, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi! I am a user on sv WP and according to some work we are doing on sheep related articles there I would like to have all images in the category:ovis aries categorized in category: sheep as well (or the other way around, but I think the first suggestion is the least controversial). I started doing this manually, but realized there were too many images. With all sheep images in one category it will be much easier to categorize individual sheep images into breed categories or other suitable subcategories. Could SieBot help with this? Best reg and a Happy New Year! Jorva21:30, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
CommonsTicker and CommonsDelinker
A working CommonsTicker is necessary for continued operation of CommonsDelinker at no.wp due to previous discussions at our Signpost. Please make sure CommonsTicker is operational and have reported the state change for the images before you run the bot. Jeblad11:10, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
User:Bryan is away and he left a message on his talk page that there's a chance that you could fix problems with the Flickr upload bot. It hasn't worked in over a day. I'm hoping that there's a chance that you could take a look or give it a good swift kick. The only thought that I have is wondering if the tool server is ok. I'll wait with my uploads until January 6th otherwise. I have over a dozen images of famous dragracing cars to upload from a flickr contributor. Thanks in any case. Royalbroil04:10, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
I took a look at the configs and found nothing wrong. As I do not know more about the bot, I cannot help you any further, I'm afraid. Sorry. Cheers! Siebrand15:45, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your attempt. I responded to a few people on his talk page that the bot is down and that he will be back on January 6th. Royalbroil22:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
If you created this image, 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Your bot apparently deleted this image because it was tagged as unknown source. But it was just a translation made by a user of this French plan, which is totally free, so I don't think there could be a problem. Could you please restitute it? Thanks. Bibi Saint-Pol (sprechen) 14:19, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Good afternoon:
Thanks for your advertisement about Image:ArqUCH.JPG license information. Already I corrected this error.
If you need information, this image has a license {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}}.
Deleting templates removes source information from pages
Next time you delete a licensing template, can make sure it's not still being used. For example, these images used Template:Изображение (there were a lot more transclusions when you deleted it). Sure the info's still in the history or viewable when editing, but it's just a little frustrating when you did everything right and then someone deletes your info by deleting a template you used. IMO, if someone wants to delete a template they should fix all the images that use it. It shouldn't be the uploader's job to save the image from deletion. Things like this aren't cool. (I can't read that language, that's why I didn't mess with it and convert to {{information}} in the first place, nor did I know I should have at the time.) I don't really care if that particular image gets deleted so I'm not going to spend time with it, but I'm sure other users were affected by this. At the very least some {{subst:}}ing should have been done. Rocket00007:17, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
As there wasn't very many images still surviving that were using it, I did the work of a bot and manually transposed info from those templates into info templates to avoid any more being nominated for deletion, or in fact deleted. But this shouldn't be necessary. The {{Information}} is not required, nor is the English language. What I would like to know now, is how do we find other images that previously used this template, but have been deleted because their source info was no longer visible? --Tony Wills10:24, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Looks like I removed the template before I was actually done. I restored it. Thanks for letting me know. As for your theoretical case: I do not think that has happened, as the wiki text was still there. Cheers! Siebrand15:03, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Oops, forgot to watch this page. Sorry for my late response. Thanks for restoring that. I wasn't implying that it should be, I just wasn't sure what was going on. I know the wikitext would still be there, but it still may be deleted as people aren't likely to check, just as it was tagged for missing source info. If you just deleted the temp. by mistake or too soon or something, then I understand. I originally thought this was your common practice. As Tony asked, I think we just have to hope no images were wrongly deleted - it doesn't seem like this cause much of a problem. And thanks to both of you! Cheers, Rocket00013:42, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
What on earth are you playing at? [16] you swop a picture for what is plainly a much lower quality version - both from Commons. Please stop these destructive edits. Do you actually look at these images? Johnbod from en. Replacing Image:Caravaggio-Crucifixion_of_Peter.jpg with Image:Michelangelo_Caravaggio_038.jpg (by White Cat because: 87.194.23.1823:21, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Inspite of all messages, the IP doesn't stop to vandalize my personal page here. Every time I check it, it's changed. Please, can you protect it against this kind of actions? Bye. Trebaruna02:21, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Please explain the removal of this photograph (a long time after it was first posted as part of the article). The following seems to provide guidelines for the use of such images:
Historical photographs
=== Fair use for ARTICLE NAME ===
Though this image is subject to copyright, its use is covered by the U.S. fair use laws because:
# It is a historically significant photo of a famous individual. (Add sources to backup this claim, like news articles mentioning this image (and not simply using it))
# It is of much lower resolution than the original (copies made from it will be of very inferior quality).
# The photo is only being used for informational purposes.
# Its inclusion in the article adds significantly to the article because the photo and its historical significance are the object of discussion in the article.
This image is, I believe, non-copyright under US law, and is particularly apt in the terms of the first and last of the above points.--voxclamans (talk) 21:32, 5 January 2008 (UTC) I have now uploaded the image again (though it is now called 41497240-moreschi2031.jpg), and would like to add it to the article again, if the correct criteria have now been met.--Voxclamans22:08, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Looks like an admin deleted the dupe image before it was properly replaced. Please complain with the deleter, not with the bot (operator of the bot) that didn't know any better. Cheers! Siebrand09:25, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
If it helps, I've gone through the category tree and created a list of required changes in my sandbox. This should hopefully get everything to the same standard. Many thanks. – Tivedshambo(talk)09:13, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Your bot seems to have problems with big pages, see [19]. Please fix it and/or put this user page on some ignore list. Thanks. --Complex01:02, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
However, I would like to notify you the following:
After I had copied images from Commons to WP:fr, I deleted the images on Commons. But CommonDelinker used the toolserver to check the links on WP:fr and due to to some lag of the toolserver, did not see the recently imported images and then deleted the links on WP/fr :(
Hello! JavaScript tool was finished by D. I'm not sure if you're free. If you're You can start tagging this list.
If not, notice me. Thanks!--OsamaK19:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Actually, it had not. I should have explained the problem clearly: your bot moved by mistake a category about France in a category about Finland. Anyway there were very few pages to fix, so I took care of it myself. Thanks anyway. PieRRoMaN14:51, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
CommonsDelinker
Could you check edits of your bot here? Size of the site is changing from 80 to 400kB and it looks like a bug. Thanks in advance. Mathepl00:01, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Your bot is replacing images that aren't duplicates at all. It's a bit hard to explain so here are the diffs: [20], [21]. I suspect this is because the duplicate name on commons is another image on wp-en. At any rate it was replacing a map with a picture of a boat in wp-en articles. --W.marsh16:31, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
I was at a wiki break (even longer wiki commons break), I just noticed these messages at my talk page User talk:Waqas.usman about several images, all of them have now been deleted. One image was my own image, I gave my own website's link as well, and others were allowed by the author to be used freely, I am a personal friend of the author, the author's link was given at wikipedia (you could confirm authorization by contacting the author), what proof can one give at wikipedia? What would be a proper way to deal with such images? Waqas.usman22:03, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
According to previous message I will block the bot if it continues operation without a previous message from CommonsTicker. Jeblad21:07, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Siebrand, why have you just deleted Image:Husky oczy 897.jpg again after it was restored by another admin? It is not an exact duplicate of anything. You neither commented here (on the request I made, which was archived after 7days because you did not respond) nor on the undeletion request I made on undeleton requests. Is there some problem that I am not aware of? Please restore it again, and follow proper procedures (ie nominate it for deletion) if you have a problem with it. Thanks :-) --Tony Wills01:34, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, you replaced Image:Sauna.jpg by Image:Sauna_2.jpg because it was a duplicate. I think this was wrong, because obviously Sauna_2.jpg (uploaded on 16.12.2006) is a duplicate of Sauna.jpg (uploaded on 2.10.2006). Please revert the replacing procedure, for Sauna_2.jpg should be deleted. --Plenz04:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
It had ''From: H.F. Helmolt (ed.): History of the World. New York, 1901.\r\n\n\rCopied from [http://www.lib.utexas.edu/photodraw/portraits/ University of Texas Portrait Gallery].''. Cheers! Siebrand09:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Still learning
The image "Pennant-winged Nightjar, immature.jpg" on Commons was deleted because it was a duplicate of "Pennant-wing immature.jpg" which was only on en.wiki. I hoped that somebody would delete the local file in stead, and that the commons file would remain available to all. How do I go about deleting a local file, after I uploaded a similar file to commons? 41.242.199.20909:39, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Siebrand- I saw your bot's change to the image reference on en:Leccinum. Maybe when (if?) they implement the name change function on Commons, we should think about changing the name from Espenrotkappe to the more universal Latin name. What do you think? --Eric my en.wp talk page15:37, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I do not have any preference for the name of media. Usually they should be descriptive, but they can be in any language. Being able to rename media would indeed be nice... Currently I am focusing on getting rid of duplicates... Only about 10.000 to go... ;) Cheers! Siebrand15:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I've put a request to the admin of Welsh wikipedia to change this image manually in cy:Hafan (Main page), as Siebot failed to do this, as obviously the page is protected. – Tivedshambo(talk)18:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Siebrand a bot deleted "Image:A certificate for the electoral vote for Rutherford B. Hayes and William A. Wheeler for the State of Louisiana dated 1876 part 8.jpg" (part 8 of 21 parts) and then had the bot CommonsDelinker remove the Image from the gallery of the other 20 part, and did not tell me they did/why by way of the User talk page. Becouas a human myself up upload part 8 as part 9 as well(Dupe of Image:A certificate for the electoral vote for Rutherford B. Hayes and William A. Wheeler for the State of Louisiana dated 1876 part 9.jpg) the problem could have solved be use the User talk to let the human know that part ...8.jpg was a Dupe of ...part 9.jpg so that human could uploald the right part or it could flag the the Images another humen could fix the problem. I have upload the right "Image:....part 8.jpg" and "Image:....part 9.jpg" and added "Image:....part 8.jpg" back to the galleries of the other 20 parts by hand(a lot of work). Please rewrire the bot to use User talk pages so humen can fix problems like this.--Lookatthis18:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
That's not going to work. You should properly tag media if you upload duplicated, not blame the cleaning lady. Cheers! Siebrand21:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Maybe you understood my long comment the problem is at the time I did not realize that I have upload duplicated, I will happly up upload new Image if I make human mistake of uploading a duplicated Image what is wrong with the BOT putting a comment on a user talk page like "you have upload a Image:name1.jpg with is a duplicated Image:name2.jpg please fix the problem" this a BOT I am talking about--Lookatthis22:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
The code for CommonsDelinker is open source in the pywikipedia framework. Feel free to implement the functionality and submit the code. The coder for CommonsDelinker is quite busy and does not have time to satisfy even the most basic improvements, let alone code things from the feature request list. Cheers! Siebrand00:46, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, I restored a deleted duplicate. That means that you now have to make sure that the other image gets removed or something. Siebrand22:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Ah. yes. No problem. Since Karta have other work, he upload another picture in Proposition karta A.
I've seen you have asked for the deletion of many pictures. Is it possible to keep the one with the most precise, appropriate and neutral name : I am not sure that 1940FaguoLiuYue.jpg is better than 13June-25June1940-Fall_Rot.jpg. And Wallonia.png more neutral than Belgique_wallonie.png. David Descamps08:39, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I am not certain either. Feel free to join in and reverse things. Whatever happens, one of the two goes. Cheers! Siebrand08:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
wikEd icon
Hi, you have deleted . This image is an icon used by the wikEd editing tool and is used extensively on Wikimedia projects as well on external Mediawiki installations. This was clearly stated on the image description. Please reinstate this image as soon as possible. In the future, please take the time to check the descriptions before deleting images. Thanks, Cacycle18:40, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Ehr, you mean that this image is being deep linked? That should not happen. I've restore the image for now. There are two duplicates. Please choose to use one of them and mark the unused image a dupe. Cheers! Siebrand19:32, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Both images are loaded dynamically by the script and are used for different purposes. They might be identical now, but that might change in the future. I will put a warning template on the images. Cacycle21:55, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I was wondering if it's possible to make one of exceptions for the replacement of raster images with vector images. I'm wondering because it looks like Vector-Images.com's images are going to be deleted and in a lot of cases the alternative free images are in vecotr format. A lot of these images are used on a multitude of wikis and if CommonsDelinker could help that would be great. As an example Image:Escut de Halland.png (used on 100+ pages on 18 wikis) would be replaced by Image:Halland vapen.svg. /Lokal_Profil02:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Vector replacements are possible by manually adding to the database. Unfortunately databases are down and this is likely to persists the following few days. -- Bryan (talk to me) 11:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Yep. That's fine. Basically any structured format with the 3 columns needed (old, new, reason) is OK. Keep on expanding that list and we'll add it in batch when toolserver comes up again. Cheers! Siebrand09:46, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
I think that list is complete for the Swedish coat of arms. I might start looking at other countries though. On a similar note, on the 1st of March russia will have yet another administrative update. Now updated locator maps have already been created and upploaded to Commons. Currently there are however 6 different sets of outdated maps (one for each update) which will all be outdated after 2008-03-01 being used across the different wikis. I've prepared a similar hitlist for those replacements to make sure that all maps get updated but the same thing applies to that list i.e. there are png images being replaced by svg images. That list is on User:Lokal Profil/hitlists/Maps of Russia. /Lokal_Profil15:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
If you created this image, 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
<sarcasm>Thanks for taking the effort to report this blatant vandalism, Bettywins. I do hope this extremely unpleasant experience does not keep you from becoming a valuable contributor to Wikimedia Commomons.</sarcasm> Siebrand09:48, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, tell your bot to stop welcoming people as this is now considered vandalism. Giving helpful links to newbies is extremely disruptive and will not be tolerated! Rocket00010:31, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Slight problem with the CommonsDelinker
Hello,
I stumbled across a slight mistake the Bot made on the German Wiki. Precisely, I found [23] this change.... Note the omission of the '|' character in the replacement. Easily fixed once I noticed it.... but I usually ignore Bots :D
A copy of this image is needed at both locations to conform to what the U.S. Roads WikiProject expects the images to be located at. Please undelete this image. --Rschen775423:32, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
I believe you incorrectly deleted the above image. You say it was a duplicate of Image:Hurricane Carmen.JPG, but I believe the two are different. Image:Hurricane Carmen Sat was a satellite image, IIRC, while Image:Hurricane Carmen was a radar image. Could you double check that, and undelete the image? If you wish to respond, I ask that you do so on my Wikipedia talk page. Also, while I'm here, could you delete Image:Unnamed Tropical Storm (2005).PNG, which is a large duplicate of Image:2006 unnamed.jpg. --Hurricanehink02:03, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Adding feature to checkimages.py
I've thought that's the case to use a little bit different template when the image has only infobox or trademark (that aren't licenses at all). So, I've created this template for that case and the bot is currently using that. Please take a look at that template and let me know if it's ok and well written in your opinion. Regards, --FilnikRock!13:30, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi Siebrand.
I have not really got to grips with using Commons, but I just discovered you left a message for me back in May 07! If perchance you recall, please tell me exactly what was the problem with the map I uploaded. Thanks—Grmanners20:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
If you created this image, 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Hi. I took a photo of a train station and uploaded it to Image:Erlton-Stampede (C-Train) 11.jpg to commons. I also uploaded the same image to here on FlickR. Then, somebody (or some bot) uploads my FlickR image to Commons as Image:Erlton-Stampede (C-Train) 11 (398448290).jpg, and my original Commons image is deleted as a "duplicate". That removes my description of the file, and the licensing info I put, and the link to my Commons account. It also removed the image from the C-Train gallery on Commons (which now just shows a blank space). This has happened with other images before as well. I'm asking you about this, since I see you're name here. I'm trying to figure out what I can do to stop this from repeatedly happening. Sorry, if this doesn't relate to you, as I can't really figure out who is responsible for this. --Rob04:05, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Best request to have the removed image restored and have the kept image replaced by the one that has been removed. I do not have too much knowledge how the process of getting media from Flickr into Commons works, but I am not certain that this can be avoided. Just let me know where else this happened and I'll try to help where I can. Cheers! Siebrand08:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Such problems could be avoided by simply stating at the Flickr page that you also have already uploaded the image to the Wikimedia Commons, including a link. Lupo11:05, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
If what I wrote on my Commons image before it was deleted wasn't seen, I doubt what's on FlickR will be. As well, we're talking about deletion of an image that was currently used in gallery (C-Train). I'm not really terribly concerned about the odd image here or there (accidents happen on a wiki). But I am concerned about the start of a pattern, that will effect lots of images. BTW, thanks to Siebrand for fixing this case. --Rob17:06, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Images that are in use should not be deleted. We have tools for checking that. Could it be that someone has reverted an edit of CommonsDelinker which lead to the red link? Siebrand23:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
CommonsDelinker Bug
See [24]. After removal of the image, the line started with a space, of course mixing up the layout. Though this is maybe more a mistake of the editor of the article, it would be nice if your bot could fix this. Regards, --schlendrian•λ•19:46, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Is there any consensus for your actions? [25]? What are you doing? :/ -- Catちぃ？ 20:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Over time many translations of core message and extension messages have popped up in the MediaWiki: namespace. Especially in the last year, localisation has improved immensely. I have removed pages that had an (almost) equal content to the core messages and/or were outdated. Feel free to have a long discussion, but I think that's pointless. Cheers! Siebrand20:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
I've undeleted one; the message in MessagesEn.php is much more ancient than the one used here and elsewhere. Some time ago, I've updated the message on Betawiki; perhaps that could be committed to MessagesEn.php? 哦，是吗？(O-person) 01:20, 18 February 2008 (GMT)
Your opinion please...
I left a note for OsamaK. I am concerned that they aren't leaving courtesy "heads-ups" for uploaders, and they aren't IMO, exercising the best judgment when choosing which copy to nominate for deletion.
When a duplicate is deleted is a redirection done to the remaining image?
No redirect is created - and that's not needed. The deletion log will always contain a link to the media that has been kept. Cheers! Siebrand10:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
't Lijkt alsof daar iets fout is gegaan. Ik heb beide bestanden teruggeplaatst en de 'dupe' tags verwijderd. Dank voor het spotten. Groet, Siebrand20:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Dupes tool
Since I can't put in a feature request for CommonsDupes, who can I contact directly? With hundreds of dupes in the category and the tool always starting at the the beginning of the alphabet, the dupes at the end will never get worked. We need the ability to pick what number or letter to start the run at or the tool should display them in the order tagged, oldest first. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:29, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
4000? We'll never get out of the A's. I created an account but I click "bug/feature request" and see no way to actually create a feature request. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
About the Farmer extension...
I have been trying to create a successful test of the Farmer extension for MediaWiki, but I keep running into database creation issues. I've noticed that you have made some somewhat recent edits to the extension code, and I was wondering if you might have some insight into this. The original developer, Gregory Szorc, abandoned the project a while ago.
The problem is this: the special pages work fine, and the system messages (if configured properly) work fine. The problem comes when I hit the button to create a wiki called "test"...
"MySQL returned error "1146: Table 'a8889767_newiki2.test_-_page' doesn't exist (localhost)".
Yes, the weird prefix was forced on me by free hosting. Anyway, it's apparent (after looking at the code) that the extension is throwing an exception when it tests to see if the database exists (before creating it). Is there a workaround to this? I mean, I don't know PHP overly well, but I do know some very basic basics, and the last thing that I want to do is cause a permanent crash of Mediawiki, so is there any way you can help? If you want to, you can e-mail me at panoptical2@gmail.com. Thanks! 66.20.150.21101:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
You deleted AmericanShetland.jpg because it is the same image as Shetland Pony.jpg. Problem is, on English Wikipedia, Image:Shetland Pony.jpg goes to a little round fluffball from Switzerland, cute pony but not the same image! To get this image of the slim, chestnut pony, I did the renaming in commons, which did create a dupe, (should have asked someone to fix the dup, but... See English wikipedia version. If you could sort this out, I need the American Shetland image for the English Wikipedia en:Shetland pony article. Somehow, any way you can make it happen. Thanks! 4.227.172.23704:46, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I think some features were activated, deactivated and then activated again (in particular the 'red links' tag). Should be fixed now. Siebrand12:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Hallo, please look here the case (Baha'u'llah image (religion1.gif)) . Today I have uploaded a new version of Image:Religion1.gif it is revised. Only the filename is the same with the old version from 18.11.06. Please write me your answer what can I do. --Magellan@_/"12:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Delinker
Hi there! I noticed a bug with the delinking of images on svwiki: [27]. Not a biggie, but still, you might wanna take a look at it. Caesar19:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Your bot Delinker has deleted one of my awards!!!! WTF?? I am not happy. It can't just go on a rampage every time an image is deleted! My name is KNewman in English Wikipedia, in case you decide to stop by. 213.33.130.21405:53, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
The bot does not know that it is an award. The media file was deleted, and thus all uses are removed. Cheers! Siebrand 09:30, 28 February 2008
(UTC)
Your bot also changed the lead photo in Winston Churchill in politics: 1900-1939 which is my project at the moment (and which also seems to have a link problem. the page is there - I checked. I have my doubts about the authenticity of that picture WSC was not (as the caption states ) the Colonial Secretary in 1912 (he was 1st Lord of the Admiralty), no reference book refers to him going to Damascus in 1912 and the source of the photo gives no references. I wish to revert the photo to the prior one but if you can provide a good source and proof WSC was in Damascus in 1912 then I'd be happy to include it (with a change to the caption)203.32.82.4001:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Recently you deleted File:Flagge Preußen - Provinz Pommern.svg and replaced it with Image:Flagge Fürstentümer Schwarzburg.svg. While it is of course true that it was a duplicate, I still think you(?)'ve made a mistake deleting it. The name of any flag should specify what country used it. Even when two countries use the same flag there schould be two files with each a different name. A lot of confusing can be prevented that way.
Hoi siebrand, kan jij een kleine wijziging zoals beschreven op MediaWiki talk:Gadget-QuickDelete.js maken? Ik heb de hele dag mijn JS console open staan en die warnings beginnen nogal irri te worden :D
Trouwens, misschien moeten de Gadget en het origineel gemerged worden, want het lijkt niet alsof er grote verschillen gaan zijn. Ik stel voor een history merge, en dan op MediaWiki:Quick-delete.js een nieuwe pagina met: includePage( gadget ). Lijkt me netter ook vanwege GFDL enzo. TheDJ11:11, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Merite.JPG. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multilicense GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Polarlys20:19, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Hmm... That looks like an interesting issue in category.py that would require some academic grade regex to solve. Siebrand08:44, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Commons:MediaMoveBot
Hi. Looking over Commons:MediaMoveBot you seemed to be the right person to ask - I'm an admin on the YPPedia, the wiki for the Yohoho! Puzzle Pirates community. We have oodles of user generated artwork along with numerous screenshots and illustrations from the game itself being uploaded every day. While a lot of it does follow guidelines for naming the stuff that doesn't is often left behind while work continues on other administrative tasks. What I've seen of this project so far is really impressive - it adds a much missed function of Mediawiki to the administrator's toolbox.
Is it possible to set up something similar for other wikis, or can someone involved in the project give some advice on how to do it? I personally have no experience in writing bots which is why I came to the much larger Mediawiki community first at Wikipedia, then at Commons. Thanks in advance. --Fiddling Frog14:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
You should be able to activate support for Image redirects somehow. It is in the code of 1.12, but not activated by default. I guess you should be able to find which setting to use somewhere on mw:. That's probably far easier than adding the work-around of a MediaMoveBot. I would like to see MediaMoveBot be open sourced in the Pywikipediabot, rather than it being closed source. This was initially specced, but the coder didn't honour that, unfortunately. He thought his code was too ugly (I don't really care about that; that is one of the things others can improve if it is really useful code). Anyway: Cheers! Siebrand18:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Is talking to you pointless? Please stop deleting those service stars! I mean it. Do not go deleting files like a bot. We do not need that. You are right I am very very annoyed. -- Catちぃ？ 08:22, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't think talking to me is pointless. I do know that I make mistakes. I want to thank you for correcting them, if they actually were. Oh, please AGF and be civil. Cheers! Siebrand11:35, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Toolserver replication has stopped again (*cry!*) and many of the remaining objects had already been tagged. I would like to wait until the dupes queue has been processed before tagging new images... It causes fewer edits on the dupes pages for now. Siebrand22:27, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
creatie categorie
Hoi Siebrand, zou je me misschien kunnen uitleggen hoe ik een categorie voor bepaalde thema fotos kan maken? ik heb namelijk fotos gemaakt in en buiten het gebouw van Radio Nederland Wereldomroep en zou graag daarvoor een aparte categorie voor willen maken. kan je me vertellen wat de stappen zijn hoe ik die categorie kan creeeren? Alvast bedankt. --ناظوري20:27, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
As an idea, maybe you shouldn't welcome bots or accounts with bot in the name. It seems sorta silly and is a waste of resources. My 2 cents, Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs)01:04, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
In theory yes. In practice the overhead is so small that it is actually a waste of time to do development on that, IMO. Cheers! Siebrand11:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Changing House of Baden to House of Zähringen is the historically most ignorant use of a bot I have ever witnessed. The House of Zähringen became extinct in the 13th century. There where follow up dynysties, like the Badens and the Fürstenbergs that were represented in the Category House of Zähringen as sub categories. As it is now this historical distinction between the different lines has been destroyed by your bot-work. What we have now is one of the usual unsorted mess of images lacking all historical context. Congratulation! --Wuselig00:14, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. You're welcome.</sarcasm> Maybe you should take a look at the history of User:CommonsDelinker/commands to see whom you are calling ignorant so you can call it to the right user. I do hope he can or will help you after that. Reverting the recategorisations is always an option. For the rest: it is best to assume good faith. Using strong words usually decreases chances of cooperation considerably. Cheers! Siebrand01:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
On March 16, Gryffindor talked about restoration here. Since I could not observe any action up to now, I ask you to revert the changes initiated by him.--Wuselig01:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Erroneous "permission missing" notifications you made
You have tagged the following images with "This image is missing permission" tags. That is patently false, please correct your error.
Please respond to me right away, as this must be an error. These photos were released under the GNU 1.2 license by Zen master Dae Gak of Furnace Mountain earlier today.(Mind meal06:03, 14 March 2008 (UTC))
Well, it's a bit outdated, but I've only discovered this summary field today... and so had a good deal of wondering (while the page with the actual edit loaded) and then of amusement today. :o) Cheers, Ibn Battuta20:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I saw your deletion of this file. However you deleted the wrong file, so the filename of the one left, is wrong. (typo)
Please undo or move the file, since I even asked to delete the other one ... (How come you deleted the wrong one?)
Thanks, Saippuakauppias23:10, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
The page states "Please remember to check the status of your listed commands and to remove them if the job is done !!!" But the bot removes things as they're completed, no? – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb14:54, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Well, all the commands I've added were removed by the bot, so why would I need to check if they're done later and remove them? Ahh, CommonsDelinkerHelper removes universal replacements, but other stuff needs to be removed by hand. Perhaps clarification then? – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb14:11, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Siebrand, ik heb deze foto opgeladen met een verkeerde bestandsnaam. Het is nl. de Lech ipv de Loisach. Ik laad de foto opnieuw op met de correcte naam. Groet Paul Hermans07:59, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
The new image comes up as redlinked, or non-existant at English wikipedia. I think the bot is broken and needs repairing. Note I won't be checking back here for a reply as I don't have a commons account, though I can be reached at En Wikipedia at User talk:Matthewedwards
Thus far Ive only added pictures I took myself. I have a couple questions about other pics. First, I have an old 1885 book on trilobites with color plates. Can I scan those in given the time lapse? What tag would I use? And I have some old family pictures which I didn't take, which are very old. How would I label them on uploading? Many thanksMmcknight420:43, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi. It's not very clear from the edit summaries why/what has happened, but Commons Delinker has made a right mess of my userpage on English Wikipedia (I'm User:Dweller there too). I wonder if you could take a look please. --Dweller10:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I tried fixing errors generated by a bug with a few commands. But bot seems to have disregarded my request... Mind taking a look? -- Catちぃ？ 11:09, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
I reported this yesterday[28] to the developer. Please do not try to fix it from within CD. It will fail and creater a bigger mess. Cheers! Siebrand15:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Recently a large number of images I uploaded have been deleted by the Commons delinker? Here you can see one of the change made by the delinker here or here. The reason for deletion was "it has been deleted from Commons by ABF because it was in w:commons:Category:Unknown as of 1 April 2008; still missing essential information."
For the time being, I have replaced the images but I don't know if this will happen again. I do not understand why those images were put into that mystery category? They were all properly licensed and was not missing any information. You might want to check for a bug or let me know what happened. Thanks. Benjwong17:19, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Siebrand - I've been looking at the talk pages of some of our users who do not seem to understand Commons well recently. Can you tell me the basis on which Siebot "welcomes" users? I've always assumed it was after there was an upload & only if the talk page was "red" - is that the case? I can see an issue (if that is so) with users who get any form of warning tag (source, license whatever) then not getting a "welcome" which concerns me a little. I'll post something about it soon but wanted to check the rules with you first, many thanks --Herbytalk thyme12:26, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
One edit, empty talk page, latest 10 new users are skipped. That's it. After that, they are welcomed after at most one hour (at least, if the bot is running). Cheers! Siebrand22:58, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I can have the bot run quicker (every 10 mins), or with fewer restrictions (no edits required). You can also consider requesting the extensions NewUserMessage to be installed. That will place a welcome messages *immediately* after registering on the newbie's page. Cheers! Siebrand23:02, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Vietnamese Wiktionary
Hi, CommonsDelinker is getting confused on the Vietnamese Wiktionary: we have a template, {{pron-audio}}, that produces a link to an audio file, along with its IPA transcription. We've noticed CommonsDelinker replacing files linked via that template, which is great, but it's omitting the equal sign separating the file parameter name from the file name. Some examples: [30][31][32]. Thanks. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 19:57, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Please stop the replacement of heraldic shields even if the image is the same. I report a message I wrote to ChristianBier relating a coats of arms of county of Boulogne: Deletion of image Armoiries_Boulonnais.png, as duplicate of Blason_Courtenay.png is absolutely wrong, because the user interested in heraldry should be able to find the coat of arms of the french county of Boulogne, with the name Armoiries_Boulonnais.png and he couldn't know that the Blason_Courtenay.png has the same image (and the same blazon: or, three besants of gules). Now, after your deletion, it is impossible to find the required image (county of Boulogne): is possible only find the coat of arms of the house Courtenay. In heraldry the name of the holder of a coat of arms is necessary as the image and the blazon (description of the image). So, please, reload the image Armoiries_Boulonnais.png, because it is not a duplicate of 'Blason_Courtenay.png, but it another coat of arms whit the same blazon. Bye Massimop 20:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC). The same happened for Gules_a_bend_or.svg which should replace Blason_ville_fr_Villespy_(Aude).svg and Blason_famille_Noailles.svg. This replacement could determine a loss of information for heraldic finding. Moreover any nation has own heraldic usages: Italy uses shields of the type it:scudo francese moderno while France use it:Scudo francese antico, so replacing Coat of arms of the House of Alerami.svg whit Argent a chief gules.svg is not correct while the image seems the same. Any coat of arms has own proper character and the name of owner is essential in identifying the image, not only the same bit sequence. Bye Massimop21:04, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
There is no reason to have more than one copy if the images are the same. They can use categories to find them. The people that use these images need to agree on a common naming scheme; granted this is an issue in a multi-lingual project. Commons policy is not to have dupe images. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
The bot seems to have some serious issues with image substitutions in templates, see: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. I know for sure several users from other projects encountered this errors in the past days. --Brownout(msg)01:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Fixed this problem. I am not starting the replacer yet, as I want to see first whether this did not introduce more problems. -- Bryan (talk to me) 09:35, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, this is a cannot fix, unfortunately. I think that the report page may have been changed, so that the screen scraping of the bot no longer works. That's shitty, but we will have to wait until that is done... Siebrand11:41, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Done Siebrand 12:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
with Image:Nuvola actions next.png File:Nuvola actions next.png They are duplicates, this is correct. But Image:1rightarrow.png is part of complete series with left right up down,... Image:Nuvola actions next.png is isolated the other arrows are missing. So it would be better to replace the other way round.
-- Walké 22:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
. This image is an icon used by the wikEd editing tool and is used extensively on Wikimedia projects as well on external Mediawiki installations. This was clearly stated on the image description. Please reinstate this image as soon as possible. In the future, please take the time to check the descriptions before deleting images. Thanks, Cacycle 18:40, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
_v2.png){kind=link}
![[4]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Image:Mongolia_and_Mongol_Autonomous_Subjects_in_PRC.png){kind=link}
![[10]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Image:IMG_Carmaderry4984rx.jpg){kind=link}
![[12]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Image:Southerne_Oroonoko_1776_performance.jpg){kind=link}
_v2.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
_v2.png){kind=link}
.PNG){kind=link}
_11.jpg){kind=link}
_11_(398448290).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[26]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=delete&page=Image:Ambl%C3%A8veWatervalCoo.jpg){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
