User talk:Zhuyifei1999/Archive 12

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

Question for uploading with Panoramio Upload Bot

Dear Zhuyifei1999, I have a question. What should I name on data for the Panoramio upload bo please? --Blackwhiteupl (talk) 21:31, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

What? I don't understand your question. Specifically what "data" do you mean? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 04:41, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Photos. Upload. With Panoramio bot from Panoramio to Commons. --Blackwhiteupl (talk) 22:58, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
I don't operate User:Panoramio_upload_bot. Maybe ask Shizhao? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 04:33, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

ok--Blackwhiteupl (talk) 09:34, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Karimov Latvia.jpg

Can you confirm my photo now?--95.156.159.63 17:10, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Nothing really serious, but some weird result. For this document, it seems that the PDF available is of higher resolution (2133 × 1537) than the JPEG image (1976 x 1384), either with [1] or your script. Regards, Yann (talk) 12:31, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

That's weird. Maybe BnF knows why? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 13:06, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

14:57, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Zhuyifei, I was thinking more about the pipeline related to Category:Media without a license: needs history check processing. I empty this category on a regular basis and I was thinking about shifting some tasks to the bot. I wonder if it would be possible:

  1. run the bot daily without human intervention
  2. do 2 queries: one for old files that "lost" the license and one for new uploads, which were uploded for the first time since the last run of the bot.
  3. the "old" files would go to Category:Media without a license: needs history check and new ones to Category:New uploads without a license

The two groups need different processing and it would be faster to automatically separate them. What do you think? --Jarekt (talk) 15:22, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Nice idea, though I can't think of any other methods to deal with files in Category:New uploads without a license than tagging {{No license since}} and {{Speedy}}. Also, as the edit summaries already include number of revisions of file page from api, I think checking "oldness" with that is much faster than two db queries. --
Yes files in Category:New uploads without a license should be tagged with {{No license since}}, but the uploader should get a single notification for all the files instead of one per file. It seems much more friendly that way and majority of such uploads seem to be from new users. For last few years I was using VisualFileChange to add them that way, and I think that was not easy to program by a bot. I am not not sure what you mean by your last sentence. Do you think we should divide the files into 2 groups based on number of revisions? I thing that would work, but many "new" files might have several edits and if they were all done immediately after a very recent upload, I would still just add {{No license since}}. A single query can return filename and the time of the first upload, and your bot could just divide them based on the date.
By the way, I should have saved some examples but there were some files, with <gallery> but without </gallery> or with some other issues, where page was not correctly parsed, and did not show the license or the categories. Your robot was adding Category:Media without a license: needs history check each time it run, without the file showing up in that category (or any other category). So your bot should perhaps check if string "Category:Media without a license: needs history check" is already on the page and deal with such pages differently (maybe alerts us). --Jarekt (talk) 05:09, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
> I think that was not easy to program by a bot.
Well, it went that way long ago, before we decided to use a tracking category instead.
> many "new" files might have several edits and if they were all done immediately after a very recent upload, I would still just add {{No license since}}.
Right. How about consider uploaded-within-a-day files "new"? As the bot shall run every day, every files uploaded before the day should be already checked previously, thus "old".
 Agree
> without the file showing up in that category (or any other category)
I used to find them by checking "most edited pages" of the bot.
I run into them by running quarry:query/4509 right after cleaning up all the new
> and deal with such pages differently (maybe alerts us).
Would you mind if my bot span your talk page (or some sort of sandbox pages) everyday? Or should I prepend (instead of appending) a tracking category instead? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 09:17, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
I assume that it is going to be something that happens rarely, so I would be OK with spamming, but prepending a tracking category might be an easier option. --Jarekt (talk) 02:06, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Ok, I'll code it tomorrow or the day after that, with prepending a tracking category for broken files (How about Category:File pages with syntax errors or Category:File pages with parsing errors or?), to avoid redundant notifications. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 09:26, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
I would just use Category:Media without a license: needs history check. If it needs manual check than we will probably notice what is wrong. --Jarekt (talk) 12:07, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Right. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 15:21, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Should be working now, except that the # of revisions part seems broken --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 09:28, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Something is wrong with your current Botrun so I had to block it, filling up the cat with images having valid licenses. Example [18] --Denniss (talk) 17:35, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Oh man. I currently have zero time to investigate the root cause. All mis tags seems to be PD files. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 18:00, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
If you stop this specific Job I'll unblock the Bot. --Denniss (talk) 18:52, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Per logs the bot run was done before you blocked the bot (i.e. no unable to save errors because of the block). And I removed the job from crontab just after my last message --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 03:56, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi, your bot recently put thousends of false positives into Category:Media without a license: needs history check. Can you please check this and if posible revert those bot edits. thx. --JuTa 20:19, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

 Doing… --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 03:57, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done rolled back last run. JarektBot also helping --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 05:07, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Thx a lot. --JuTa 05:24, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

16:17, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Has the panoramio bot stopped working? Just wondering. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 01:48, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Reported as phab:T109403; now using old version of pywikibot. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 04:48, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Report status for the Panoramio Review Bot

Hello, please start the Panoramio review bot. The bot does not start in the moment. Regards--Blackwhiteupl (talk) 15:15, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

tools.yifeibot@tools-bastion-02:~$ qstat
error: commlib error: got select error (No route to host)
error: unable to contact qmaster using port 6444 on host "tools-master.tools.eqiad.wmflabs"
O_o --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:20, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Asked in -labs: <Krenair> known, people working on it --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:21, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

OK--Blackwhiteupl (talk) 16:57, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Why does the Panoramio Review Bot not work automatically again? --Blackwhiteupl (talk) 14:56, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done Manually restarted and (temporary) edited crontab so that future runs use older version of pywikibot --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 15:06, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

13:02, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

source provided for the commons images that is Pothi mala guru har sahai, the barki memorial ferozepur, saragarhi memorial ferozepur (under the category 'monuments in punjab, india') and shaheed bhagat singh college of engineering & technology ferozepur

source provided for the commons images that is Pothi mala guru har sahai, the barki memorial ferozepur, saragarhi memorial ferozepur (under the category 'monuments in punjab, india') and shaheed bhagat singh college of engineering & technology ferozepur, mechanical block (under the category ' colleges'). please approve the uploads. thankyou. we will keep contributing

source is provided for the common 'Shaheed Bhagat Singh College of Engineering & Technology, Ferozepur Mechanical Block' under the category (colleges)

source is provided for the common 'Shaheed Bhagat Singh College Of Engineering & Technology, Ferozepur Mechanical Block' under the category (colleges).please approve the image. thank you. we will keep contributing

Perhaps the flickr review bot has taken a break. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:33, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

✓ Restarted --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 00:56, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

21:36, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Gallica Tool

Hi, This tool allows direct uploads from WMLabs servers. I tested it from your tool: File:Caen chapelle saintepaix 1822, btv1b77408310.f1.jpg. Could you use it to upload files directly from your tool? Thank you again for your help. Best regards, Yann (talk) 14:18, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

I'll probably look into it tomorrow --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 15:05, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
I added a link to seed the url to url2commons. Is seeding description necessary? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 08:26, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Nice. This seems to be an easy solution, as a more automated system would probably require quite some work, isn't? Can you seed the description with some text from Gallica? Or even propose a sensible name for the file? I have no idea how difficult it would be. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:33, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
@Yann: The original PHP tool had some wikitext output. Shall I reuse that code? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 11:07, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Why not? I suppose it is free software, isn't? Yann (talk) 10:27, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Ok I'll do that tomorrow. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 10:28, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done The title will be invalid (be default) though --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 02:45, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

17:29, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Zhuyifei1999, I have been away for 2 weeks and was not monitoring Category:Media without a license: needs history check, but it seems to me that the bot is not running, as we had over a hundred recent uploads without license. --Jarekt (talk) 16:59, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

That was because of the massive amount of false positives in last run, and I failed to find a reasonable explanation. Besides, adding those categories to false positives seems quite disruptive to me. How about using a gallery instead? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 08:14, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
What triggers placement in this cat? Is it just missing {{License template tag}} usually called for by license tags? If just PD tags were affected then something must have recently been changed (or just another bug/handling change in MW Software. Please do a testrun with a gallery page to see if the problem persists, if you can't find the root cause we'll need a PD license tag whitelist. You may want to have a look at different style tag placements in {{PD-Layout}} and {{GNU-Layout}}, {{CC-Layout}}. --Denniss (talk) 09:17, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
The false-positives was no longer there in db queries when I removed the job last time (which made it ~impossible to debug). The conditions of placing is that having none of {{License template tag}}, {{GNU-Layout}}, {{No license}}, {{Delete}}, {{Speedydelete}}, {{Remove this line and insert a license instead}}, {{No source since}}, {{No permission since}}, {{No license since}}, {{Copyvio}}, {{OTRS received}} and not in either of the cats. The script used to do a a null-edit and then a second check for {{License template tag}} and {{No license since}}, but I'm afraid this part of the code might be broken during the compat to core migration. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 09:39, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
The query is copied to quarry:query/5007 --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 11:12, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Checked about 30 images, none were false positives with PD tags. Not easy to look at more due to time consuming copy and paste operations. --Denniss (talk) 13:01, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
I just run this query and the results look fine. the only problem are files with User:Chriusha/License, User:Saffron Blaze/license consent and User:Saffron Blaze/license licenses, which according to our standards do not have proper licenses. I do not know what to do with them, but we are talking with both users about relicensing. We also have two false alarms: File:Poem ('The Hermit Does Not Sleep at Night') LACMA M.2003.28.jpg or File:Bronze Fals LACMA M.2002.1.453 (1 of 2).jpg --Jarekt (talk) 17:22, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
So can we restart this bot. I am not getting any false positives in my queries. --Jarekt (talk) 02:33, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done Hopefully false positives won't happen again --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 08:56, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Pitt Meadows Airport Image of Tower

Hello The image you have posted has a fuel tank that is no longer present. I'm not sure how this is done through Wikipedia (I see in your other photos on Flickr you have more of the tower), would you be able to change the photo?

Thanks

@Denniss: --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 07:41, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

@Zhuyifei1999: take a look at this the result just looks weird] Lotje (talk) 11:57, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Hmm. What's weird? The description? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 12:01, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Yes, to me this description looks weird. Lotje (talk) 12:14, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Well, in that case @: could you look into this? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 12:18, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
It's bad OCR, probably from attempting to read the text when vertical. -- (talk) 12:29, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

16:17, 14 September 2015 (UTC)