User talk:WhatamIdoing

English: Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, WhatamIdoing!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki—it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], which produces: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|correct name}} For more information read the full deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

--Legobot^Operator_talk 01:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Sysop

I know that we have our differences, especially on Meta, but you fit the profile of a administrator very well. Have you ever considered attempting to become a sysop on enwiki or Commons? You might be better off becoming an enwiki sysop rather than a Commons sysop, but I'm unable to participate in the enwiki community at this time. Would you enjoy doing administrative work on Commons? If so, what sort of administrative work would you like to do? --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 02:24, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind note. RFA an enwiki is such a hostile environment that I can't really understand why anyone agrees to go through it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 07:49, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Your're welcome. Commons:Administrators/Archive – Do you feel that Commons has the same hostile environment? Or is it different? --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 13:13, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't know. I'll look it over when I have some time (maybe as early as next week). WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:53, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

I guess that's a "no" then :( --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 14:03, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. Actually, I did look at a couple, and it's not as hazing-oriented (which is good), but I don't think that I have a realistic chance right now, because I haven't done as much work on deletion requests as many of them want, and I'm not an expert on copyrights (and several regulars really want experts, rather than people to help with the bulk of the obvious stuff and enough sense to know their limitations and thus leave the complicated stuff to others). But it's possible that someday I'll have enough experience here to meet their ideals. WhatamIdoing (talk) 14:49, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Alright. It's fine with me if you're not yet completely confident in your chances and/or ability. Maybe next time. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 15:24, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Photographs of identifiable people

Hi WhatamIdoing,

I think there is sufficient agreement to move the draft User:Colin/People to replace the existing guideline page (obviously with a few tweaks to add categories, etc). The complication is that a few people such as yourself have editing the draft and so I think, per copyright licence, we need to ensure they are credited in the history. I can't find info on that on Commons, but what I found on Wikipedia confused me. I think it might be permissible to move the content over and simply refer to the old draft in the edit summary with a link. Then the draft can be blanked. However, perhaps a more complex admin move is needed where history is kept. I know you are not an admin but you are very knowledgeable about policy. Do you know what to do? I've also asked User:Kaldari. -- Colin (talk) 11:28, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I think you can merge histories, which requires an admin. Providing a link (redirecting might make more sense than blanking, because blanking might prompt someone to delete it) is also "legal" as I understand it. For my own part, I really don't care if I'm credited for those small changes. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:05, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I've asked a couple of admins about it. One of them moved the draft. I'm not totally sure he did the right thing. See the guideline talk. Oh well, we'll see what happens. Colin (talk) 15:17, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Help Desk archived & "Wehrmacht"

Hello ! I assume it's not OK to attempt editing dialogues in archives. However I noticed now (after sometime with little time) that You gave me a reply to my last comment about the German war time books. Thanks for your reply. I must not scan these books, they are not mine, and has become fragile over the years. So I will instead attempt photograph some of the most interersting pictures. (most of them are not). I thank You once again Boeing720 (talk) 01:16, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Sourcing expert required

In the Commons:Requests for comment/Xrays, Avenue uncovered a paper here that discusses radiographic images wrt archaeology artefacts. Eleassar has seized on this as proof the "nuclear option is nonsense" and is confident such images are not copyrightable in the US and UK. The article is an interesting read and makes very similar arguments to those made by various wikidocs (though the author's understanding of MRI leaves something to be desired). However, consider it from the POV of a Wikipedia source. It becomes clear that the article is an opinion piece, not an authoritative work on copyright. It also becomes clear the author is making an argument for a state of affairs they think should be the case in their opinion, if they had their way, rather than one that actually is the case. Much as I would like the article to be used to save such images from the chop, this is merely more evidence of the amateur lawyering and misuse of literature to be found throughout this discussion. Could you please put on your sourcing-expert hat and explain to Eleassar why this article is interesting but ultimately useless.

I hope the WMF team consider the topic from both a legal and pragmatic viewpoint. For example, EllenCT's argument is that it is all very well to consider some theoretical "it is protected" argument but without a legal case (no harm) this might well be moot. Other options include relaxing the "precautionary principle" for certain subjects where there is clear doubt but no evidence that there is actually a problem. I'm still in discussions with a couple of publishers to try to discover how they do this in practice -- so far it appears there is a convenient hole in their procedures. -- Colin (talk) 07:30, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Colin,

Thanks for keeping up with that discussion. I'm also not a lawyer, of course, and, speaking purely as another volunteer non-lawyer, I think that the whole thing would be better settled by people who know more than I do, and best settled by every government in the world specifically addressing diagnostic medical images in their statutes.

I'm unfortunately really short on time this month, so I haven't done much research, but my impression is that all of the sources are approximately equally lousy: somebody here says, "it's kind of like a photograph, so let's guess that the photography laws apply" and somebody over there says, "Nah, it shouldn't be copyrightable, because it's just information" and someone in another place says, "Probably it ought to work approximately like this"—but nobody knows, and we would rather know than just guess what is most likely. I don't really know what to recommend, except to wait for the Copyright Office to reply (and I'm not actually very hopeful that they'll issue anything like a definitive statement). WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:59, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

You may like to see en:User talk:Elcobbola#Medical images. Elcobbola knows their stuff. I've no sure idea how it will work out but I do know that this is very much the sort of thing that "the crowd" should not be working out for themselves. Colin (talk) 07:43, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Applicable law

Commons:Applicable law has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this project page, 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. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Be..anyone (talk) 21:06, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

The essay is now an edited draft in Meta userspace and editing and discussion are welcome there. Nick Levinson (talk) 05:36, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

File:VisualEditor_-_Gallery2.png

Hi, What page is the File:VisualEditor_-_Gallery2.png image taken from? Evolution and evolvability (talk) 11:59, 20 November 2015 (UTC) The description still says en:apple! Cheers, Evolution and evolvability (talk) 11:59, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Evo. Thanks for telling me about that. As of the last round of updates, all images in the user guide are (or are supposed to be  ;-)  using mw:Help:Sample page.

Actually, because that page is marked for translation, it's necessary to extract a plain copy of it first, rather than editing directly there. If you want a copy, then the fastest solution at the moment is to copy the contents of w:simple:User:Whatamidoing (WMF)/Sandbox. NB that the "article" is actually public domain/CC-0, because (a) I wrote nearly all of it, so it was my decision and (b) I didn't want to have to mess with attribution "paperwork" any longer. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:05, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm pretty new to any of the non-wikipedia wikis, so this is really helpful. Evolution and evolvability (talk) 12:10, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Nortreus

Hi! Happy New Year! Thanks for your info, I changed the reason for blocking to spam, self promo. Best, --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 22:00, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Category:People_in_the_history_of_medicine

People in the history of medicine has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Jochen Burghardt (talk) 06:22, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

copyviol

thanks. I waited two weeks just in case before putting it there, i was suspicious but it was difficult to find any proof without google from China. Thank you again.--Alexmar983 (talk) 04:36, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

You've got some amazing photos on that page. I was impressed.

In Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets, under ==Maintenance tools==, there's an option for the TinEye tab. It's very easy to use (but with a limit of 50 searches per day), and that's how I found this one. (I've checked all of week #1 and #2 already.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:33, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks WhatamIdoing. For the tool and for the impression. it was a hard team work but it's paying well. I hope the wikimedian-jurors will also help in the next weeks. I am starting to write a post about the maintenance work on commons for the main website. New categories to be created, and also copyviol. I want the general public to understand how delicate the commons ecosystem might be.--Alexmar983 (talk) 05:47, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Have you met User:Colin? He knows a lot about contests (and more about photography than I ever will). WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:50, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Category:Books_and_other_writings_in_the_history_of_medicine

Category:Books_and_other_writings_in_the_history_of_medicine has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Jochen Burghardt (talk) 10:34, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Category:People_associated_with_medicine

People associated with medicine has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

E4024 (talk) 13:04, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:CH IMG 0275.jpg

Yours sincerely, Dronebogus (talk) 07:15, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open!

2022 Picture of the Year: Saint John Church of Sohrol in Iran.

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2022 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the seventeenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the two most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on 1 May 2023, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2021 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:16, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open!

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you voted in Round 1 of the 2022 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in the second round. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2022.

Round 2 will end at 18 May 2023, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:46, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Regarding NOTFILESTORAGE matter at enwiki

• I can only chat here, I cannot comment on w:en:Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Clarification_on_NOTFILESTORAGE because the IP address that I use, provided by my Internet service provider, is blocked under ridiculous "peer-to-peer IP by Converge ICT" reason.

Regarding the debate on w:en:WP:NOTFILESTORAGE reason, I took note of Iruka's mentions to Patrickroque01 (talk · contribs)'s uploads. Here are some of my inputs:

• Yes, several of Patrick's photos are on Commons, but majority were FileImport-ed by me (of course, after a review of the depicted objects to ensure that copyrighted government buildings and statues are not included to be moved here). I conduct file reviews and file moves everytime his userspace gallery page pops up on my enwiki watchlist. Other photos were probably moved by other users, but I assume they also conducted review of building/monument copyright statuses.
• Nonetheless, majority of his photos fail the eligibility for transfer because of showing copyrighted buildings and monuments, like Rizal Provincial Capitol, Philippine Sports Stadium, Pacific Star Building, Tuguegarao City Hall, and Lapulapu statue (in Metropolitan Cebu). Note that we still do not have freedom of panorama, and therefore these should not be moved here unless our law is finally changed, which is something that one thematic user group here (of which I am a member) is trying to achieve (meta:Pilipinas Panorama Community/Freedom of Panorama). But for the meantime, in my point of view, those photos by Patrick Roque may remain on enwiki for a while, unless if the NOTFILESTORAGE becomes modified to state that enwiki should not be an indefinite host of photos of copyrighted buildings of the Philippines, Dubai, Bahrain, South Korea, France, Ukraine, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Burma/Myanmar, Kazakhstan, and other countries with no FOP or no commercial FOP notwithstanding the enwiki's rule of only applying US FOP for those buildings; that is, a maximum of 5 or 10 images of the same building, regardless of the year of images, can only be hosted.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:59, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

That sounds like a problem to take up with the copyvio folks, rather than with the WP:NOT policy. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:31, 29 September 2023 (UTC)