User talk:BMacZero

Archives

Adding Disambiguation categories by BMacZeroBot

For your information. BMacZeroBot has added the disambiguation categories Log and Logs to File:Log and shake house, with cars in background, ca 1929 (KINSEY 826).jpg. Is it possible to avoid that? Regards, Wouter (talk) 13:28, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Wouterhagens: Thanks for the report! I changed all of the tags that mapped to Category:Log or Category:Logs to map to Category:Logs (wood) instead. – BMacZero (🗩) 16:38, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That particular file doesn't even seem to have a tag like "Log", so I'll investigate where those categories came from as well. – BMacZero (🗩) 16:47, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bot Suggestion for Public Domain Day 2026 and thanks!

Hi! I have a suggestion for next year's Public Domain Day in accordance with your bot that uploads things. We used Category:Media uploaded for Public Domain Day 2025 this year to tag recently uploaded items. I think next year it would be cool if we made a few sub-categories under the 2026 banner for things like the SAYRE images. Then they all get grouped together better for perusing. Would this be something that is tough to implement? I would be glad to help again next December.

And thank you again so much for uploading ALL of these works. It is so truly incredible.

Best, SDudley (talk) 18:47, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SDudley: Sure, that should be pretty easy, I'll add a note to do it next year. The Sayre collection is a really useful one for Wikipedia, I'm glad we have access to it! – BMacZero (🗩) 00:03, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! The SAYRE collection is so helpful to me. I'd love to make it more accessible to others going forward. SDudley (talk) 00:09, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I actually went ahead and used VFC to get the ones from this year in Category:Media uploaded for Public Domain Day 2025 (Sayre Collection), since it may help with finding homes for them. – BMacZero (🗩) 00:21, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Actor Holbrook Blinn (SAYRE 7991).jpg

File:Actor Holbrook Blinn (SAYRE 7991).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

– BMacZero (🗩) 02:42, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:A picture of the number 2. (c7b8d7e1-1dd8-b71b-0bbb-72839784b75e).png

File:A picture of the number 2. (c7b8d7e1-1dd8-b71b-0bbb-72839784b75e).png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Gnomingstuff (talk) 05:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PD-Art

Hi, Now only 72 files in Category:PD-Art (PD-old default) with PMA inside 70. Could you please use the same method to list all files with {{PD-Art}} and an unknown or anonymous author?

If you have a bot which can detect the date of death in Creator template, would it be possible to change {{PD-Art|PD-old-70-expired}} to {{PD-scan|PD-old-auto-expired|deathyear=}}? Thanks, Yann (talk) 20:35, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I can replace other non-specific PD-Art tags as well; I'm actually running on Category:PD-Art (PD-old-70) right now and I can do that one as well.

That's great progress on those inside-70 files. I can run more queries on the authors and dates, but as a very rough estimate on some data I have cached, there are about 30k that are some variant of "unknown" and another 7k "anonymous". What do you want to check those files for specifically? Can we narrow the query down? – BMacZero (🗩) 07:22, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, when the date of publication is 1. less than 70 years, 2. between 70 and 120 years, 3. more than 120 years. #3 is the easiest. Yann (talk) 09:19, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so you want to review these to see if {{PD-old-assumed}} or a Category:PD-anon license tags tag applies? I counted 28k PD-old default files with authors like "unknown" and 5k like anonymous, which seems like too many to get through by hand, and this might be able to be automated later. I could start with the non-machine-readable ones (that aren't using {{Anonymous}} or similar). That would give 3231 "unknown" and 1335 "anonymous". Sound okay? – BMacZero (🗩) 20:48, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, fine. Yann (talk) 09:10, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I created some new subcats of Category:PD-Art (PD-old default) for files author strings like "anonymous" and populated them. – BMacZero (🗩) 04:24, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. These should be easy to fix. I already fixed several hundreds of files from Category:PD-Art (PD-old default). The problem is when there is no date. Yann (talk) 10:16, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Usually, the date was wrong in Category:PD-Art (PD-old default), anonymous author, fewer than 70 years ago, but I was able to fix it in most cases. Idem for Category:PD-Art (PD-old default), anonymous author, 70-119 years ago. A few remaining cases without enough information. Yann (talk) 12:10, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think you fix the license automatically in many cases:

1. Adding {{PD-Art|PD-old-100-expired}} whenever the date is before 1850, whatever author is mentioned. In such cases, the author was born around 1825 or before, and was certainly dead by 1925.

2. Adding {{PD-Art|PD-old-70-expired}} whenever the date is before 1875, whatever author is mentioned. In such cases, the author was born around 1850 or before, and was certainly dead by 1955.

3. In many cases, the date is in the title or in a category. Could you use that to fix the date?

I am looking for other cases. Yann (talk) 13:59, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if you could give me a copy of your code, I could run it myself, as I have a bot account: User:YannBot. Yann (talk) 19:21, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Yann: Thanks for the ideas, any more you have would be helpful. {{PD-old-assumed-expired}} might also be good for those cases. It will probably be tricky to parse the date from the title, and even more so to have confidence that it's actually the date of publication rather some other date, but I can see if there are any common patterns.

Source code is on GitHub (this is the PdArtFixup task), though I don't have any documentation and it's a bit of a mess in places. – BMacZero (🗩) 04:00, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have cleaned the title for the first 400 files by alphabetical order in Category:PD-Art (PD-old default). The remaining files are all dates when there is a 4-digit number. I prefer only using {{PD-old-assumed-expired}} at the last possibility. Yann (talk) 08:31, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that {{PD-old-assumed-expired}} is the correct license to use if we don't know the author's death date. If we use a PD-old-XX it kind of hides that fact that the death date is unknown, whereas PD-old-assumed points that out specifically.

As far as the dates, in the majority of cases the year is already available in the Info template, replacement is mostly blocked because of missing the author's death year.

One other thing I'm thinking is to assume that the country of publication matches the author's nationality, so I don't have to assume 100 years of protection and can bring it down to whatever the country uses.

I will also be manually mapping some authors to death years where I can.

– BMacZero (🗩) 15:39, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, if there is an author but date death is unknown with a pre-1905 date, PD-old-assumed-expired is the right license. But if the author is unknown, I rather like to use a country-specific template: PD-US-expired for USA, PD-UK-unknown for UK, PD-RusEmpire for Russia, PD-EU-no author disclosure for the European Union, etc. That's more work, but much more precise rationale. It is also better if the date is uncertain, i.e. "ca. 1904". Yann (talk) 17:49, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, there's a lot we could do if the country of publication was known. I understand what you're going for with the {{PD-Art|PD-old-100-expired}} for files older than 1850, I will run that next. – BMacZero (🗩) 03:23, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are very few countries with more than 70 years of protection, and the only relevant case is Mexico. Other countries can safely be ignored, e.g. Ivory Coast has 100 years, but it was a French colony 100 years ago, so I would apply French law for content from that period. Yann (talk) 18:07, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, will do. – BMacZero (🗩) 15:19, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We are below 100,000! \o/ Yann (talk) 23:24, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, great progress! – BMacZero (🗩) 04:24, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]