Commons:History merging and splitting/Requests/Archive 2

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search


  • Request: Split
  • Reason: The original photo taken in 2005 was overwritten by a different photo by the same author taken in 2007.

Thanks in advance, --DAJF (talk) 11:31, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 15:02, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Thank you. I have now updated and corrected the categories etc to match the image content. --DAJF (talk) 16:21, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: The original photo taken in 2005 was overwritten by a different photo by the same author taken in 2008.

Thanks in advance, --DAJF (talk) 12:21, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 15:04, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Thank you. I have now updated and corrected the categories etc to match the image content. --DAJF (talk) 16:21, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: The original photo taken in 2004 was overwritten by a different photo by the same author taken in 2007.

Thanks in advance, --DAJF (talk) 13:19, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 15:06, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Thank you. I have now updated and corrected the categories etc to match the image content. --DAJF (talk) 16:21, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: The original photo was overwritten by a different photo taken by the same author at a later date.

Thanks in advance, --DAJF (talk) 10:56, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 15:13, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Thank you. I have now updated and corrected the categories etc to match the image content. --DAJF (talk) 16:21, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Poké95 11:16, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 15:12, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was not sure about the exact mapping that you wanted, so I went ahead and gave the files temporary names. Please use {{Rename}} template to correct the file names.
--Sreejith K (talk) 21:49, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the split, but the infoboxes are all wrong. The caption claiming to be for the bus at Herald Square is actually for Floyd Bennett Field. The one claiming to be outside RCB Ballpark in Staten Island, NY isn't even on Staten Island. It's actually in Manhattan. Evidently, "Number 2" is the one outside RCB Ballpark. ----DanTD (talk) 20:22, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: The original image was overwritten by another image taken by the same uploader on a different date.

Thanks in advance, DAJF (talk) 02:34, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@DAJF: ✓ Done, though the destination filename was changed to File:EF6649 Fuji Hayabusa 20090312.jpg by the script. I don't know Japanese, hopefully you can sort out any errors in the file pages. Revent (talk)
 Thank you. - I have now edited the descriptions and categories etc to match the image content. --DAJF (talk) 03:04, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


@DanTD: The request you're making isn't really what this page is for, since it's not something that needs admin rights. The type of 'merging and splitting' this request page is for individual page or file histories, which requires the right to delete pages to accomplish. You should just create the two new categories, recategorize the files, and then nominate the old one category for deletion. Alternately, you can bring it up at COM:CFD if you think prior discussion is needed. Revent (talk) 14:16, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if this is something I can do myself, I'll do it. I think I'll split off the truck, and bring up the renaming of Atlantic Antic at CFD. ----DanTD (talk) 14:24, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@DanTD: Either way (creating a new one or renaming the other, or creating two new ones and deleting the old one) works... you should actually be able to rename the category yourself (I don't think it's at all controversial), it's just that you'll either have to then recategorize the files manually or wait for the bot to do it. Whichever method seems easier to you. Revent (talk) 14:35, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Gunnex: ✓ Done Copyvio image removed from file history. Thanks for reporting it. Revent (talk) 14:22, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: The original image was overwritten by another image taken by the same uploader at a later date.

Thanks in advance, DAJF (talk) 08:40, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @DAJF: Please fact-check the file pages. Thanks. Revent (talk) 14:42, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Thank you. - I have now update the descriptions and categories etc to match the image content. --DAJF (talk) 15:26, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: The original image was overwritten by another image taken by the same uploader at a later date.

Thanks in advance, DAJF (talk) 08:40, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @DAJF: As usual, please double check the file page info. Revent (talk) 14:52, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Thank you. - I have now update the descriptions and categories etc to match the image content. --DAJF (talk) 15:26, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: The original image was overwritten by another image taken by the same uploader at a later date.

Thanks in advance, DAJF (talk) 08:40, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @DAJF: Ditto. :) Revent (talk) 14:59, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Thank you. - I have now update the descriptions and categories etc to match the image content. --DAJF (talk) 15:26, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: The original image was overwritten by another image taken by the same uploader at a later date.

Thanks in advance, DAJF (talk) 08:40, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @DAJF: And again, please double check the pages. Thanks. Revent (talk) 15:18, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Thank you. - I have now update the descriptions and categories etc to match the image content. --DAJF (talk) 15:26, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: 1. Please extract the first version into Nicotine_racemic.svg. 2. Furthermore please delete the second/middle formula since it depicts what can not exist. --Itu (talk) 09:38, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done @Itu: please check the descritpions and fix them if necessary. Ankry (talk) 10:16, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(third-party chemist chiming in...) Looks fine. DMacks (talk) 20:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Ankry (talk) 21:33, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

--Herzi Pinki (talk) 08:07, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @Herzi Pinki: please, check description and categories. Ankry (talk) 10:42, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Ankry (talk) 21:34, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done Ankry (talk) 04:00, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Ankry (talk) 21:34, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done @Itu: please, fix description and categorization, if necessary. Ankry (talk) 06:40, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The "Reverted to version..." looks very senseless. Can you still remove this? --Itu (talk) 07:22, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Newest version cannot be removed. Or at least it is not worth to. Please conncentrate on content, not on revision changelog comments. Ankry (talk) 07:37, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Ankry (talk) 21:35, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Request: Split

--Itu (talk) 11:35, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @Itu: please check description and categories. Ankry (talk) 14:04, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There should be some template pointing to the splitting done, because its very confusing to understand the historys after the split. --Itu (talk) 14:21, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Itu: There is none ot the moment. Feel free to create one. Ankry (talk) 12:49, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Ankry (talk) 21:35, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Merge finished, but unfortunately (because of software bug?) something went wrong and the file version with EXIF info disappeared during processing. See phab:T131020 for more info. On hold till the bug is closed? Ankry (talk) 12:53, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
first version - File:Intrare USEM.jpg
second version - File:Intrare Cocieri.jpg
  • Reason: Completely different images; ambiguous title.

--XXN, 00:00, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done For the record, 'intrare' just means 'entrance', so the original title was indeed extremely ambiguous. Reventtalk 06:11, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Ankry (talk) 21:36, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

--Herzi Pinki (talk) 13:18, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Herzi Pinki: Sreejithk2000 appears to have started this split on April 6, but then undeleted it without actually doing the spilt.... why is not clear from the logs. I would think, however, that it would make more sense to split out the middle version to File:Kirche Oberrußbach exterior.jpg, and keep the existing image at it's current location... it's been at this name for ~5 years, and changing it would be contrary to established practice. Reventtalk 21:25, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Revent: , the file is unused (in the WPs, on Google images). But it is ok to extract the middle version to the name you proposed. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 04:15, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Herzi Pinki: Unfortunately, it's really (seriously) not possible to 'authoritatively' determine off-wiki usage... think paywalled websites, those with a robots.txt preventing crawling, ones embedded in PDFs, or ones from somewhere like India (where language issues cause Google to be really terrible). Splitting off the 'top' version of in image to a different filename is essentially a rename, and so should follow at least the 'reasoning' of the rename policy... it's better to just split out the middle, unless the overwrite was very recent.
I'm just giving this a day or two to make sure that Sreejithk didn't encounter some non-obvious issue when he tried to split this previously... unless he found some kind of problem, I'll do it soonish. Reventtalk 23:56, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There was something wrong with the history the last time I tried to do the split. I could not do it and I reverted the file back to its old version. Feel free to try the split now. --Sreejith K (talk) 14:31, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Sreejithk2000: I don't think that was a 'history problem' in the sense of being a database glitch, but instead the result of an Upload Wizard bug... my 'theory' would be using the tool to upload multiple images into the 'upload cache' under the same filename, without actually finishing the process to create the file page... hitting the back button at the 'wrong' spot in the process could cause this.
Here is what I did to resolve this (it's a slightly modified version of the split process)
  1. Delete all revisions.
  2. Restore only the file, and not the file page, for the version that needs to be split. (I missed on the first try, lol, and had to 'reboot') This is intentionally creating a zombie file.
  3. Create a file page for the new zombie, by copying the content from the (at this moment, deleted) file page.
  4. Move the file, and restore the 'original'
I think this is acceptable here because both files were from the same source.... same uploader, same date, same camera, same place... so it seems apparent that the uploader did probably intend to upload them both (they uploaded a number of other images as part of the same campaign) under that license.
@Herzi Pinki: Done as described above. Reventtalk 20:34, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Reventtalk 21:56, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: the two versions are quite different.

--El caballero de los Leones (talk) 08:51, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Please do the necessary cleanups --Sreejith K (talk) 15:54, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 15:57, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: the two versions are quite different.

--El caballero de los Leones (talk) 08:51, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done - Please do the necessary cleanups --Sreejith K (talk) 15:57, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 15:57, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Same problem as above: phab:T131020 for more info. Ankry (talk) 17:13, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: The original photo was overwritten with a different photo (different location). Thanks in advance.

--DAJF (talk) 06:43, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done - target filename is File:Choshi Electric Railway 2002 Inuboh 20100808.jpg. (notice the lowercase file extension) Reventtalk 21:37, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Reventtalk 21:37, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: overloaded with different image, both landscape and portrait variant are good and useful.

--Herzi Pinki (talk) 08:07, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done target filename is File:Wien - Frohner-Brunnen (Josef-Holaubek-Platz 1) 2.jpg (note the lowercase filename extension) Reventtalk 21:42, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Reventtalk 21:42, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done The older version of the file has been moved to File:SaltMesum 2.jpg. The filename suggested by the requester does not seem appropriate to me. Ankry (talk) 17:42, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Reventtalk 21:43, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
@Liji6085: This requires an actual split, not just a suppression of the overwritten file. Hiding that upload warring occurred is not an appropriate use of admin rights. Reventtalk 21:45, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Split to File:National Taichung Library Liming Branch (2).jpg, resultant file was a duplicate of File:Liming Branch Library Entrance.jpg, thus deleted as a duplicate. Reventtalk 21:54, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Reventtalk 21:54, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Reventtalk 21:55, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

--DAJF (talk) 10:27, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @DAJF: Because of the age of the overwrite, I instead split the underlying version to File:JRW-700-hikari-railstar 20080506.jpg. Reventtalk 04:03, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. That was probably a better way to do it. --DAJF (talk) 10:32, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Reventtalk 07:06, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Request: Please split the newer version to File:Hachiko Line 205 82 20090215.jpg
  • Reason: The original photo was overwritten with a different photo (different trainset taken on different date). Thanks in advance.

--DAJF (talk) 01:03, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @DAJF: As above, because of the age of the overwrite I split the underlying version to File:JNR-205-for-hachiko-line 20060406.jpg. Reventtalk 04:11, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. That was probably a better way to do it. I've added/updated the appropriate categories. --DAJF (talk) 10:33, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Reventtalk 07:07, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Request: Please split the newer version to File:DE11 Omiya 20100626.jpg
  • Reason: The original photo was overwritten with a different photo taken on a different date. Thanks in advance.

--DAJF (talk) 00:22, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @DAJF: And again, because it's so old, split the underlying version to File:De11 omiya 2010-04-10.jpg. (typed the hyphens this time, by habit, sorry. :/ ) Reventtalk 04:19, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I've added/updated the appropriate categories. --DAJF (talk) 10:33, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Reventtalk 07:07, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Request: Please split the older version to File:HK-8000series-8008 20060807.jpg
  • Reason: The original photo was overwritten with a different photo taken on a different date. Thanks in advance.

--DAJF (talk) 23:58, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Reventtalk 03:07, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. I've added/updated the categories accordingly. --DAJF (talk) 04:02, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Reventtalk 07:07, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Request: Please split the older version to File:HK-8300series 8314 20050401.jpg
  • Reason: The original photo was overwritten with a different photo taken on a different date. Thanks in advance.

--DAJF (talk) 23:58, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Reventtalk 03:14, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. I've added/updated the categories accordingly. --DAJF (talk) 04:02, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Reventtalk 07:07, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Please split both versions, but let the active version bear this filename, because it’s in use. The old version can be named into something like File:Beak Doctor (Thomas Bartholin).jpg, if a name is needed, but it’s actually a duplicate of File:Thomas Bartholin's beak doctor.jpg. — Speravir_Talk – 02:39, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Speravir: I don't think a 'split', truly, is the right thing (since it's a duplicate) but I can merge the underlying copy over to the duplicate, if you want to use it instead (it's cleaner). Reventtalk 00:12, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, I’m not interested in using this. And aside of this isn’t it in a worse resolution? But as I’ve seen this I thought these two versions have nothing in common (well, almost nothing), and such occurrings should be splitted. Am I wrong? — Speravir_Talk – 00:32, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The alternative way could be to hide the first version, or am I wrong again? — Speravir_Talk – 00:44, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
They 'should' be split, theoretically, but there is not much point to doing so if you're just going to them delete the split file as a duplicate (you called it one). The resolution is actually about the same, the 'overwritten' one doesn't have the bleedthrough, but also appears to have come from a poorer-quality print. Unless you actually 'want' the overwritten file, for some reason, I really just don't see why it's worth bothering with splitting them (which always risks breaking something, from bugs). Reventtalk 04:06, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK, then let it, like it is. I do not like this, but I can bear it. — Speravir (Talk) – 22:25, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Unintentional upload under same name, different images

--Herzi Pinki (talk) 05:03, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Herzi Pinki: We don't have any source or licensing information on the top version, here...the editor that overwrote the image did not edit the file page. I've simply reverted... if you can communicate with the uploader, please (I don't speak German) and get the needed info for the file pages I'll split them... otherwise we should probably revdel the images as unlicensed and unsourced. Thanks. Reventtalk 07:33, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Revent: Thanks, I'll ask her to upload from the scratch again. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 09:32, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've gone ahead and suppressed the overwritten versions, as lacking a source or license. Reventtalk 20:50, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Reventtalk 20:50, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Unintentional upload under same name, different images. If version #2 & #3 are different, both should be moved to the new name.

--Herzi Pinki (talk) 05:03, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As above. Reventtalk 07:33, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've gone ahead and suppressed the overwritten versions, as lacking a source or license. Reventtalk 20:50, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Reventtalk 20:50, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

I yesterday renamed this file, but noticed later, that the requesting user, who also provided the recent and earlier file versions, shouldn’t have uploaded his/her file versions upon the first file, but as a new one. Hence my question: Is it possible to split this file into …

— Speravir – 18:15, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Speravir: Just to make certain.. you want the original version, by Olaneli, back at the original name (Varkud satellite (VS) ribozyme.png, where the redirect now is), and the overwritten versions at the current name. Right? Reventtalk 20:45, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly, Revent. — Speravir – 21:36, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Reventtalk 21:45, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Reventtalk 21:45, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done Reventtalk 20:33, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Merge
  • Reason: The same file (from flickr), different resolutions.

--XXN, 22:08, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. XXN, 22:36, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: 2 different banknote specimens (different signatures and serial numbers).

--Djadjko (talk) 00:11, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done--Sreejith K (talk) 19:43, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Sreejith K (talk) 19:43, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: the last scan is from a banknote with a different serial number.

--Djadjko (talk) 00:11, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done--Sreejith K (talk) 19:48, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Sreejith K (talk) 19:48, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: the last scan is probably from another banknote.

--Djadjko (talk) 00:11, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 19:50, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Sreejith K (talk) 19:50, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Request: Merge
  • Reason: the same image in two different resolutions. Both transferred from Flickr via Flickr2Commons, and without modifications.

--XXN, 11:51, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@XXN: These are not the same photos. The second one is straightened version of the first one (that's why it has lower resolution). I think that the author uploaded the first version to Flickr, then Tm uploaded it to Commons, then the author uploaded straightened version to Flickr and finally JotaCartas uploaded it to Commons under a new name. --jdx Re: 11:22, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Reventtalk 21:05, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Reventtalk 21:05, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: two very different CoA's renderings should be separated

-- MaxxL - talk 21:06, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 19:06, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Sreejith, not done, you have now separated the last actual version, which is now unused.
(@Sreejithk2000: ping reapply) User: Perhelion 20:42, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
So you want to interchange the names? --Sreejith K (talk) 15:52, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, of course (that should be no question) Jdx has corrected this... User: Perhelion 21:35, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done @MaxxL, Perhelion, and Sreejithk2000:
I hope it is now all right. --jdx Re: 21:33, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Sreejith K (talk) 18:17, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done Reventtalk 02:19, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Sreejith K (talk) 18:17, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

File:MTA Bus Company New Flyer C40LF (2011).jpg File:MTA Q64 at Ridgewood Savings Bank; Forest Hills, Queens.jpg

✓ Done --jdx Re: 23:14, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 23:14, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Безымянный.png The second version was uploaded by mistake probably. It's already available in File:Synopsis methodica fungorum title page.jpg, so please hide it. Third file version, in fact is the same as first (was a revert) and also may be hid. --XXN, 12:42, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done New name: Turbo Basic ver. 1.1 screenshot.png. --jdx Re: 12:20, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pixabay-logo.svg

[edit]

The file Pixabay-logo.svg has already a split request by Josve05a, but I think it is a bit complex, so it’s better to write something here: As easily can be seen, the latest, active version should be split from all older versions, but for the naming we have to consider the following:

  • The old versions are the svg equivalent to file Pixabay-logo.png. Hence I would suggest to give after splitting the actual name Pixabay-logo.svg to these versions.
  • There is already a file Pixabay new logo.svg, which is taken from the website start page. The full logo seen here in the active file version is from Pixabay: About Us/Goodies (there are BTW more files not uploaded yet, including another logo variation). So my suggestion is to move the active version to File:Pixabay new logo full.svg or similar.

— Speravir – 01:55, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @Speravir and Josve05a: Old logo moved to Pixabay-logo (old).svg / Pixabay-logo (old).png. Regarding Pixabay new logo.svg, first of all it should be fixed because the validator doesn't even want to validate it (click "valid" link) and XML text is displayed instead of image when I click on it in Firefox. I think this is due to lack of <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> header. Also I think it should be renamed, e.g. to Pixabay-logo (unofficial).svg because it doesn't seem to be official, current logo due to lack of the camera. --jdx Re: 16:11, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve updated Pixabay new logo.svg, the XML declaration was missing. Regarding the “unofficial”: This is used on every Pixabay page, so I consider it very official. But that’s off topic here. — Speravir – 22:54, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Merge
  • Reason: A bit cropped / rotated photo uploaded by the same user. Sorry for my edit cut in.

--Darklanlan (talk) 18:24, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done The merged file is named File:Hitomi Nozoe.jpg. --jdx Re: 16:53, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Merge
  • Reason: Cropped image (in order to remove watermark). Should have been uploaded under the same name.

--XXN, 20:28, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Sreejithk2000 has already removed the watermark from the source image. --jdx Re: 17:15, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merging File:Ted Danson.jpg and File:Ted Danson at 42nd Emmy Awards.jpg

[edit]

I didn't realize that two of the files are of the same image. Is history merger possible? --George Ho (talk) 04:14, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done It is possible from technical point of view, but should we really do it? As for now, I marked File:Ted Danson at 42nd Emmy Awards.jpg as duplicate. Let other admin take a look at it. --jdx Re: 19:27, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps simply deleting one image (the newer?) as a duplication? Just a thought. Cheers ZooPro 12:55, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@ZooPro: Hedwig in Washington has already deleted the duplicate, i.e. File:Ted Danson at 42nd Emmy Awards.jpg. BTW. Welcome back after 3 years break. --jdx Re: 17:27, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jdx: , Thanks sorry I didn't see the deletion, and thanks for the welcome back. I am looking forward to getting back into the swing of things. Cheers ZooPro 04:05, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: multiple overwrites: Please move the later versions to new file names as indicated above.

--Herzi Pinki (talk) 23:24, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 22:59, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 22:59, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: [Merge]
  • Reason: Similar images.

--Darklanlan (talk) 11:00, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Done by Josve05a. --jdx Re: 17:06, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: 3 different files uploaded to same filename

--Herzi Pinki (talk) 21:59, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @Herzi Pinki: Please check if everything is alright. --jdx Re: 18:41, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well done, thx --Herzi Pinki (talk) 19:06, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Herzi Pinki (talk) 19:06, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: multiple overwrites: Please move the later versions to new file names as indicated above.

--Herzi Pinki (talk) 23:35, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @Herzi Pinki: Please check if everything is alright. --jdx Re: 20:30, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Thank you. ok, --Herzi Pinki (talk) 21:49, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Herzi Pinki (talk) 21:49, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Multiple overwrites

Recommend splitting and renaming the three different images as follows:

I'll update/adjust the categories once the files have been split/renamed. --DAJF (talk) 03:35, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done File:Chichibu Railway 1000.jpg redirects to File:Chichibu Railway 1002 20080126.jpg. Please also fix format of dates and remove unnecessary {{Information}}. BTW. Shouldn't the 2nd and 3rd photos have 1203 and 1202 accordingly in their names? --jdx Re: 10:53, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. I've cleaned up the descriptions and categories. The numbers in the file names are OK, as they are the trainset numbers used to identify the trains, even though the number will be different at one end of the train. --DAJF (talk) 11:23, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
DanTD: Done. Please do the necessary cleanups/updates to description and categories. Thanks! Rehman 16:39, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and I already made the changes. ----DanTD (talk) 17:16, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Overwrites

One bus model in three locations. The two older versions are in two different locations on Staten Island with two separate routes, while the current version is on another route in Brooklyn. The current version should be kept as File:MTA New York City Bus Nova LFS Rigid (2011).jpg, while the older versions should be split and renamed as follows;

The descriptions for each version can be found in the history itself. ----DanTD (talk) 16:08, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DanTD: Done. Kindly recheck if everything is in order, and please do any necessary cleanups/updates to description and categories. Thanks! Rehman 16:46, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and I already made the changes. ----DanTD (talk) 17:17, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Overwritten

Someone overwrote the original image. Should be first split and probably followed up with a request for more information to the uploader. --Taketa (talk) 02:50, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Taketa: ✓ Done - Reventtalk 19:16, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Original image was overwritten with a different image taken on a different date.

Please split the more recent image and rename it File:JNR EF301 20090509.jpg. Thanks in advance. --DAJF (talk) 08:37, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Please clean up the files. --jdx Re: 10:20, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I have now cleaned up the categories and descriptions to match the images. --DAJF (talk) 01:59, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Cropped version does not concur with source attribution

Please split only the most recent, cropped version from the others, copy the description. I would later adjust these pages and file uses, if you do not this alone. — Speravir – 02:38, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Speravir: ✓ Done I believe that only old, uncropped version needs to be updated. Also please note that wikipedias & Co. now use uncropped version, so these links probably should be updated. --jdx Re: 08:31, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The available image size on the British museum page is smaller than the one here on Commons. The file uses are fixed now. — Speravir – 19:24, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done --jdx Re: 18:38, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. --XXN, 00:29, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done --jdx Re: 19:22, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split, original version only.
  • Reason: Both versions of this file contain the same bus at the same location (Floyd Bennett Field). However, the original image takes place in 2007, while the other versions were taken in 2009. Furthermore only the original version appears to be departing the former airport, and the second and third versions are parked along side another antique bus behind it. The third version of this file is an improved version of the second one, therefore the second version should remain with the existing one. A category for this bus already exists, and will be added to the version that should be split off. ----DanTD (talk) 18:47, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done --jdx Re: 19:51, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and more will come. ----DanTD (talk) 21:47, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Merge
  • Reason: the same picture, in two cropped versions, both unused. There is an OTRS ticket indicated in the file page of the oldest one; take care to not lose it:) --XXN, 01:21, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done BTW. Please use ~~~~ as signature instead of copying&pasting it from previous entries. --jdx Re: 09:42, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you2. I forgot about signature timestamp :) --XXN, 11:41, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment @Josve05a: First, I'm not sure if I understand correctly what would you like to be done. Second, File:Wikimedia-button1.png seems to be corrupted, i.e. on Special:Undelete/File:Wikimedia-button1.png there is no usual "File history" section, which means that file description page of this file has no actual image associated with it. IMO due to an old bug in MediaWiki, as this is a very old file. --jdx Re: 09:44, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh, alright. I just wanted to try and find an 'easy' solution to get en:File:Wikimedia-button1.png from enwp to Commons and keep "records" of where the files is, or was, given the age of the file. It could be uploaded over the deleted Commons file, but then someone would most likely ask that it be merged with File:Wikimedia-button-for-homepage.png or deleted again. Feel free to do as seem fit...(tJosve05a (c) 09:49, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please split only the most recent version of File:Duplessis Autoritratto.jpg; suggested new name: File:Joseph Duplessis, self portrait.jpg. Reason: The active version is clearly distinctive from the old versions and the source attribution is wrong (cf. linked data bank entry). I think the file uses should stay on the old file, because it is better, though smaller. Afterwards I would do necessary fixes. — Speravir – 19:55, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Please do the necessary cleanups --Sreejith K (talk) 22:17, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 22:17, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Merging duplicates and potential version delete

[edit]

There are 4 files with a defunct, but active version, which the uploader then reuploaded as new files. Perhaps the defunct versions should be version deleted, but I’m not sure: Given the other uploads of this user it may have been simple mistakes, but the content of the blank versions looks dubious. These are the files, first the defunct versions, second the version they should be merged into:

File:Antoine PESNE (1683–1757), Tanzendes Paar mit Zuschauern im Park, Gemälde im Stadtschloss Potsdam (Speisezimmer).png
File:Antoine PESNE (1683–1757), Tanzendes Paar mit Zuschauern im Park, Gemälde im Stadtschloss Potsdam (Speisezimmer), Ausschnitt Der Tänzer, Teilansicht Gesicht.png
File:Antoine PESNE (1683–1757), Tanzendes Paar mit Zuschauern im Park, Gemälde im Stadtschloss Potsdam (Speisezimmer), Ausschnitt Die Tänzerin, Teilansicht Gesicht.png
File:Antoine PESNE (1683–1757), Tanzendes Paar mit Zuschauern im Park, Gemälde im Stadtschloss Potsdam (Speisezimmer), Ausschnitt Liegender Herr vorne links, Teilansicht Gesicht.png

Side remark: The given source is wrong (right link is Zwei Gesellschaftsstücke - Antoine Pesne | Bildindex der Kunst & Architektur), and there category related issues, too. I want to fix this afterwards.
— Speravir – 22:23, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Speravir: Given that the rationale for overwriting the original uploads was 'wrong description', I think it's reasonable to consider these to be uploader requests for deletion... I don't think merging them would server any useful purpose. Someone who speaks German might explain how to request renaming. - Reventtalk 22:52, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Revent, I can live with this solution. There’s no need for renaming, I only thought, it would be better to have the now deleted versions as redirects (3 of the files are actually not wrong). — Speravir – 23:01, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Speravir: I will not object if you create redirects... but a merge is kind of an involved and risky way to make one. :) - Reventtalk 23:16, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I decided to not create redirections, the files have not been not in use, and it’s not that important – and the first now red one is actually ambiguous. — Speravir – 21:54, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. — Speravir – 21:54, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Donetsk

[edit]

Hi I have a request. For the file File:Flag of the Lugansk People's Republic.svg, could you move the "19:56, 24 June 2014" edition to File:Variant Flag of the Lugansk People's Republic.svg. Also, for the file File:Flag of the Donetsk People's Republic.svg, could you move the "22:59, 11 April 2014", "20:45, 12 May 2014" and "16:19, 16 May 2014" editions to File:Flag of the Donetsk Republic (Organisation).svg ? Regards. --Panam2014 (talk) 15:11, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Please do the necessary cleanups. --Sreejith K (talk) 21:22, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 21:22, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

--XXN, 10:57, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done by Sreejithk2000. Thanks. --XXN, 20:10, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. XXN, 20:10, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Restore the fully transparent version [1] so that it is available for use
  • Reason: The original uploader has objected to having a fully transparent version overwrite their partially transparent version, and has reverted the change. A fully transparent version is desirable and preferable over this partially transparent version.
  • Comments: This request is also available at: Wikipedia:en:Wikipedia:Files_for_upload#Ishtar

-- 70.51.200.162 05:18, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done - See File:Ishtar-star-symbol-simplified-transparent.svg. Please do the necessary cleanups --Sreejith K (talk) 19:58, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 19:58, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Fotografía de un menor

[edit]

El archivo File:Johnmcfly.jpg es la fotografía de un menor, según se puede leer en su página de usuario, no sé si corresponde el borrado o si hay alguna política referente a la privacidad de menores. Solo informo por si hubiese que borrarla. --Jcfidy (talk) 06:11, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File nominated for deletion. XXN, 20:10, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. XXN, 20:10, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Pressoir de La Coudira à Pregny-Chambésy.jpg

[edit]

The uploader requested file renaming (to an existing filename btw, which is a redirect), but in my eyes the versions should be split.

— Speravir – 01:00, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done - Please verify --Sreejith K (talk) 02:51, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
All fine. — Speravir – 20:59, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 02:51, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Multiple Overwrites.

Six pictures of the same bus in six separate locations in Manhattan. The current version should be kept as File:NYC Transit Authority Flxible 53102-6-1 7340.jpg, while the older versions should be split and renamed as follows;

The descriptions for each version can be found in the history itself, with the exception of the fourth version, which can receive a new description. A new category for all six images named Category:Flxible 53102-6-1; NYCTA (7340) will be created. ----DanTD (talk) 20:10, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @DanTD: Please check descriptions, categories and dates (see Exif data). --jdx Re: 12:29, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. jdx Re: 12:29, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Flickr files

[edit]
  • Reason: the same images originating from flickr (a common source for every pair) uploaded on Commons in by two versions in different resolutions (in past the transfer tool failed to retrieve files in highest available resolution, or flickr didn't made them available at that time, and at the most recent transfer the tool didn't detected duplicates).

--XXN, 22:38, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@XXN: IMO low resolution versions should be processed as {{Duplicate}}s and finally deleted. I can't see why should they be merged with their high resolution counterparts. --jdx Re: 13:18, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: History deletion
  • Reason: This is not actually a split or merge request, but could an admin please delete all the overwritten file versions from the history of File:JR east E351.jpg to restore the original version? The overwritten version is a duplicate of File:E351系 s22編成.jpg uploaded earlier by the same editor, so there is no need to split or preserve the newer version here. --DAJF (talk) 08:07, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done --jdx Re: 11:47, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot. Much appreciated. --DAJF (talk) 23:20, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. jdx Re: 11:47, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Different images by different uploaders

--Herzi Pinki (talk) 13:06, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Question Which version should be marked as ___2.jpg? --Sreejith K (talk) 02:52, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
the second one. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 09:57, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done - Please verify --Sreejith K (talk) 18:17, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks --Herzi Pinki (talk) 10:40, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 18:17, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

The possibility of transferring pictures from Panoramio to Commons would be a ... enabled through gerrit:126384. --McZusatz (talk) 10:01, 20 April 2014 (UTC) ...

[edit]

This is not a change, its a query about the above Subject.Let me know what is the proper venue. I want to know if there is a way I can transfer 3000 Panoramio pictures, many with wiki descriptions, out of Panoramio to either my external hard drive or some other place. I have no monetary interest in them but hate to see them vanish later this year.Johnmacdonaldewing (talk) 21:56, 7 May 2017 (UTC) Johnmacdonaldewing@gmail.com[reply]

  • Request: Merge
  • Reason: Not fussed which is the correct way to merge. I will leave decision to the person who does the merge (the French description is better on WKossak031.jpg). The two files are from the same source and with similar resolution.

--PBS (talk) 09:04, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 09:41, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 09:41, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Two different paintings depicting the same person

Moved from COM:AN --Achim (talk) 15:00, 14 May 2017 (UTC):[reply]

I would like to have the two images in the version history of File:Johann Christoph Gottsched.jpg as two different files, for the two images show different paintings and need different comments as to painter, year and location. Both users are no longer active. Could an administrator do that the right way? --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 14:20, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done @Pp.paul.4: The older, black&white image is now in File:Johann Christoph Gottsched (B&W).jpg. Please add {{Artwork}}, do necessary clean-up, etc. --jdx Re: 18:38, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 18:38, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Please, merge File:Gray contrast test image-edited.svg into it as latest, active version. The file is heavily used, but has a serious flaw, see Commons:Village pump#Incorrect color on screen test file (hopefully, later archived in Commons:Village pump/Archive/2017/06). Is it possible to add the file, but to keep the description of the overwritten one? — Speravir – 01:01, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look into the flawed version and actually it would be much easier to upload a fixed file, but I want to wait for an answer here. — Speravir – 01:45, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Request withdrawn, I’ve uploaded a fixed version. — Speravir – 22:13, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Speravir 22:13, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: The original photo dating from December 2009 was overwritten with a new file taken in January 2010.

--DAJF (talk) 13:20, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 04:48, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. --DAJF (talk) 05:46, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 04:48, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

File:Nl-Pringles-article1.oga to File:Nl-Pringles-article.ogg

[edit]

File:Nl-Pringles-article1.oga to File:Nl-Pringles-article.ogg. A few filemovers tried to do this, but the file kept the extension oga i.s.o. ogg. Had the same problem with an other file, but after a while I saw that was renamed succesfully, so it's very strange. For this file I even changed the name with "1", but that did not help. So it must be in a redirect. Can someone please rename the file into the right one? Thanks in advance. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 17:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done @Richardkiwi: This request has nothing to do with history splitting or merging. Also .oga is the right/preferred extension for Ogg audio files, as per en:Ogg. --jdx Re: 00:22, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jdx: It might be worthwhile, however, to document how to actually do this somewhere. - Reventtalk 09:04, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Revent and Richardkiwi: Well, I couldn't rename the file using Move & Replace script, but Special:MovePage (with appropriate parameter) worked as expected. Anyway, now it's ✓ Done. --jdx Re: 10:07, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jdx: Yeah, you have to either use the special page, or temporarily turn off Ajax... the gadget specifically includes code to normalize extensions. - Reventtalk 10:11, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 00:22, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Older version(s) contain image of station under construction.

--Voidvector (talk) 21:07, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @Voidvector: Please do necessary clean-up, check categories and fix dates (according to Exif data). --jdx Re: 10:11, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 10:11, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Older version(s) contain image of station under construction. There are at least 2 different old versions.

--Voidvector (talk) 21:07, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @Voidvector: Please do necessary clean-up, check categories and fix dates (according to Exif data). --jdx Re: 10:11, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 10:11, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Older version(s) contain image of station under construction

--Voidvector (talk) 21:07, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @Voidvector: Please do necessary clean-up, check categories and fix dates (according to Exif data). --jdx Re: 10:11, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 10:11, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Please split the source file into three files (two addional ones); just add some numers to differenciate.
  • Reason: The uploader User:Pandukht mentioned it was a mistake to overwrite the previously uploaded files at the bottom of his discussion page.

Thanks, --Arnd (talk) 11:55, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done File:Armenian Embassy, London.jpg, File:Armenian Embassy, London 1.jpg, File:Armenian Embassy, London 2.jpg --jdx Re: 19:30, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 19:30, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done The older version is named File:Echo Lake at Disney's Hollywood Studios (old).jpg. --jdx Re: 19:30, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 19:30, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done ZUFAr, already done by another user. --Arnd (talk) 05:34, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 19:30, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: Original 2005 image was overwritten file taken in 2008.

--DAJF (talk) 03:54, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Please add {{Information}}, do necessary clean-up, etc. --jdx Re: 19:30, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. I've now updated the descriptions and categories accordingly. --DAJF (talk) 23:27, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 19:30, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: Original 2004 photo was overwritten with a photo taken in 2007. Note that the "1705" in the new file name is not a typo (it is the correct set number for this train). --DAJF (talk) 02:17, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Please do necessary clean-up. --jdx Re: 10:09, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. I've now updated the descriptions and categories accordingly. --DAJF (talk) 23:27, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 10:09, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

--DAJF (talk) 02:58, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Please do necessary clean-up. --jdx Re: 10:09, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. I've now updated the descriptions and categories accordingly. --DAJF (talk) 23:27, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 10:09, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: First image existed for almost 7 years under that name and is now overwritten by a new image. This will replace the image in all the wikiverse internal usages, but also for external usages without notice. I asked the user to do so in another case, but I fear he does not unterstand.

--Herzi Pinki (talk) 08:20, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 10:20, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 10:20, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: Two separate images

--Elisfkc (talk) 19:37, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 07:33, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 07:33, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split ]
  • Reason: The original photo taken in May 2017 was overwritten with a new photo taken in August 2017.

--DAJF (talk) 04:40, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 07:46, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 07:46, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Categories of Brumado

[edit]
✓ Done @Jarould: I've merged histories and then deleted empty categories named in Portuguese, but perhaps {{Category redirect}}s should be created. --jdx Re: 08:24, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 08:24, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

File history: delete version

[edit]

--Gunnex (talk) 19:29, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gunnex: I agree with your reasoning, but it is old and widely used file, so IMO regular deletion request should be created for the current version. Besides, technically it isn't splitting or merging request. --jdx Re: 21:00, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jdx: ("(...) technically it isn't splitting or merging (...)") --> yeah, I know (but in some occasions I already got some positive consent here for versions to be deleted). Anyway, I'll fill a DR. That was an alternative I also have been thinking about. No problem: thx for watching/treating the request. Gunnex (talk) 21:14, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Gunnex (talk) 21:15, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Overwrites.

One bus model in three locations. The two older versions are in two different locations, one in Manhattan near the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center, and the second one on Staten Island with two separate routes, while the current version is on another route on Staten Island. The current version should be kept as File:NYC Transit Authority Flxible New Look 4727.jpg, while the older versions should be split and renamed as follows;

The histories are in both earlier versions. A new category (Category:Flxible New Look 111CC-D5-1 (4727)) is being prepared for all three images of the bus. ----DanTD (talk) 09:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 11:12, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 11:12, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done @Meisam: Please check description, add categories, etc. --jdx Re: 13:04, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 13:04, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Overwritten

--kennethaw88talk 22:06, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @Kennethaw88: The newer photo is now under the name File:Battle Creek City Hall 2.jpg. Unfortunately its author and source are unknown. @Boscophotos: If you are the author, please update source and author fields and licence tag. --jdx Re: 01:01, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 01:01, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

--Herzi Pinki (talk) 12:23, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 13:43, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 13:43, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done --jdx Re: 11:05, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 11:05, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Old logo was overwritten by new logo.

--John123521 (talk) 07:53, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --PierreSelim (talk) 10:11, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. — Speravir – 17:46, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: A new photo of a building that has already been photographed should be a separate file

--Arnd (talk) 15:39, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --PierreSelim (talk) 10:17, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. — Speravir – 17:47, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: , this never happened to me. I will ask the uploader @CHAITALIR11: and let you know. What I heard from him that he was uploading all the files simultaneously. I am not sure, if that created this issue. -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 16:01, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Bodhisattwa: They were all uploaded within a four minute window, so that is plausible.   — Jeff G. ツ 16:07, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
where to give feedback? Artix Kreiger (talk) 16:20, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Artix what kind of feedback? This here is the page for requesting merges and splits. Everything related to this belongs here. — Speravir – 18:15, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Speravir: , it seemed the user overwrote the photo using the android app. I wanted to give feedback so that a warning (a rather big one) would appear on the app. Artix Kreiger (talk) 20:31, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. Artix, this would belong on the developer page(s) for the app whereever this is (I only find Commons:Mobile app). As long nothing happened with splitting this file here could serve as warning example. — Speravir – 22:01, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Update: The main developer seems to be Nicolas Raoul. I left a message on his talk page, you could add more information there. — Speravir – 22:11, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello all! Thanks for reaching out to us! The fastest and most efficient way to reach the developers is to create an issue on our bug tracker. I created one for this problem: https://github.com/commons-app/apps-android-commons/issues/919 We have fixed this problem a while ago, so we have to make sure whether that particular user is still using an old version of the app or not. Thank you for your feedback! Syced (talk) 02:43, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There is at time of writing an active deletion request which could be speedy decided before splitting in my opinion: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Small branded swift.jpeg. — Speravir – 18:15, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Bodhisattwa: ✓ Done. Could you add correct description to each of them? and also the file name should be changed. splited files are: File:Hibiscus yellow 001.jpg, File:Hibiscus yellow 001000.jpg, File:Hibiscus yellow 00010000.jpg, File:Hibiscus yellow 00100.jpg, File:Hibiscus yellow 0010.jpg, File:Hibiscus yellow 0000001.jpg, File:Hibiscus yellow 000001.jpg, File:Hibiscus yellow 00001.jpg and File:Hibiscus yellow 0001.jpg. ~ Nahid Talk 17:26, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 14:38, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: User has uploaded a different photo over the existing one!

--Meisam (talk) 11:38, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 00:32, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 00:32, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done --jdx Re: 17:08, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 17:08, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Photographs taken at two different location: the current version was taken at Huangshidong Railway Station, the old version was taken at Hankou Railway Station.

--MNXANL (talk) 00:18, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Please adjust categories, descriptions, dates, etc. --jdx Re: 11:59, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 11:59, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Photographs taken on the different stage of the railway construction

--MNXANL (talk) 00:21, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Please adjust categories, descriptions, etc. --jdx Re: 12:51, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 12:51, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Request: merge
  • Reason: to preserve the category's history after a cut&paste move.

--HyperGaruda (talk) 21:47, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 19:13, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 19:13, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 Not done. The entire file has been deleted: the original is out of scope and the newer version is a copyvio (found here). --P 1 9 9   20:24, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@P199: Thanks anyway.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 23:07, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 19:17, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
@Elisfkc: Are you sure that the file should be split this way? Please look at the log – IMO the first version should be deleted (probably it has been restored by mistake). The second and the latest version are also uncertain, probably only the second version should be kept as per this UDR. Pinging @Jcb who restored the file. --jdx Re: 20:29, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am just requesting the split since there are three different versions. If the first should be deleted, so be it. --Elisfkc (talk) 20:33, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The first version was deleted as a netcopyvio. I have splitted the second and the third. Jcb (talk) 21:04, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Jcb (talk) 21:04, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: these two versions are quite different.

--El caballero de los Leones (talk) 12:07, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done The old version is under the new name. Please do necessary clean-up. --jdx Re: 13:33, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 13:33, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi. A user has overwritten File:TanDaNguyenKhacHieu.jpg (which was already in use) with a substantially different image. I've just tried to revert back to the original, and the revert hasn't worked correctly. Both images are just fine as far as I can tell, so really I guess they should be split, but I didn't see that option at the time. Please help. Thanks much. Phil wink (talk) 16:52, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Phil wink: Your revert worked but may not have been visible due to a caching issue. I agree a split is warranted.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 18:10, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done @Phil wink: I moved the second version to File:TanDaNguyenKhacHieu (1).jpg. --jdx Re: 22:11, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 22:11, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Category:Pernambuco and Paraiba Stock Exchange e Category:Bolsa de Valores de Pernambuco e Paraíba

[edit]

Olá pessoal! Peço que executem a fusão dos históricos das categorias a seguir. Elas foram criadas separadamente, sob títulos em línguas diferentes (português e inglês). Uma foi editada por último em 2009 e outra criada somente em 2017.

Grato. --Luan (talk) 02:59, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 21:35, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 21:35, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Image was overwritten with a new version taken on a different date.

--DAJF (talk) 14:16, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 21:09, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 21:09, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi, it seems that a user has overwritten file: Einbeck1.jpg , can someone please check that?. I believe the original image showed the building in year 2005, whereas the current image shows the building in 2018. It would be nice if both images could be kept and possibly renamed. Both should be in category: Einbeck Brodhaus, or Houses in Einbeck. Thanks! --Bob kolndyke (talk) 09:05, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Bob kolndyke: Everything seems to be fine. According to Exif data the photo was taken on 21. October 2005. It was moved to Commons from German Wikipedia on 26. January 2018 and haven't been overwritten since then. According to the original upload log the photo was overwritten on dewiki on 9. June 2008 but the original uploader (Ingo2802) reverted this change. Either way, everything seems to be fine. --jdx Re: 20:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 20:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

File:Necromanis franconica.jpg

[edit]

Please, split File:Necromanis franconica.jpg.

— Speravir – 22:02, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 22:09, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 22:09, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello! I wonder if this file is in need of splitting? If you look at it you see that another picture was uploaded first, depicting the same person, but with other clothing, but that picture is now hidden behind the later one. I think the later one has better quality, but perhaps the first one deserves it's own file here on Commons? (I've never done a request like this, so please be patient if I haven't done everything correctly and inform me how I should've done.) //Vätte (talk) 18:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Images by Apokryltaros

[edit]

It seems that User:Apokryltaros did not knew COM:OVERWRITE. He has overwritten a lot of his images. I searched them all, here's a list. The should probably all be split. (Cf. Commons:Administrators' noticeboard) -- Michael F. Schönitzer 22:17, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this a problem? I reuploaded newer versions of these files either because the previous versions were inaccurate, or that I wanted to replace them with artistically improved versions.--Mr Fink (talk) 22:40, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Two different images, one hiding the other. To be not disruptive, please extract the version #1 to the new name and keep #2 under the old name.

--Herzi Pinki (talk) 10:13, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to do it, but now I am unable to restore File:Am Spitz 11.JPG. Let me ask about this in Commons:Administrators' noticeboard --Sreejith K (talk) 22:38, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done by Sreejithk2000. --jdx Re: 00:33, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 00:33, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

In File:Schönberg.jpg there is a reverted version which should be split from the others if possible. For this version showing a building instead of a hill I suggest the name File:Schönberg (Vogtland).jpg (this was actually the name suggested by the uploader of this version who is not the original uploader). — Speravir – 02:38, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold Jeez, another database error, just like in the topic below. Anyway, I moved the reverted version to File:Schönberg (Vogtland).jpg and then deleted it because it was duplicate of File:Bahnhof Schönberg, Straßenseite.jpg. --jdx Re: 19:15, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Restored. I had to upload the file with a different name and move it here and then restore the entire history. --Sreejith K (talk) 03:57, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks both. Sorry, Jdx, that I did not notice the duplicate. — Speravir – 22:44, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 03:57, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: two different photos

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Aschroet (talk • contribs) 11:38, 22 March 2018‎ (UTC)[reply]

I think that would be a split.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 01:32, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Jeff G., of course. --Arnd (talk) 06:44, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 14:48, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 14:48, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Overwrite

Previous versions of this image are almost entirely in various locations in Nassau County, New York. All five version are the same make and model of bus, but not the same fleet number. The current version (File:MTA Long Island Bus Orion VII Next Generation bus.jpg;) which is in Amityville, in Suffolk County, New York should be kept in tact. Older versions should be named as follows;

The first three older versions have separate descriptions fitting each version. The fourth version never had a change in the description, and could be anywhere between Flushing Main Street (LIRR station) in the NYC Borough of Queens and Glen Cove, New York, which is in Nassau County, NY. This picture was taken in the days before the N21 route was truncated from it's previous western terminus with Flushing Main Street LIRR station to the current western terminus at Great Neck (LIRR station). A new description for the fourth version will be required. --DanTD (talk) 14:49, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold I have started splitting but (usual) error occured [WqwRuApAMFgAAEDP4JUAAAAM] 2018-03-16 18:49:29: Fatal exception of type "Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError". We have to wait some time. --jdx Re: 18:56, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please, let me know when you get the other versions back. I don't think the original uploader would be too happy about this. Also, I'm going to hold off any other requested splits until the error is resolved. ----DanTD (talk) 20:54, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried my best to bring back the files. Can you please verify? --Sreejith K (talk) 04:20, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The correct description for File:MTA Long Island Bus Orion VII NG N35 Nassau Community College.jpg is actually missing. I'm sorry I didn't check on this when you restored the images, but this still isn't entirely resolved. I'll have to work on the description for the fourth version myself. ----DanTD (talk) 04:13, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done @DanTD: One revision was lost (actually it was in File:MTA Long Island Bus Orion VII NG N21 on the North Shore.jpg), so I moved it to the proper place: Special:Diff/20406487.
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 06:52, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: The cropped picture is essentially a new topic than the original photo.

--Wcam (talk) 23:15, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to do it and now I am unable to undelete the file. It throws an error Error undeleting file: The file "mwstore://local-multiwrite/local-public/9/95/Andrew_Ng_WSJ.jpg" is in an inconsistent state within the internal storage backends. I will wait till this is fixed in MediaWiki. --Sreejith K (talk) 22:02, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Restored and split the file now. The new file is available at File:Andrew Ng WSJ (2).jpg. Please do the necessary cleanups. --Sreejith K (talk) 15:47, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 15:47, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Split file Laenderfinanzausgleich.png

[edit]

Please split File:Laenderfinanzausgleich.png:

I will take care for further necessary steps. — Speravir – 00:47, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 15:03, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
“Necessary steps” done now, as well. — Speravir – 21:49, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 15:03, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: Split off original onto new name.
  • Reason: Overwrite

Previous version of this is in a different location within the West Side of Midtown Manhattan. Split off old version with a new name, specifically File:NYC Transit Flxible F2D6V-401-1 5117 at Circle Line Pier 83.JPG. Current version should keep the existing name. I have preserved the earlier description in the event that the correct one is lost, as in my previous split request. ----DanTD (talk) 13:07, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done--Sreejith K (talk) 16:41, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that went smoothly. Thanks. ----DanTD (talk) 18:57, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:41, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

File:NYC Transit Authority GMC TDH-5303A 8466.jpg

[edit]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Overwrite

Each version of this image is located in completely separate neighborhoods in Brooklyn, New York City. All three version are the same make, model and fleet number of bus. The current version should keep the existing name File:NYC Transit Authority GMC TDH-5303A 8466.jpg, while older versions should be named as follows;

The histories are in both earlier versions. A new category (Category:General Motors TDH-5303A (8466)) is being prepared for all three images of the bus, plus a fourth image that has nothing to do with the overwrite. The only issue is that the second and third versions have the same description, but that description appears to apply more towards the second version. I have preserved earlier descriptions in the event that the correct ones are lost, as in an earlier split request. ----DanTD (talk) 13:20, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This went better than I expected. Again, thanks. ----DanTD (talk) 18:59, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: Split off original onto new name.
  • Reason: Overwrite

Previous version of this is a different make and model of truck, and is in a different part of New York City. Keep the existing image and split off old version with a new name, specifically File:MTA MetroCard Van in Washington Heights, Manhattan.jpg. The histories are in both versions, and both version as well as other MTA MetroCard vans and buses will be in a new category named MetroCard Vending vehicles. ----DanTD (talk) 12:13, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 19:28, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again. ----DanTD (talk) 23:48, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 19:28, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: Split off original onto new name.
  • Reason: Overwrite

Previous version of this is in a different location within Southeastern Brooklyn, specifically Pennsylvania and Schroeders Avenues in Starrett City. Split off old version, and use it's presence in Starrett City as part of the name. specifically File:NYC Transit MetroCard bus 8319 in Starrett City, Brooklyn.jpg. Current version should keep the existing name. I have preserved the earlier description in the event that the correct one is lost, as in my previous split request. Note that both versions are of the same manufacturer, model, and fleet number of bus, and both versions will gain the category MetroCard Vending vehicles. ----DanTD (talk) 23:47, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 21:10, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that. I've corrected all the categories too. ----DanTD (talk) 21:46, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 21:10, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: two different files

--Arnd (talk) 16:52, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 21:06, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 21:06, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: [Merge]
  • Reason: Category:Morgan was, for the most part of its existence, related to the Italian singer. That history should be merged into the new category created for the singer.

--Capmo (talk) 13:33, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 08:56, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 08:56, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: Merge
  • Reason: There are two categories for the same building. Dürerstraße 24 is the street address of the former Sozialversicherungsanstalt building. --Bujo (talk) 19:03, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done @Bujo: I don't think that history merging is a good solution in this case. IMO better solution is moving files to the "proper" category and leaving {{Category redirect}} in Category:Dürerstraße 24, Dresden, what I have just done. Anyway, if you insist on merging, let me/us know. --jdx Re: 16:08, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jdx: I have no objections against your solution. Thank you! --Bujo (talk) 18:11, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 16:08, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Overwrite

Previous versions of this image are at various locations on the Bx12 in the Bronx, whereas the current version of this file (File:MTA New York City Bus Nova Bus LFSA SBS.jpg) is on the M15 in South Ferry, Manhattan. All four version are the same make and model of bus, but most are on a separate route. Current version should keep the existing name. Names for older versions should be as follows:

I have preserved earlier descriptions in the event that the correct ones are lost, as in a split request from two months ago. ----DanTD (talk) 16:01, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 16:13, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:13, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: Merge the two files into one file under the name of File:Pakatan Harapan Logo.svg, but mantain the version of File:Bendera Pakatan Harapan PH Hi Res 8000x4000 px.svg since it is with the correct ratio.
  • Reason: Similar file.

--Molecule Extraction (talk) 08:05, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 16:07, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:07, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Crop should be another pic. Furthermore, the original shows other people as well.

--Arnd (talk) 08:56, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 20:42, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 20:42, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Not a librsvgworkaround therfore repairing should be overwritten

[edit]
  • Request: Merge
  • Reason: not a librsvgbug, file was invalid (therefore repairing file can be overwritten, without documenting the non existing librsvg bug)

--JoKalliauer (talk) 18:55, 17 May 2018 (UTC), 18:59, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. Please do any necessary cleanups. Thanks, Rehman 02:26, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 09:24, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Request for multiple similar files to be merged into one file

[edit]
  • Request: Merge
  • Reason: All are similar files that was created for State Legislative Assembly seating in 2018 that supposed to be in one file. The final confirmed version is on File:Sabah State Legislative Assembly seating, 2018.svg and that should be mantain as the current/top version. Molecule Extraction (talk) 07:35, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done, Molecule Extraction. What a morning exercise! The current/top version is automatically set based the latest version (which happens to be exactly what you wanted). That being said, there seems to be a software bug that made an old version show on top. What luck. I will update here again once I figure how to sort that. Rehman
Glitch fixed by User:Zhuyifei1999 (thanks!). Rehman 05:11, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 09:24, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
What is the source of that the file from Sidlerbj? --Sreejith K (talk) 03:14, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Sreejithk2000: I was hoping to find out with Google Images.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 05:29, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The thumbnail was hidden by @Jdx: citing Unknown source. So I guess the image is a copyright violation. --Sreejith K (talk) 04:10, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh well. I wonder where it came from.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 04:27, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 09:25, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

--AlbanGeller (talk) 18:44, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 22:27, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 06:49, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: Merge
  • Reason:Same subject, different name (French and British)

--Les Yeux Noirs (talk) 19:53, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done @Les Yeux Noirs: These categories have independent, parallel histories, so they cannot merged (although it is technically possible). However feel free to move files from the 1st category to the 2nd (using e.g. HotCat) and create {{Category redirect}}. BTW. IMO these categories shouldn't be merged – IMO it is quite common that the same locomotive have diffrerent code designations depending on operator. They should have the same parent category. --jdx Re: 09:30, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Thank you very much for your advice. --Les Yeux Noirs (talk) 17:04, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 09:30, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 21:19, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 21:19, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
The situation is much worse than I initially anticipated. Please merge all these categories which have been manually moved by the same user:

Many thanks -- Meisam (talk) 15:33, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 10:29, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by AlbanGeller (talk • contribs) 02:52, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@AlbanGeller: Have you read COM:OVERWRITE?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 03:21, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not all of it apparently. So I guess borders for historical images are necessary to keep, then? AlbanGeller (talk) 04:30, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Merge
  • Reason:

Identical images. HapHaxion (talk) 01:36, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

LibrSVG Workaround --> Original file

[edit]

since there are too many buggy files, those files should be overwritten. Just move the file, and keep the original text, I will fix the rest. I think after moveing there is no need of a redirection.  — Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 23:00, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 21:03, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 21:03, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Reason same as above: #LibrSVG_Workaround_-->_Original_file  — Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 12:51, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Request: Split
  • Reason: COM:OVERWRITE – I tried to split it myself but did not succeed.

--De728631 (talk) 23:47, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done by Guanaco per notice at COM:AN. The new file is now at File:YOTEL New York 2018-04-14.jpg. De728631 (talk) 00:22, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Two different logo, current logo was used after Bennington's death

--John123521 (talk) 13:41, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done - Please review --Sreejith K (talk) 19:14, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: Someone has added a completely different photo as a new version of my original photo. The two are from different years even, and the new one is definitely not displaying the author at the book signing originally described.

--Hobbsansak (talk) 15:55, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done - Please do the clean-ups. CC: @Awardsprizes: --Sreejith K (talk) 21:52, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: The last version is the old logo.

--Paul Ewe (talk) 14:33, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The file history has three versions of the file. Which one should be renamed? --Sreejith K (talk) 14:51, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The 2018-version. --Paul Ewe (talk) 21:58, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done - Please verify. --Sreejith K (talk) 04:09, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. --Paul Ewe (talk) 22:32, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Paul Ewe (talk) 22:32, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: Merge
  • Reason: Reason: These two photos share the same URL, however one of them is from the Italian Wikipedia page while the other is from the English one. The english one was created earlier this year and is a crop out of Cesare from the march on rome, and is not a portrait let alone an official portrait of him. I noticed that the Italian wikipedia uses his official portrait, which was uploaded to the site in 2014, and even has the same URL as the english one. Ive been trying to work this out with 4nn1l2 and after much talk he has decided that It would make sense for the English Wikipedia to use the official portrait. So i am making this request to finalize that and finally change the URL and picture to the right one.

--Scu ba (talk) 02:36, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I know that we simply revert overwritten files and ask the user to upload the image as a new file under a new name according to COM:OVERWRITE. But I also think we should be flexible and consider some exceptional cases. The first version of File:Cesare Maria De Vecchi.jpg has been uploaded on 20 February 2018 which is not very old. On the other hand, it:File:Cesare Maria De Vecchi.jpg has been uploaded to the Italian Wikipedia on 23 March 2014. This file could have been transferred to Wikimedia Commons earlier. Alas, that this did not happen. Instead, a low-quality image was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. The portrait is of higher quality and better suits the encyclopedia, so I think it deserves the simple and natural filename of Cesare Maria De Vecchi.jpg. We can rename the 1922 photo of March on Rome to something like File:Cesare Maria De Vecchi, March on Rome 1922.jpg. 4nn1l2 (talk) 07:30, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
dummy comment to postpone bot archiving. 4nn1l2 (talk) 08:05, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Split
  • Reason: Transferred from enwiki, but the two file versions are two unique images. I transferred both versions to the same file name due to limitations of the tool I was using, but the newer version should be split out.

--~ Rob13Talk 05:00, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 15:09, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 15:09, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: Merge
  • Reason: History merge needed to repair cut-and-paste move

- Eureka Lott 15:45, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 11:08, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 11:08, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: These two versions are quite different.

--El caballero de los Leones (talk) 17:20, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 15:34, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 15:34, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: These two versions are quite different.

--El caballero de los Leones (talk) 17:22, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 15:39, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 15:39, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks in advance. --Peter17 (talk) 19:34, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 02:16, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 02:16, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! <3 --Yeru 314 (talk) 14:07, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 22:38, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 22:38, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Please move recent cropped version to File:Bundesarchiv Bild 183-T0925-114, Dresden, Kosmonautenbesuch, Jähn und Bykowski (cropped).jpg or a better name if you have an idea. — Speravir – 18:51, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Please do the necessary cleanups --Sreejith K (talk) 20:22, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OK, done. — Speravir – 23:16, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 20:22, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Please split, it are completely different 18th-cent. paintings, violation of COM:OVERWRITE. --Achim (talk) 12:08, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please suggest a new name for the overwritten file --Sreejith K (talk) 20:53, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am not Achim, but: The file uploader also altered the file information. The image source link is dead, but archived in Wayback Machine. According to information something like Francesco Geminiani (Royal College of Music).jpg or probably better, because we are not totally sure about this origin (I cannot find it on the college pages), more cryptic Francesco Geminiani - rcmu pphc000015.jpg by adding a bit from the source name should work. Achim? — Speravir – 03:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't matter, might be "Francesco Geminiani (1).jpg" or the like. Original source of the 1st upload probably had been http://www.haendel.it/compositori/geminiani.htm (or predecessor at time of upload). --Achim (talk) 14:36, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request: Merge
  • Reason: History merge needed to repair cut-and-paste move

- Eureka Lott 23:48, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 12:36, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 12:36, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: Merge
  • Reason: Cut-and-paste move.

--xplicit 23:43, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 00:08, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 00:08, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Request: Merge
  • Reason: Two Versions of the Same File that both have existed since January 2008. TBD What info on either SVG is the most accurate.

--―Matthew J. Long -Talk- 16:27, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --jdx Re: 18:11, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 18:11, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: Accidentially overwritten with Kipi Uploader

--Sbjoern (talk) 15:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 16:21, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:21, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: Accidentially overwritten with Kipi Uploader

--Sbjoern (talk) 15:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 16:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: Accidentially overwritten with Kipi Uploader

--Sbjoern (talk) 15:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 16:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: Accidentially overwritten with Kipi Uploader

--Sbjoern (talk) 15:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 16:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: Accidentially overwritten with Kipi Uploader

--Sbjoern (talk) 15:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 16:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: Accidentially overwritten with Kipi Uploader

--Sbjoern (talk) 15:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 16:33, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:33, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: Accidentially overwritten with Kipi Uploader

--Sbjoern (talk) 15:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 16:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: Accidentially overwritten with Kipi Uploader

--Sbjoern (talk) 15:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 16:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: Accidentially overwritten with Kipi Uploader

--Sbjoern (talk) 15:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 16:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: Accidentially overwritten with Kipi Uploader

--Sbjoern (talk) 15:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 16:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Request: [Split]
  • Reason: Accidentially overwritten with Kipi Uploader

--Sbjoern (talk) 14:20, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sbjoern: Thanks for posting here, but please sign your other sections above.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 14:36, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done --Sreejith K (talk) 16:19, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Sreejith K (talk) 16:19, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Request: Split and rename original version.
  • Reason: Overwritten files:
    Evidently User:Panoramio upload bot uploaded two files with the same bad name and no description for either version. Despite the lack of a description, the image infobox is clearly better suited for the first version. This version by somebody named "Kailito" is at some beach in Crimea and was taken on August 23, 2010, as evidence suggests in the archive of the original photographer's Panoramio page . The second version which was taken on June 2, 2010, is by User:Idawriter, and is of an intersection containing a Turkey Hill gas station and convenience store, somewhere in Pennsylvania, which you can tell by the small signs across from this gas station (the ones with "SR 222/310" pointing one way and "SR 222/300" pointing another). In time, both versions should get a proper name, but since the one from Pennsylvania has less info than the one from the Crimean coastline, the original version should be split off and the current one should keep the bad name and the replacement infobox that already exists in the file history. --DanTD (talk) 03:52, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The suggested file name is invalid, a valid one would be File:Undetermined Beach in Crimea, August 2010 - panoramio.jpg (the panoramio part is usually kept).
 Info From the upload commentary you can see that the active file information is for the overwritten file. With reverse image search you can find some uses of the newer file version, all for places in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. I found 5 different pages on tripmondo.com where the image is embedded, but more important is they provide there geo coordinates according to which the petrol/gas station is in 39°53′41″N 76°10′18″W / 39.8948°N 76.1718°W / 39.8948; -76.1718 which is apparently in Quarryville, PA, crossing of West State Street with West 4th Street (in Lancaster County) – and Google Street View confirmed this.
So a suitable name for the newer image could be File:Gas station in Quarryville, PA - panoramio.jpg. — Speravir – 23:13, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Speravir: I suggest File:TurkeyHill gas station in Quarryville, PA - panoramio.jpg.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 06:50, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot argue with that, because I have no clue, but, yes, Turkey Hill and TurkeyHill can be read in Google Maps. — Speravir – 22:11, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't argue with Jeff G.'s suggestion for the latter one either. ----DanTD (talk) 14:09, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, I just found out this gas station is at the west end of the overlap with U.S. Route 222 in Pennsylvania and Pennsylvania Route 372. So that's more categories for the newer version. ----DanTD (talk) 14:25, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
UPDATE: I also found another image from Quarryville, Pennsylvania overlapping a Crimean Beach taken by the same photographer. Good thing I didn't rename that one yet, but I'm considering a new name for that duplicate. ----DanTD (talk) 18:00, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Now can you restore the previous version, so I can give it the proper name? ----DanTD (talk) 18:57, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done The beach is under File:Undetermined Beach in Crimea, August 2010 - panoramio 46383447.jpg and the gas station under File:TurkeyHill gas station in Quarryville, PA - panoramio.jpg. Now I will look at the next file. --jdx Re: 19:24, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I was going to start a whole new thread on that one, but I'd like to recommend the name File:PA 372 at NE Corner of Lime Street; Quarryville, PA - panoramio.jpg for the new version. I've got Idawriter's version at this link if you'd like. ----DanTD (talk) 19:29, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(Edit conflict) @DanTD: Please request splitting of the new finding, as well. Apparently also more images in this range should be checked. @Jdx: After the new finding probably the beach image should get number 1, so the second could get no. 2, what do you think? — Speravir – 19:40, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I considered the previous numbers for the Crimean beachfront. The original request could probably get File:Undetermined Beach in Crimea, August 2010 - panoramio (2965).jpg, and the one that hasn't been split yet might be better off with File:Undetermined Beach in Crimea, August 2010 - panoramio (2961).jpg. If there are that many unidentified beach scenes from Crimea, we may have a pretty serious problem. ----DanTD (talk) 19:46, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done The second beach is under File:Undetermined Beach in Crimea, August 2010 - panoramio 46383431.jpg, the first ends with 46383447 – I have used full Panoramio's IDs. --jdx Re: 20:08, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --jdx Re: 20:08, 18 January 2019 (UTC)