Template talk:ID-USMil

This template should be autotranslated, see {{Autotranslate}}. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Multichill (talk • contribs) 18. Nov. 2009 12:05 (UTC)

Well, so far there are no other language versions --D-Kuru (talk) 13:59, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

This is just a reminder for me ;-)

Currently every template used more than 5000 times, except the ones tagged by me, are autotranslated. Autotranslating templates before you have translations is actually quite useful because it's less work (less languages to convert) and makes it easier for users to add translations. Are you willing and able to convert this template? Multichill (talk) 14:07, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I can do the german section and the codec. I don't know when I really have time for that but I think either today (2009-11-19) or on Saturday or Sunday could be somewhere time to do that.

--D-Kuru (talk) 23:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

question

Shuold USCG images use this template? Geo Swan (talk) 01:09, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Many USCG photos have names conforming with the US Mil standard, with the identifier "G". So, yes, the Coast Guard should be added to the options. Sv1xv (talk) 04:12, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

VIRIN question

I've come across a USAF photo with a branch ID of "O". Original is at http://www.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/100330-O-1234S-001.jpg. Now, I notice the SSN/Initial are the default "1234S", so I wonder if the "O" isn't some kind of default as well, that the photographer forgot to change. Anyone have an idea about what's going on? — Huntster (t @ c) 00:57, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

I've contactem them and asked them this question - let's see if I get any answer at all.

However, on the How to Create a VIRIN site they say "The content of this page is currently being revised." So maybe there will be a new VIRIN character (maybe "O" is for President Obama, how knows ^^')

--D-Kuru (talk) 02:05, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Kuru, the "how to" page has definitely been changed since I was there...it did contain very good instructions on how to format the VIRINs, just not anything on "O". I'm concerned that "O" may refer to "Other entity", such as a non-military source that they are simply republishing, which may in turn mean the media is not public domain. — Huntster (t @ c) 03:23, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

There are still instruction about creating VIRINs on the US Navy website [1]. Letter "D: in a VIRIN stands for "Other Civilian or contract employee of the DoD". Letter "O" is used "to indicate a person not falling into one of the categories above". SV1XV (talk) 08:06, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

trust

I wrote here when another contributor excised the {{ID-USMil}} template from an image uploaded from the ISAFmedia flickr-id.

In my experience those who managed the uploads from the ISAFmedia flickr-id can be trusted to use the correct VIRIN.

Therefore I think I should continue to add the {{ID-USMil}} template to images that sem to have a valid VIRIN. I welcome comments from anyone who disagrees.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 17:37, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. This is an official source, so no reason to purposely exclude them. — Huntster (t @ c) 04:51, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

XXXXX

The File:American fortifications in Kandahar.jpg's VIRIN contains XXXXX a VISION ID.

It seems the photo has been released, but with the photographer identity concealed.

Should in this case add the template {{ID-USMil|Army|110223-A-XXXXX-001|url=www.flickr.com/photos/isafmedia/5484409163}}? --Dereckson (talk) 22:47, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I see no problem with this situation. Flickr is down, so I can't verify it myself, but so long as the photo has been appropriately released, that template format looks okay. — Huntster (t @ c) 22:37, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Source links for US-Marines images from marines.mil are dead

It seems that marines.mil has changed their URLs for images. If, for example you go to File:USMC-100215-M-HB381-033.jpg and click on the link for the image source, all you get is a 404. I've checked a few other images with the same result. I wasn't even able to find the images using their website search functions, neither using the ID nor using random sections of the file description. Google didn't help either. Looks a bit like they just removed all the old pictures? --El Grafo (talk) 07:42, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

I also thought about that problem and I also thought about including an option to include a second website (as new place to find), but I ran into the same problem: I couldn't find the image anywhere (not google, bing or whatever). Even an ID search or using googles image search failed in some cases. To be honest I have no idea how to replace the source link in that case.

The question for me though is: Do we really need the links as proof? If the image is PD-USmil then it is PD anyway and if you are using the template I would assume that you have a valid ID and that you know what you are doing. The only thing I could think of is to replace the dead link with some kind of "The source website was deleted" note (but this wouldn't help with the deleted website after all).

--D-Kuru (talk) 15:49, 3 May 2015 (UTC)