Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive 94

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Having issues with deleting a few files

When I try to delete File:Dzhojar Tsárnayev.jpg it gives me errors like "Error deleting file: An unknown error occurred in storage backend "local-multiwrite"." When I try to delete File:Hillary and Bib.jpg, it gives me an error "Error deleting file: Could not read the status of file "mwstore://local-multiwrite/local-public/5/5e/Hillary_and_Bib.jpg"." Any advice? Abzeronow (talk) 16:47, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Looks like I was finally able to delete them. Abzeronow (talk) 17:01, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

History merge of MediaWiki:DebateTree.js with MediaWiki:TemplateScript-Wikidebate.js

Hello, good folks. Could someone who has the time please merge the history of MediaWiki:DebateTree.js with MediaWiki:TemplateScript-Wikidebate.js ?

In 2017, the author of MediaWiki:Dialectiki.js did rename the script to MediaWiki:DebateTree.js and requested the deletion of the previous name, MediaWiki:Dialectiki.js. Then it appears an administrator has incorrectly deleted MediaWiki:DebateTree.js instead of MediaWiki:Dialectiki.js (relevant logs: DebateTree.js, Dialectiki.js). This was also stated by the author.

Could someone please restore the history of MediaWiki:DebateTree.js and merge it with its current name MediaWiki:TemplateScript-Wikidebate.js ? Thanks.

Elominius (talk) 19:11, 26 September 2023 (UTC) - last modified 22:28, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Request for semi-protection of File:Blowjob close up.webm

Constant target for frivolous bad faith deletion requests. --Trade (talk) 22:37, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Done - Jmabel ! talk 00:14, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

File:Abraham Lincoln 1865 Digital Restoration 2048px.jpg

The new user that uploaded this file says it is a digital restauration. I found out that it is a colorization of File:Abraham Lincoln O-116 by Gardner, 1865-crop.png with added background. I modified the description of the file but I was wondering if the copright by the user was legitimate. Could an administrator verify if this image is valid for Commons?

Pierre cb (talk) 11:29, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Tagged files not showing up in speedy deletion categories

Recently a bunch of files that I have tagged for speedy deletion are not showing up in the speedy deletion category pages. For example, File:Pressurewashed.jpg, File:Precisionpressurewashingandexteriorpainting.jpg, and File:Pressurewashingandexteriorpainting.jpg do not show in Category:Advertisements for speedy deletion even though that category shows up on each of the file pages. Similarly, File:PGDM Colleges In Bangalore-IIBS Bangalore.jpg does not show in Category:Copyright violations. Am I doing something wrong? Or is there a broader issue that might be affecting administrators' ability to process speedily deletions? Marbletan (talk) 12:57, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Categories will do that sometimes due to software issues. One has to perform a null edit to essentially refresh the page and get it to show up in the proper category. If we don't already, we could have a bot that does that very slowly across all images on Commons, which would serve as a mitigation for this sort of thing. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 14:11, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Also, I've gone ahead and performed a null edit on all of them. They're showing up properly now (right before they're deleted). — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 14:12, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, Red-tailed hawk. If it happens again, I'll know what to do. And thanks for deleting the files. Marbletan (talk) 14:15, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Questionable user Ceoalphonso

They were spamming on Wikipedia, later claimed that their account was hacked. They were blocked for having a compromised account. They have recently uploaded some media to Commons. Most of it is claimed to be evidence of being hacked. None of the media is educational, and there are probable copyvios, e.g. screenshots of a source code of unknown origin. This user should be blocked as a precaution (see the Wikipedia edits, for example inserting spam into TemplateData) and their media deleted. Janhrach (talk) 08:24, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

No activity for 2 month, so block is not needed. I am even not sure, that the files need deletion. Of course, you can nominate the uploads for regular (not speedy) deletion. Taivo (talk) 09:57, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

@Taivo: The editor has been active for over a year, making several edits at once and then taking breaks. I am nearly sure that they will return. Janhrach (talk) 10:44, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Bot request reminder

Hi, I don't know if this is the place to post this, but I'd like my bot request at Commons:Bots/Requests/GlaMainBot reviewed. Beao (talk) 21:44, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Versions of File:Queen Suthida, Royal ploughing ceremony 2019.jpg

~~Hello. Please:~~

delete the present version and the version dated "18:29, 29 July 2021" of File:Queen Suthida, Royal ploughing ceremony 2019.jpg (due to copyright violation) and

revert it to the version extracted from the original file, File:Royal ploughing ceremony day 16.jpg.

~~Thank you so much. -- Asembleo (talk) 04:05, 2 October 2023 (UTC)~~

Please delete the versions "05:09, 2 October 2023" and "18:29, 29 July 2021" of File:Queen Suthida, Royal ploughing ceremony 2019.jpg due to copyright violation. Thank you. --Asembleo (talk) 09:29, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Done - Jmabel ! talk 15:22, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

File caricato tramite app.wikilovemonuments.it inserito come aggiornamento di un file esistente anziché come nuovo file.

Buongiorno,

ho caricato una fotografia per il concorso Wiki Loves Monuments 2023 tramite app.wikilovemonuments.it. La fotografia in questione, anziché essere stata caricata come nuova fotografia, è stata caricata come nuova versione di un file esistente appartenente ad un altro autore; forse è successo per una questione di omonimia dei file, anche se questo non è stato segnalato al momento del caricamento.

Il file in questione è: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Spoleto_-_Chiesa_di_Sant%27Eufemia.jpg

In base a quanto si vede in questo momento nella pagina, io non risulto l'autore della fotografia né la foto risulta partecipante al concorso Wiki Lovers Monuments 2023. Penso occorrerebbe ripristinare il vecchio file con la foro caricata in data 31 ago 2016 ore 11:13, autore Luca Aless, e creare un file separato con la mia foto caricata in data 28 set 2023 ore 23:11, autore Tinus70.

Fatemi sapere se servono altre informazioni, grazie!

Gabriele Costetti Tinus70 (talk) 07:48, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

@Tinus70: I've deleted your override; feel free to upload it under a different file name. Presumably if you ignore any warnings about it being a duplicate, that should work. - Jmabel ! talk 15:28, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Protected page possibly copyright violation

Heya, folks. File:Drew Weissman.png is currently protected, but two people have suggested that the page is a potential copyright violation (see File talk:Drew Weissman.png and Commons talk:Auto-protected files#Weissman and copyvio). Neither of them can tag the page, as neither of them are administrators. Could any of you take a look at it? ArcticSeeress (talk) 18:17, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

I’m coming here to report the exact same issue. The photo in question was uploaded by a new user as their own work as previously published in a scientific publication. Not very likely to be true. Schwede 66 18:48, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Done Right. It seems very well to be a copyvio. Deleted. Yann (talk) 18:49, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

@Yann. There is also the derivative work File:Drew Weissman (cropped).png, which should probably be deleted. ArcticSeeress (talk) 20:10, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Done Deleted. Yann (talk) 21:22, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! ArcticSeeress (talk) 21:26, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Changing the category name

On the Commons page, this category should be changed as ‘Murat Bridge (Muş)´ . Because his official name is Murat Bridge. See Wikipedia page. I would appreciate it if you could help. Vartolu3566 (talk) 21:18, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Convenience links (the ones given above specifically go to versions for mobile phone): Category:Sulukh_bridge, en:Murat_Bridge_(Muş).

@Vartolu3566: You are citing a Wikipedia stub written entirely by yourself. I see you also recently changed the name in several languages on Wikidata, without even leaving the prior name as an "also known as", which is not usually good practice.

If you think the Commons name should be changed, please start a CfD.

Not everything on Commons is under its "official" name. Presumably User:Hayk.arabaget (who appears no longer to be active) had at least some reason to choose the category name he chose. I have no particular opinion on what name is correct here, just that it needs discussion. - Jmabel ! talk 23:52, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

It looks as though "Sulukh" might be a name with Armenian roots, and "Murat" is Turkish. I'd like to see wider discussion of whether, and evidence that, the latter is the correct name for us to use. The same goes for its representation on sister projects. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:20, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Bad deletion nomination

Please can we have a speedy closure of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Royal Burlington cup and saucer - 2023-10-04 - Andy Mabbett - 02.jpg, which was either raised in error or through bad faith? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:59, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Done Andy Dingley (talk) 21:27, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Category:Copyright violations

I want to say this has been brought up before, but is the count here just totally bonkers, or is the page not populating all the images in the cat? GMG ^talk 10:54, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Looks like it is being handled well, see this. -- CptViraj (talk) 13:40, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

200 in the queue is relatively high, yes. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 17:07, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Well at the time I posted, the count was fifty or so, but the category page was populating like...four. GMG ^talk 10:42, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Problema metadati di tre mie fotografie

Nella sezione 'Metadati' di tre mie fotografie, caricate il 4 settembre, nelle righe della tabella 'autore' e 'informazioni sul copyright' risulta il nome "LORIS TULLIO MORATTI", il quale non è il mio nome, tantomeno io conosco nessuno con questo nome. Vista la mia inesperienza in Wikimedia Commons, chiedo spiegazioni e se possibile una soluzione al problema, dato che sembra che l'autore delle foto sia questo Loris Tullio Moratti e non io. Grazie in anticipo :-) Cadiprati (talk) 19:21, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

@Cadiprati: Che tre mie fotografie? Vedo solo cinque foto che hai caricato su Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 19:45, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Scusa! Avevo dimenticato di linkarle

Eccole: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sirmione_-_Castello_scaligero_di_Sirmione_-_2023-09-04_18-08-55_001.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Belluno_-_Chiesa_di_Santo_Stefano_-_2023-09-04_18-03-59_001.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Belluno_-_Comune_di_Belluno_-_2023-09-04_17-52-31_001.jpg Cadiprati (talk) 19:49, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

@Cadiprati: That is EXIF data in your file that you uploaded. It came either from your camera or from software that you used to post-process the photo. Most likely, for the future, you can fix it in the camera; you can edit EXIFs on your computer with ExifTool.

(Stiamo raggiungendo i limiti del mio italiano qui, quindi sto usando Google Translate.) Questo è dati EXIF nel file che hai caricato. Proviene dalla tua fotocamera o dal software che hai utilizzato per post-elaborare la foto. Molto probabilmente, per il futuro, potrai sistemarlo nella fotocamera; puoi modificare gli EXIF sul tuo computer con ExifTool. - Jmabel ! talk 23:31, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much, I didn't know this. :-) Cadiprati (talk) 13:05, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Add German translation to protected template

Template:PD-USGov-Military-Air National Guard/lang is protected, only administrators can edit it. There is a German translation (Template:PD-USGov-Military-Air National Guard/de). Would someone be so nice and add it to it? TheAmerikaner (talk) 17:53, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Done - Jmabel ! talk 17:58, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Could an admin confirm or remove a no-permissions tag on two Jess Wade images?

User:Beccaynr added "template no/missing permission" to two versions of a photo of Jess Wade, a rather famous Wikipedian, provided by her to the Wikimedia blog back in 2018, and used as the main image for her article ever since: File:Jess Wade - 2017.jpg and File:Jess Wade - 2017 (cropped).jpg. I believe the Wikimedia blog saying that Jess Wade gave them the image and released it under CC BY-SA 4.0 should be sufficient permission. However I'd rather not remove the tag myself, and would prefer that someone with an admin mop confirm this, since Beccaynr is also a rather experienced editor, and maybe she is right and I am wrong. --GRuban (talk) 19:54, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

It seems, the original image was uploaded as "https://diff.wikimedia.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/17_350-icl-jwade-024.jpg" at the same time, when the article was written (13 July 2018) by Melody Kramer, and was transferred to Commons only 2 months later. Per Metadata, "Dave Guttridge" from "The Photographic Unit" shot the photo in December 2017. He seems to be a professional photographer[1]. So, per our SOPs, even in 2018, upload would have required a permission from Dave Guttridge sent directly by him to OTRS/VRT. Not sure whether diff.wikimedia.org has their own records or processes for storing such a permission. --Túrelio (talk) 20:21, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Removed. We generally don't require proof when a big, trusted organization (such as the WMF) claims that a photo is freely licensed. For example, this FP came from LG's Flickr account without proof that the photographer transferred the copyright to LG. I will also note that it has previously survived a DR, and these cases are not eligible for speedy or "no permission" tagging. @Beccaynr: You may open a new DR if you wish to continue the matter. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:28, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you - I also didn't realize the tagging was out-of-process, and appreciate the guidance. Beccaynr (talk) 20:47, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

@King of Hearts, I cannot see where WMF has claimed that the photograph is freely licensed. Diff is not entirely written by WMF staff. It is a community blog moderated by MovCom team. Although Diff has a credits box, it does not have any permissions-archive where permissions could be stored. Generally, contributors use images that are already freely licensed here on Commons. If an uploader there puts the credits correctly (even with perhaps no-permission) the image would not be taken down, maybe. wmfblog:/2018/07/13/jess-wade/ (See page bottom) does not appear to contain credits for the image as compared with what the general practice on Diff blog is. Similarly many images on this blog which was published recently doesn't even have any credit information except on just one image. That's to say, I do not trust Diff blog blindly when it comes to permissions. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 05:12, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Import

Please Special:import de:Vorlage:CH1903-WGS84 to Template:CH1903-WGS84 (or similar). Enhancing999 (talk) 05:25, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Please protect File:Flag map of the world.svg

Dear admins, File:Flag map of the world.svg seems to attract disruptive edits (see the revision history). It may be helpful to prohibit anonymous (IP) edits for this file. Thank you very much! --Aristeas (talk) 07:08, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Done, please use COM:ANP for protection requests. Thanks! -- CptViraj (talk) 07:21, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Nominating for speedy deletion for no reason (maybe)

@Skazi is added copyvio stub on page of file "Teract in Groza Ukraine". I tried to get an explain from him, but he is don't replied me on his discussion page. This image is used by many ukrainian media, and in source, where I get this image, specified that people can use materials with credit to website. So, I added the source. Maybe I choosed wrong lisence or what? Nobody explained me. Arturztrostiantsia (talk) 12:42, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

This is because you don't understand Ukrainian language. If you interested where I got this info, just scroll to the end (where you find "© 2000-2023, Korrespondent.net") of page and find "Використання будь-яких матеріалів, розміщених на сайті, дозволяється за умови посилання на Корреспондент.net." Translate of this sentence is "The use of any materials posted on the site is permitted under the condition of linking to Korrespondent.net.". Arturztrostiantsia (talk) 08:45, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

I don't know Ukrainian, but I know how to use Google Translate. The Terms of Use is quite liberal, but not equivalent to a free license. Yann (talk) 10:05, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

The photo has nothing to do with Korrespondent.net. It was published by Office of the President of Ukraine. Obviously, the Office did not take it, it was probably taken by police or Emergency service. Both of them publish their images under free license. If so, you can search it on the websites of police, Emergency service, their regional departments or the regional administration. If you find it there, you can claim free license. Sneeuwschaap (talk) 05:40, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

User is uploading tons of copyvios and is generally causing problems across wikis

EdithGruFan (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:03, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Done Last warning sent, all files deleted. Please use COM:ANU in the future. Yann (talk) 08:54, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Globally locked. Yann (talk) 10:02, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

File:The theory of spectra and atomic constitution; three essays (IA theoryofspectraa00bohriala).pdf

This work is PD in the US but not in the UK where it was published, as Bohr died in 1962. I've added it to Category:Scans from the Internet Archive/non-free already, and posting here to inform admins. The file should be moved to the English Wikisource as it is in-scope there and they take files that are only PD in the US as well. Ciridae (talk) 05:26, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Done DRed. Yann (talk) 10:01, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Not able to delete a file - Fatal exception

I'm trying to delete File:Blue-Lock-TRAILER-OFFICIEL.webm but I'm getting an error: [b7eb1d7c-4d8d-4b8a-89db-057fb5e33fdc] 2023-10-12 19:15:06: Fatal exception of type "Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBUnexpectedError". Anyone know what this is? The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 19:20, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Phab:T348667. -- CptViraj (talk) 09:19, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Mass-message request for WLM-US 2023

Hello! I'm one of the organizers for Wiki Loves Monuments in the US. Could the following message be sent out to all of 2021's participating inviting them to this year's event? (The US did not participate in 2022)

Target: Listed at Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2023_in_the_United_States/Messages/Invitation_to_2021_participants/Recipients
Subject: Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States 2023
Body:: {{subst:Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2023 in the United States/Messages/Invitation to 2021 participants}} ~~~~~

Thank you! ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 00:31, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Sent. -- CptViraj (talk) 09:13, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Sockpuppets proved on English Wikipedia

Hello everyone, I am here only to inform the Commons community of some proven sockpuppets. They are confirmed socks by Checkusers. Please see w:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Marxist Economist. Marxist Economist, Indian Marxist Politician, Atal Bihari Vajpayee BJP and George Simon Ohm. Also to inform that George Simon Ohm after getting blocked and TPA revoked in English Wikipedia by Courcelles came to my talk page asking for help to get unblocked. Despite me telling him before that he shouldn't discuss about one project on other. Just brought it to notice rest depends on you. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 13:56, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Done All blocked, and all files deleted (DENY). Yann (talk) 21:53, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Wrong categorizations made by user Superior6296

Hi

Can someone explains to @Superior6296: how categorizations works.

Have a look to these categories:

you can see that parent categories added by Superior6296 are wrong since they are in fact the chidren categories.

I have tried to explain that to Superior6296 with the case of "Flags of the Ottoman Empire" wrongly categorized under "Historical flags of Ottoman Algeria". Unsuccefully: [2].

--Poudou99 (talk) 03:16, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

These look to me more like well-intentioned (if misguided) edits than vandalism.

@Superior6296: what you are doing here doesn't make a lot of sense to me, either. Can you please explain your intention? And can you please pause what you are doing here and wait for consensus? (I'll also post on their user talk page.) - Jmabel ! talk 04:14, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

@Poudou99:

Done, blocked for a week by @Jmabel. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 12:06, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Revert to original version of the image

I mistakenly overwrote File:Eita, village in Grosio, Italy.jpg and fail to restore the original version. Please restore the original version dated 11 December 2016. PawełMM (talk) 10:51, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

That would be 1 December 2016. Mere mortals get "The current version of the file is already identical to the selected one." and "The upload is an exact duplicate of the current version of File:Eita, village in Grosio, Italy.jpg." — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 11:10, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Done I managed to do it. It's okay now. Thank you. PawełMM (talk) 11:24, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

@PawełMM: Thanks for doing that, which seemed to reveal some kind of "thumbs are one version out of date" bug. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 12:03, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

DelReqHandler not working on Commons:Deletion requests/2023/06

For some reason, when I open Commons:Deletion requests/2023/06, the DelReqHandler gadget's [keep] [del] etc. links are missing. For the May and July requests it works, only June is affected. I suppose that there is a deletion request that somehow breaks the gadget, but which one? Any ideas? Gestumblindi (talk) 21:22, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

I've been having that happen for a while, NOT just for June, and it seems to be getting worse. Happens on 2 different computers using 2 different operating systems I use. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:39, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
- It might be because the page is so large. Try going to individual days. That worked for me. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 21:45, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
  - I don't think that the size of the page is the issue. June has currently 788 open deletion requests; July has 1462, and DelReqHandler works there (not the whole month is shown, though, because of the known include size issues). Individual days work though (thank you), so I suppose if we clicked through all of June's daily deletion requests, we could find the culprit... Gestumblindi (talk) 21:52, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

I have no idea what fixed it, but DelReqHandler is working again on Commons:Deletion requests/2023/06 for me. Gestumblindi (talk) 18:22, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

I sometimes had similar problems in the past. IIRC the problem was usually some malformed deletion request. Fixing it resolved the problem. --Rosenzweig τ 18:41, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

License review for today’s media of the day

File:Patricia Janečková - G. Rossini - Petite Messe Solenelle - Crucifixus.webm, today’s media of the day, has a warning template about not being license-reviewed. It’s a thing that it hasn’t been reviewed for nearly two years, but featuring it on the Main Page in this state doesn’t constitute to a good image of Commons. Could an admin review the image? (Non-admin license reviewers can’t do so due to the file being cascade-protected.) Thanks in advance! —Tacsipacsi (talk) 08:13, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Looks like User:The Squirrel Conspiracy has now done this. - Jmabel ! talk 15:28, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Please change "at" to "in".

When I made these categoris, I made a typo.

And please don't make redirects. Ox1997cow (talk) 12:04, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

@Ox1997cow: I'll do this but please in the future if you have a request like this just mark it with {{Rename}}. - Jmabel ! talk 15:29, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Requesting a review of a block on GameCreepr

Hi there. I just blocked GameCreepr (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user for sockpuppetry. It stretches the boundaries of AGF that someone's first ever edit to Commons, from a largely inactive account (they have exactly one edit outside of their own user page since 2021), is to wade into an ongoing edit war. However, I'm fine if an uninvolved admin thinks the block should be reverted.

While we're at it, I think it's high time to full protect that file, spin the other version (whichever one isn't the one when it's locked - I genuinely don't care which one) out as a separate file, and let the fight over which colors to use transfer over to the individual projects.

Thanks, The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 08:30, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

I've reverted the block, as they really don't look like a sockpuppet to me based on their enwiki profile and contributions. However, I've protected File:Flag of Russia (1991–1993).svg indefinitely. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:43, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Reporting a copied/reuploaded image

I believe the following image is not an original work but a reuploaded image: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Saleh_Mosque_%22Masjed%22_in_the_capital_of_Yemen_%22Sana%22.jpg

I reverse searched the image and I found an earlier source: https://asrarpy.com/2019/03/20/10849/

The image used on this webpage also contains a url which was cut out before uploading to Commons.

What do I do? This image is used on a couple of pages on Wikipedia and on Wikidata. ~ Spinarak (talk) 12:15, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I found an even earlier copy, so Commons:Deletion requests/File:Saleh Mosque "Masjed" in the capital of Yemen "Sana".jpg. Yann (talk) 12:30, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. What will happen to the pages where this file is being used now? Should someone try to replace (some of) them? Spinarak (talk) 18:27, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Spinarak When a file is deleted, a bot goes around and removes it from articles. However, it doesn't replace it or anything. You're free to replace it yourself, though. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 18:51, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Interface admin needed

I wonder what's currently wrong with the edit request process? The categories show a surprisingly large number of open requests. My specific example is a minor technical bugfix for the HotCat gadget that's open for about a month. Is there anything we – the Technical Wishes team – can do to help? Thiemo Kreuz (WMDE) (talk) 17:50, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Open for a month is certainly unusual, but the total size of the backlog is probably par for the course. I personally would be very hesitant to edit JavaScript that I hadn't had a chance to study thoroughly, no matter what some third party told me. - Jmabel ! talk 18:25, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Protection of file

Hello! File:Kejsi Tola LUMINOUS.jpg is regularly vandalized since October 19th, notably by 2 IP address and 1 account. A protection of the page would be useful. Thanks -- Titlutin (talk) 21:11, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Done semi-protected. FWIW, it's possible that the one logged-in user who appears to have vandalized this was just confused, it happened via an "undo". - Jmabel ! talk 23:58, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Deletion requests

Is it possible for deletion requests to somehow fall through the cracks and not get closed? Commons:Deletion requests/File:DouglasBertramMacDonald.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Brent Wilson, bassist (2004-2006).png have been open for months with no one closing them. Have those somehow fallen off an open request list? Seraphimblade (talk) 01:18, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

@Seraphimblade: There's just a really huge backlog. As you can see on COM:DR, we're just getting around to nominations created in June. There are some people who focus on recently nominated files, and some who work on the backlog, but overall there aren't that many of us, so yeah, sometimes it just takes a while before one of us gets to it. —holly {chat} 02:22, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

revdel, please

I uploaded the wrong file at File:Cyclists keep left sign - 2023-10-23 - Andy Mabbett.jpg. I have now overwritten it. Please can someone revdel my error? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:26, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Done Yann (talk) 14:33, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Wrong name: File:Frederick Christian of Brandenburg-Bayreuth.jpg

Hello,

the File:Frederick Christian of Brandenburg-Bayreuth.jpg seems to be misnamed. It shows a picture of a young prince, wearing the badges of the Orders of the Golden Fleece and of Saint Hubert of Württemberg, but Frederick Christian of Brandenburg-Bayreuth never was a Knight of those orders. I can not tell for sure, but I guess the picture shows Charles Eugene, Duke of Württemberg, who in a young age became both Duke and Knight of the Golden Fleece.

Best regards Socius sociologicus (talk) 12:34, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

@Socius sociologicus: Please add the template {{Rename}} to the file description page with a suggested new name and an admin will get to it. Thanks! —holly {chat} 02:24, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

@Howcheng Thank you. Socius sociologicus (talk) 00:59, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Kuban Animator

Good evening! I have a question for the administrators - is it by chance that Roman Kubanskiy and Kuban Animator are the same person? MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 13:49, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

For what purpose was this question asked? I can answer. Roman Kubanskiy (talk) 14:22, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

User name i guess Trade (talk) 09:59, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Possibly invalid uploads by inexperienced user

User:Aunthank appears to have been active on en-wiki and Commons for just a day or so this August. I don't doubt her claim in this en-wiki edit that she is a relative of Bill Wright (golfer), and I wouldn't be surprised if she owns the rights to some or all of the photos she uploaded of him. Unfortunately, she didn't use an email when she took an account, and she gave the upload date as the date for all of the photos (including some that must be about 60 years old), none of which can be recent because Wright died in 2021. "Own work" seems unlikely for the entirety of a group of photos spanning 60 years (though some might be legitimately inherited rights). If I thought there was a decent chance of getting hold of her, I would certainly do so and give her a chance to sort it out before moving toward any deletions. Can anyone suggest how best to proceed? - Jmabel ! talk 05:56, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Mass renaming request

Hi! In accordance with the file renaming rationale #3 “To correct obvious errors”, Nationalmuseum Sweden requests the following changes to file names on Wikimedia Commons.

The information in the file names that we request to be changed currently indicates that the depicted artworks belong to the collections of Nationalmuseum Sweden, which is incorrect and misleading. The images of the artworks are likewise not created by Nationalmuseum. The files were temporarily used by Nationalmuseum in connection with a temporary exhibition, which is the source of this error.

The images have earlier been requested for deletion. Following the decision to keep the files, we kindly ask for the file names to be changed to correct this regrettable misunderstanding and misinformation.

Elinmeriksson (talk) 08:10, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

@Elinmeriksson: Hi,

The right way to do this is to use the {{Rename}} template. Yann (talk) 09:13, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Elinmeriksson , I do not see a need to include the Göteborgs konstmuseum in the file name. A painting can be sold, and then the name should be changed again? Who will check that. In the description of the file it is shown where the painting is. The paintings can be simply renamed into painter - title - code - year.jpg, at least my 2 cents. Regards, Ellywa (talk) 11:15, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

I've started to rename some of the files, but I also agree with Ellywa's point. (EDIT: For example, should I rename the file File:John Singer Sargent - A Crashed Aeroplane - Inlån JSS 401-02 - Imperial War Museum London.jpg as File:John Singer Sargent - A Crashed Aeroplane - IWM ART 1610 - 1918.jpg?) Abzeronow (talk) 16:20, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your help and thoughts in this matter. You make great points! The suggested format for the changes are correcting the file names to reflect the creator of the digital file.

If the file name should not reflect the owner, like Ellywa's point, then the code should not be displayed either. The code is an institution specific number used by GLAM institutions to identify artworks. As such, "IWM ART 1610" is still connecting the file to the Imperial War Museum London and would change if the artwork would change owner. Elinmeriksson (talk) 13:15, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi again @Abzeronow and @Ellywa!

I would recommend to keep the institution that is/was the owner (and creator) of the digital image in the file name. This is because the image reflects how the artwork looked under that particular institution's ownership. Artworks change over time due to e.g. conservation treatment or damage. A change in ownership usually results in new images, which could illustrate the change over time when compared to the old images. This could of course be very interesting for a lot of people! Elinmeriksson (talk) 14:02, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

This seems to be a continuation of Commons:Deletion requests/Nationalmuseum artworks on loan from other institutions

I object to the renaming like File:John Singer Sargent - Shoeing the Ox - Inlån JSS 400-01 - Nationalmuseum.jpg. This file was loan "JSS 400-01" in the Nationalmuseum. That's not an error, let alone an obvious error. Multichill (talk) 20:05, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

The digital files were not created by or for Nationalmuseum, that is why mentioning Nationalmuseum, and the id (e.g. "JSS 400-01", which is not the id for the file) is both an obvious error and misleading since it attributes the file to us Elinmeriksson (talk) 13:37, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

The Nationalmuseum is the source of the files. Multichill (talk) 20:05, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Dug up the source and it's still online at https://api.nationalmuseum.se/api/objects?page=25&limit=100 :

{
        "id": 218270,
        "inventory_number": "Inlån JSS 400:01",
        "pinCode": null,
        "iiif": "http://nationalmuseumse.iiifhosting.com/iiif/294429d7c2b133d552b83a08cadd47f3e4dba82333338f9af0219815f1bb56ab/",
        "iiif_license": {
          "copyright": null,
          "license": null,
          "creditline": null
        },
        "title": {
          "sv": "Oxen skos",
          "en": "Shoeing the Ox",
          "de": null
        },
        "technique_material": {
          "sv": "Olja på duk",
          "en": "Oil on canvas",
          "de": null
        },
        "acquisition": {
          "sv": "Aberdeen Art Gallery, ABDAG003875",
          "en": "Aberdeen Art Gallery, ABDAG003875",
          "de": null
        },
        "acquisition_year": null,
        "descriptions": {
          "sv": "Motivet är hämtat från Siena i Italien. I en mörk byggnad har en man och tre ynglingar bundit fast en oxe vid en träställning för att kunna spika fast järnskor på oxens fötter. Huvudet är fixerat med rep och en slinga håller den väldiga kroppen uppe. Gester och ansiktsuttryck visar hur männen anstränger sig och den underkuvade oxens resignation syns tydligt. Med en rad ljusreflexer leder Sargent blicken runt kompositionen.",
          "en": "Sargent observed this farming ritual in Siena. In a dark work building a man and three youths have harnessed an ox to a massive timber frame in order to nail iron shoes to its feet. Ropes secure the animal’s head and a sling supports its immense body. The gestures and expressions of all involved convey the efforts they make, and the resignation of the subjugated ox is evident. The artist relied on an array of deftly rendered highlights to lead the eye around the composition."
        },
        "material_tags": [
          "Duk",
          "Oljefärg"
        ],
        "technique_tags": [],
        "category": {
          "sv": "Målningar (Måleri)",
          "en": "Målningar (Måleri)"
        },
        "object_type": {
          "sv": null,
          "en": null
        },
        "style": {
          "sv": null,
          "en": null
        },
        "geografical_reference": null,
        "signature": null,
        "inscription": null,
        "motive_category": null,
        "loan": true,
        "texts": [],
        "dimensions": [
          {
            "id": 204206,
            "item_id": 218270,
            "dimension": "55,9 x 71,1 cm",
            "type": "h x b",
            "value_1": 55.9,
            "value_2": 71.1,
            "value_3": 0,
            "unit": "cm",
            "description": null
          }
        ],
        "dating": [
          {
            "id": 318475,
            "item_id": 218270,
            "ref_type": 2163,
            "date_type": "Utförd",
            "date": {
              "sv": "Utf. 1910",
              "en": "Made 1910",
              "de": null
            },
            "date_earliest": 1910,
            "date_latest": 1910,
            "acquisition_year": 0
          }
        ],
        "actors": [
          {
            "id": 22281,
            "actor_full_name": "John Singer Sargent",
            "actor_title": null,
            "actor_given_name": "John Singer",
            "actor_surname": "Sargent",
            "actor_prefix": null,
            "actor_suffix": null,
            "actor_profession": "målare, skulptör, grafiker",
            "actor_nationality": "amerikansk",
            "actor_gender": null,
            "actor_biography": "Död i Chelsea, London 1925-04-15/ 1925-04-25. Alt. dödsår 1924. [Källa: Allgemeines künstlerlexikon]",
            "actor_item_id": 444802,
            "item_id": 218270,
            "relation_type": "Tillkomst",
            "actor_role": "Konstnär",
            "actor_qualifier": null,
            "actor_extent": null,
            "dates": [
              {
                "id": 304160,
                "item_id": 22281,
                "ref_type": 3063,
                "date_type": "Födelseår",
                "date": {
                  "sv": "född 1856-01-12",
                  "en": "born 1856-01-12",
                  "de": null
                },
                "date_earliest": 1856,
                "date_latest": 1856
              },
              {
                "id": 304161,
                "item_id": 22281,
                "ref_type": 3063,
                "date_type": "Dödsår",
                "date": {
                  "sv": "död 1925-04",
                  "en": "dead 1925-04",
                  "de": null
                },
                "date_earliest": 1925,
                "date_latest": 1925
              }
            ],
            "links": [
              {
                "link_type": "Wikidata",
                "link": "http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q155626"
              }
            ]
          }
        ],
        "exhibitions": [
          {
            "id": 3633,
            "item_id": 218270,
            "title": "John Singer Sargent",
            "start": "2018-10-13T00:00:00Z",
            "end": "2019-01-13T00:00:00Z",
            "year": "2018",
            "room": "1647 Kabinett södra sviten",
            "theme": null,
            "descision": null,
            "detail": null
          }
        ],
        "assets": [],
        "last_updated": 1698109856,
        "_links": {
          "self": "https://api.nationalmuseum.se/api/objects/218270"
        }
      }

Multichill (talk) 20:31, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

This is irrelevant to this discussion. This is the source of where you got the information for the Wikidata items for the physical artworks. The source of the files are already clearly stated in the comment on the description page, and this is not what this change request concerns.

This request only concerns correcting the information in the file names which makes people believe that the files were created by Nationalmuseum and that the physical artwork belong to the collections of Nationalmuseum. Elinmeriksson (talk) 09:10, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

It's very relevant to the discussion. See Commons:File_renaming#Which_files_should_be_renamed? for valid reasons to rename a file. "makes people believe that the files were created by Nationalmuseum and that the physical artwork belong to the collections of Nationalmuseum" is not a valid reason for renaming. The Nationalmuseum is in the filename because that's where it came from, just like File:1 Brick Lane - geograph.org.uk - 5617121.jpg has geograph in the name. So no, having Nationalmuseum in the filename is not an obvious error.

@Abzeronow: please undo the relevant reames because these are not backed by any policy or community consensus. Thank you,Multichill (talk) 16:14, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

If you wish to further undo the renames, I have no objection. I stopped renaming since it's apparent now that's no censensus for the names. I will obviously be more cautious in doing rename requests in the future as well. The problem of the Nationalmuseum Sweden wanting their names off of these files will remain though. Abzeronow (talk) 16:27, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Agree that renaming isn't needed. It's unclear if the interpretation of Nationalmuseum Sweden is even compatible with the views of WMF on public domain artworks. "Inlån" means "on loan". If any works were incorrectly noted as having been on loan, this would be a different question. Enhancing999 (talk) 13:39, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Our rename request concerns the misleading file names. The artwork was on loan, not the file. The attached ID in the file name (e.g. "Inlån JSS 400-01") is a temporary artwork ID, not a file ID.

If there is a need of association in the file name, it should be the creator of the file, the owner of the artwork or even the user that uploaded the file, but not the institution that once used the PD image.

This is a question about preventing the spread of misinformation and confusion. Nationalmuseum is dedicated to making trustworthy and correct data of our collections accessible, as we trust the Wikimedia community strives for as well. We would be happy to keep collaborating with you in this regard and hope that you can see how file and artwork association is important for GLAM professionals. Elinmeriksson (talk) 15:14, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
The photographer of the file is generally considered secondary for pd artworks.

What kind of statement would Nationalmuseum like to see on the file description pages to clarify this? Enhancing999 (talk) 15:30, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
I don't see the need for another statement in the file description other than the source which is already clear in the comment in the file history. The same way that the creator of the file is secondary, like you said, so is the usage history of PD images. If any information should be added, I can add exhibition history for the artworks on wikidata.

I also want to point out that the word "Inlån" in the current file names is not used descriptively nor informatively, but is part of the temporary internal inventory number for the physical artwork - not the file, and this is not in use at all anymore for any of the artworks.

In conclusion: the usage of "Nationalmuseum" and old temporary inventory number indicates that the files were created by Nationalmuseum and that the depicted artwork belong in our collections, both of which is factually incorrect and misleading and should therefore be removed from the file names. Elinmeriksson (talk) 13:57, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

I disagree with the conclusions here. While yes there are cases (such as the geograph.org.uk) where that is added to the file name there are also multiple cases, (such as images fetched from Europeana) where we would not consider adding that to the title. There are also multiple examples in the listed renaming requests where the current title combines the temporary Nationalmuseum identifier with the name of the sourcing institution (e.g. File:John Singer Sargent - Camouflaged Tanks, Berles-au-Bois - Inlån JSS 401-06 - Imperial War Museum London.jpg) or the identifier of the source institution with the name of Nationalmusem (e.g. File:Anders Zorn - Gondola, Venice - GKM 1842 - Nationalmuseum.jpg), these are obvious errors.

In general I'm a bit shocked about the very confrontational tone taken here. This is a GLAM institution, which regularly works with Commons, accepting the result of the DR and presenting a suggestion to an issue which they clearly see as misrepresenting the association between them and these files. They did not try to hide the connection to the DR (it's right there in the first message) nor is it the case of a GLAM institution objecting to having works in their collections on the Wikimedia projects or making copyright claims on PD images.

Independently of the above, can we all agree that the more valuable information to have in the filename would be the identifier and name of the actual Institution which produced the digital file (and likely holds the artwork itself)? If you want to contact them about an error, match the artwork against any public listings or track artwork condition over time then that is the institution you will want to get information about. With that as the assumption, is the objection to the cases where no alternative Institution is suggested for the filename? If so that is something which could be addressed. Or is it a blanket objection independently on the merits of the renaming suggestion?

While the opinions above are primarily representative of my views as a Commonist (Lokal_Profil) I'm still signing it with my Wikimedia Sverige account to be abundantly transparent about the professional relationship I also have with Nationalmuseum (incl. helping them get onto Commons many years ago). /André Costa (WMSE) (talk) 13:14, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Tagging a protected image as copyvio?

Hello,

The low-resolution image File:The magnificent Ganges River Dolphin.jpg appears to be a copyvio, with a few instances of the same photo in higher resolution available on the web – for instance at https://river-dolphins.weebly.com/river-dolphins.html (slideshow; image URL: [3]) or at https://www.futureoceans.com/projects/endangered-ganges-river-dolphins/, in both instances credited to Elizabeth Fahrni Mansur, a wildlife photographer from Bangladesh[4] (the WM image has been uploaded and claimed by User:Aafi Ali).

I've been unable to tag the photo as copyvio or propose for deletion as it is autoprotected. Can somebody help? Cheers, — kashmīrī ^TALK 22:33, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

BTW, a very similar photo, likely of the same dolphin, is attributed to Mansur elsewhere[5], which additionally suggests a copyvio by Aafi Ali. — kashmīrī ^TALK 23:06, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

User:Aafi Ali has no other edits on Commons besides this one upload. I think that's a pretty clear copyvio. Any objections to a speedy delete? Do we really need to take this through a DR? - Jmabel ! talk 00:42, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel Go for it. It's not even on the enwiki main page anymore, so they won't yell at us :) AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 00:56, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Does File:Ganges River Dolphin.jpg seem less problematic? I'd really hope we can have something similar to substitute. - Jmabel ! talk 05:02, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

All copies come from Commons. Yann (talk) 11:47, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

That's a bit telegraphic, but it seems to mean "yes, it seems less problematic." - Jmabel ! talk 15:08, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

mass-rename all files in category

If you can please rename all files beginning with "Nicole Sharp" in the category "Solar eclipse of 2023 October 14 in Hobbs, New Mexico" from the template of

"CommonsUserName OriginalFileName (FlickrID)"

to the template of

"FlickrAlbumName CommonsUserName OriginalFileName (FlickrID)"

with the FlickrAlbumName being

"Annular Solar Eclipse from Jefferson School Park (2023-10-14)"

that will be much appreciated.

Example:

"file:Nicole Sharp IMG 2946 (53272991358).jpg"

should be renamed instead as

"file:Annular Solar Eclipse from Jefferson School Park (2023-10-14) Nicole Sharp IMG 2946 (53272991358).jpg".

(Text to be prepended to each filename is underlined here for emphasis.)

Reason: The filename without also including the Flickr album name in the filename is too unspecific and makes it too difficult to find the files in a search (neither CommonsUserName, OriginalFileName, or FlickrID provide any indication to what the photo is about, but FlickrAlbumName does).

If this is too difficult, then please delete all of the eclipse files that I just uploaded from Flickr to the category "Solar eclipse of 2023 October 14 in Hobbs, New Mexico" using the format "CommonsUserName OriginalFileName (FlickrID)" and I will upload them again with the corrected filenames as "FlickrAlbumName CommonsUserName OriginalFileName (FlickrID)".

Nicole Sharp (talk) 09:03, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Done. Batch job running as I type this. I left the redirects in place. - Jmabel ! talk 17:22, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you!! I also put in a deletion request for the one duplicate photo. Nicole Sharp (talk) 23:57, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- The redirects might not necessary since the files were only on Commons for less than 24 hours and it should be much easier to find the same files again now. Nicole Sharp (talk) 23:57, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
  - @Nicole Sharp: "might not necessary" => are you saying you would like them deleted? - Jmabel ! talk 02:29, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
    - My opinion is that the redirects should be redundant and unnecessary so it doesn't matter if they exist or not. I feel that they are unneeded so it should be safe for you delete them but if you think they might serve some purpose, I do not see any harm in keeping them either. It might be less confusing though to have the redirects deleted since there are a lot and might still show up in some searches. Nicole Sharp (talk) 03:22, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
      - OK. I'll delete them though this is harder to do now than it would have been as part of the move. - Jmabel ! talk 17:45, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Activation of file overwriting limitation

More than one month ago we decided to limit the file overwriting to users with autopatrol rights Commons:Village pump/Proposals/Archive/2023/08#Limit file overwriting to users with autopatrol rights. I am not planning to finally turn this on tomorrow.

The abuse filter for this will be Special:AbuseFilter/290 with the massage MediaWiki:Abusefilter-warning-file-overwriting.

As there was the request for exceptions I created the Template:Allow Overwriting that can only be placed by users with patrol rights through Special:AbuseFilter/292.

For requests for exceptions I created Commons:Overwriting existing files/requests. So we need some people looking on this page. GPSLeo (talk) 09:44, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

One small remark: Instead of “If the overwriting is conform with the overwriting guidelines” it should probably read „If the overwriting does comply with the overwriting guidelines“ or something like that. Can a native speaker confirm this? --Rosenzweig τ 11:17, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

"I am not planning to finally turn this on tomorrow" -- is this a typo? JPxG (talk) 04:22, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

uhm... I definitely did not not turn it on yesterday. Yes it is a typo and the filter is ~~not~~ now active. GPSLeo (talk) 06:49, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Request for IPBE

Hi, I use a VPN when I'm traveling and occasionally find myself autoblocked. Could I please have the IPBE flag? Thanks, FASTILY 08:26, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Done Happy to give you that flag. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 08:29, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! -FASTILY 08:32, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

User:SteinsplitterBot/Rotatebot not working

SteinsplitterBot (talk · contribs)

The bot is not rotating the files as it should be since October 10. Instead it keeps adding "Bot locked itself after a internal problem" with the edit summary "Bot: Could not get lock. Lock file already present. Exit." I messaged User:Steinsplitter but he/she hasn't responded yet. Đại Việt quốc (talk) 07:52, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

can File:IMG-20221002-WA0041.jpg be deleted asap because of potential copyvio? it was probably the first one in the queue waiting to be rotated, so maybe it got the bot stuck and deleting it might get it out of the way. i found it thru https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?sort=last_edit_asc&search=hastemplate%3Arotate+insource%3A%2Ftate%5C%7C%2890%7C180%7C270%29%5C%7D%2F . RZuo (talk) 15:41, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Deleted, as WhatsApp would appear to be the source. Abzeronow (talk) 16:38, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Steinsplitter's last activities (here and at en.wp) date to September 12, 2023. That's a rather long time for an admin and bot operator to be completely absent. Did something happen? --Rosenzweig τ 17:13, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@RZuo, Abzeronow, and Rosenzweig: The error is still persisting, so I don't think that file would be the cause. Đại Việt quốc (talk) 17:44, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

dont know if anyone knows him/her in person. even before this absence he's been editing quite infrequently for at least half a year, often returning only to fix the bots and answer overdue queries on the user talk page.

no idea how to reboot the bot. anyone knows? RZuo (talk) 21:23, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

according to https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steinsplitter&oldid=815357988#Template:Edit_request/List , maybe User:Tacsipacsi has access to SteinsplitterBot? could you please take a look? RZuo (talk) 21:28, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

According to this, so does User:Zhuyifei1999, so I am tagger him/her his as well. Đại Việt quốc (talk) 05:36, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@RZuo: The bot worked again and rotated a few hundred files already. But the error still comes back sometimes. Đại Việt quốc (talk) 15:13, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Zhuyifei1999 is not active since 26 March 2023, so it doesn't help either. Yann (talk) 15:47, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

I do have a working copy of this C# version here. I can use this to get rid of the backlog. Maybe that brings the the bot back to work or allows to identify the root cause. This is not proposed as a long-term solution, as this code is not checked to the extend to run this completely unattended. --Schlurcher (talk) 20:26, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

i guess some users noticed the problem and rebooted the bot. huge appreciation to Steinsplitter, Tacsipacsi, Zhuyifei1999 or anybody else, whoever is rebooting the bot from time to time. RZuo (talk) 21:16, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

That would be a big coincidence. Well, I've learned that the old code from C# does not take into account exif orientations, so I had to revert all 10 or so edits I made. However, I also noticed, that these two files failed my upload script File:ISS007-E-12321 - View of Cuba--Easternmost point of Cuba--provinces of Santiago de Cuba, Guantánamo and Holguín.jpg File:ISS006-E-25534 - View of Cuba--Guanahacabibes peninsula, gulf of Batabanó, isle Juventud.jpg. So my guess would be those two also got SteinsplitterBot stuck as well, as it continued working right about when I manually fixed these two. If someone rebooted the bot the same time, that's also fine. At least we are making progress. --Schlurcher (talk) 21:23, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

i think the ones getting splitterbot stuck are all logged in the report page. the last entry before each resumption of normal service is the log of the failed file.--RZuo (talk) 21:36, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Project Checkusers

Anyone know any reason why requests are handled SO slowly at present? I've been under the impression that the project hand "enough" CUs however I put in a request 4 days ago and nothing has happened. It's not an "urgent" one any more than most of the others however the lack of speed seems remarkable to me (though I may simply be out of date with the way things are (not)done... Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:43, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Herby, all accounts in your request are blocked, and it is a borderline fishing request ("It would be good to be sure we've blocked them all")--which is why it has not been prioritsed; verily, at least one subsequent RFCU has been done. It would be helpful to understand your basis for "SO slowly at present" (uppercase in original), especially as en.wiki, as a comparable, has unchecked requests from as far back as 6. October (which is admittedly ridiculous, but 3 days (the timing of the two requests other than yours), is hardly unreasonable. Эlcobbola _talk 14:49, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

So seven accounts (that we know of) abusing Commons quite extensively is not a priority - it would be interesting to hear other views on that... I have no idea if I got them all. I would be fairly sure that there will be an underlying IP for such systematic abuse of Commons and to me CU is there to ensure abuse of Commons can be investigated (if warranted). So maybe why is this not warranted??

And there appear to be an adequate number of CUs to carry out the tasks? What happens elsewhere is not relevant to this community. This community appoints users, tries to keep the project clear of junk etc etc. Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:18, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

I asked for a basis for the purport of "SO slowly at present", and gave an example from the largest and most influential project. If you dislike benchmarking to other communities, that is fine, but you've not bothered to provide an alternative or substantiation of the concern. Verily, what disruption has occurred that would have otherwise been prevented? Further, I've not said "seven accounts (that we know of) abusing Commons quite extensively is not a priority", and it is difficult to imagine believing that to be a genuine summation of my comment. The accounts were all already blocked when the RFCU was filed; it would have been prioritised differently is that were not so. If it has escaped your notice, "Checkuser is a last resort for difficult cases" (these were all ducks, thus indeed their blocks sans CU confirmation) and "Running a check will only be done to combat disruption on Commons". A blocked account, by definition, is not being disruptive, and COM:RFCU is not AN-lite, nor is it for fishing ("It would be good to be sure we've blocked them all"; "I have no idea if I got them all"). CUs are not appointed "to keep the project clear of junk." Эlcobbola _talk 15:51, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Category:Audio files

Could someone roll back the recent changes to this category, please? Thanks in advance, Wieralee (talk) 19:27, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Done We really ought to have an edit minimum for moving categories - a user with one previous edit shouldn't be able to do that. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:34, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

raising requirements for Commons:Autoconfirmed users might do? RZuo (talk) 21:10, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Typo on the main page

I hate to nag, but since this is on the main page right now and my edit request is unlikely to be dealt with quickly, I figured it was worth leaving a message here too. The English-language caption on today's POTD has a typo ("quite" instead of "quiet"; see the original addition, which uses the Spanish "tranquilo"). If someone would make the fix at Template:Potd/2023-11-01 (en), I'd appreciate it. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Done - Jmabel ! talk 02:58, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

pornographie

hello . I don't know the rules for film for +18 years. File:Dance222.ogg and File:Dance1.ogg Chatsam (coucou) 13:29, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Chatsam: See COM:PORN, Commons isn't censored and pornography is allowed if it's educationally useful, but here these two files aren't. They are also copyvios, therefore I have speedy deleted them. -- CptViraj (talk) 13:39, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Village pump/Proposals#image-reviewer → license-reviewer

FYI. -- CptViraj (talk) 05:15, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

User:Vichycombo: intractable copyright violations despite litany of talk page warnings and 2-week block

This user appears to be continuing to rapidly upload copyrighted material, mostly anthem audio recordings, to Commons, despite having an absolute litany of warnings, file deletions and even a 2-week block recorded on their talk page going right back to April, which is the majority of their account history. · • SUM1 • · (talk) 19:12, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I have just got two of the images this user had uploaded months ago to be deleted as copyleft violation. I was quite lucky to have known from memory the sources of those images Vichycombo had uploaded. I think this user needs to be blocked indefinitely and as quickly as possible to prevent further damages to the project. Veverve (talk) 09:52, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Category:XXX of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic‎

There are a lot of these in Category:Other speedy deletions and they've been sitting there for a while. All of the admins that work on that page - myself included - seem to be ignoring it.

I've been ignoring it because it seems like every month there's a new batch of these with a new name: Nagorno-Karabakh Republic‎, Artsakh, Republic of Artsakh, etcetera, and I don't want to be inadvertently stepping into the middle of an edit war or something.

However, we probably *should* deal with this (both the categories for deletion and the naming in general).

Thoughts? The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 00:45, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@The Squirrel Conspiracy: If you look at who is editing and tagging those categories and why, you may pounce on a conspiracy, or at least a reasoning. I suspect either "make way for a move" or "not needed anymore" based on your post. I seem to remember some discussion about official renaming and de facto vs. de jure regarding these categories, so check links from Commons namespace. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 01:03, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

There are enough separate discussions here that we may want to create a centralized list, or a category, or some such.

I would welcome gathering some links here for now and will start it with one I know of offhand. But, yes, there was a recent and more extensive one that I can't quickly find right now. - Jmabel ! talk 19:31, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Relevant discussions

Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/11/Category:Nagorno-Karabakh

Commons:Territorial division of the World

It looks like this page has no official status, and isn't being well-maintained. It probably should be maintained, including noting current disputes, even if it remains unofficial. - Jmabel ! talk 19:33, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

MAIN PAGE: Problematic MOTD of today (3 November)

Hello, the MOTD file of today (Template:Motd/2023-11-03), File:Naked News anchor Marina Valmont speaking about German ePetition 157928 to remove social media apps from app shops in Germany if the social media company does not remove anti semitic posts in a timely manner.webm, seems problematic to me. It concerns a call to action to sign a petition (about banning certain social media from German app stores if they don't act on anti-semitism, which in the light of the current Israel/Palestine conflict does unfortunately have a political connotation) and has been authored, uploaded and made MOTD by the same user, User:C.Suthorn. The current file replaced the previous file, File:National Anthem of Dominica by US Navy Band.ogg (made MOTD by User:Q28), in this template yesterday night, with as argumentation a link to Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems/Archive_106#Q28, which indeed touches MOTD uploads, but, given the small time window between upload, template change and today, this seems more like an excuse to bring this petition to light on the homepage than anything else. I can't revert this change, as it is currently included on the main page, but I do find this problematic and needs attention as soon as possible, as I'm sure this isn't the way these things are supposed to go, and this file is along Commons also shown on many other wikis. Pennenetui3000 (talk) 00:48, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm not going to override this, because I'd just be one more person pissing in the soup, but it does seem that no one should unilaterally change what file is used for MOTD less than 24 hours before it goes live. - Jmabel ! talk 04:46, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

I've restored the original, as there was no inherent reason to replace MOTDs by Q28 according to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 106#Q28; the main reason to replace them was due to low quality/unsuitability of material or captions, neither of which applied here. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:44, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@Pennenetui3000: Please see the instructions about starting discussions here at the top of the page. When discussing the actions of another editor, you need to notify them on their talk page about the discussion. In this case, I have sent C.Suthorn a notification on your behalf. From Hill To Shore (talk) 08:02, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Motd/2024-11-01&oldid=814474931 I nominated the file at 24 oct - Nobody objected and nobody told me, that I got the year wrong

- https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Motd/2023-12-30&oldid=817445029 I noticed my error with the year and resceduled the file

- https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump&oldid=817448783 I found out that 30 of the MOTD for the following 60 days are national anthems of small countries as OGG files and notified the community at VP

- https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Help_desk&oldid=817604856 I notified the community at HD

- https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Motd/2023-11-03&oldid=817679525 I found out that Q28 was permanently blocked from editing template name space for mass nominating national anthems as MOTD and that there was a prior discussion of that and that an admin replaced some of the Q28 anthems but not all, hoping others would do the replacements, but that no one had done.

- congratiolations to you all for your fine work. C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm - p7.ee/p) (talk) 08:28, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
That's all nice and well and very much appreciatet right until the point where you chose a controversial video as a last minute replacement for a boring but harmless national anthem. This is where you say "whoops I messed up" rather than leaving a snarky comment about how you saved the wiki and others don't appreciate it. (Hu/wo)man up, accept the trout to your face and move on. El Grafo (talk) 08:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

This shows that the MOTD does not work as there is not enough good content and not enough people who are engaged in the topic. One solution could be to make the Picture of the day a Photo of the day and then we move maps, diagrams or similar to the MOTD. Then we would have much more good content and maybe more people working on the selection. GPSLeo (talk) 08:46, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
I think that is a very good idea. El Grafo (talk) 09:32, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@From Hill To Shore, thank you, will remind that in the future. Pennenetui3000 (talk) 10:13, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

how about adding tomorrow's motd to Commons:Cascade-protected items to prevent last minute swap? 1 day should be enough for checking?

i also made Template:Motd/Upcoming for easy checking. RZuo (talk) 09:13, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

So we are just plain out not allowed to have anything related to antisemitism as POTD now?--Trade (talk) 12:17, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@Trade Where on earth did you get that from? Nobody said we cannot have "anything related to antisemitism" on the front page. The point being made here is that you don't just unilaterally change a scheduled MOTD last minute into something controversial. Give the community some time to realize what you intend to do and talk things through. El Grafo (talk) 12:40, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

I would remove the "controversial" form the rule. We should generally disallow all changes in the last 24 hours before the content gets live despite there is a clear consensus to make the change. GPSLeo (talk) 13:06, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

From the part where it was conplained that the image had a political connotation Trade (talk) 16:57, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Lubi Zabytki

Dlaczego nie wszystkie zdjęcia przesłane w okresie od 01.09-30.09.2023r znajdują się w galerii przesłanych zdjęć na konkurs Wiki Lubi Zabytki 2023? Justyna2577 (talk) 15:11, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello Justyna, please raise your question at the Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments/Help desk. -- Thank you and best regards, 32X (talk) 16:20, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

User:Adiprat

Hope this is the right place to post this, but Adiprat (talk · contribs) keeps uploading copyright logos of Indonesian football teams and tournaments. I've nominated a couple for deletion and he just reverts those nominations. Two were finally deleted, but he reuploaded them under a different name. His uploads should probably all be deleted, and he should be blocked. A look at his talk page shows that he doesn't care about copyright warnings. Pichpich (talk) 16:26, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi, COM:ANU would be a better place.

Done Last warning sent, all files deleted. Yann (talk) 16:34, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Mass reverts on flags

Could someone please have a look at the mass reverts in regard to flags by Juanqianguo (talk · contribs)? --AFBorchert (talk) 07:19, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

And another new account is likewise mass-reverting: Jf889840 (talk · contribs). --AFBorchert (talk) 08:39, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Jf889840 has now been indef'd by Taivo. --AFBorchert (talk) 12:28, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Juanqianguo (talk · contribs) has been renamed to 9BBWMJ (talk · contribs). -Peacearth (talk) 18:58, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Aleksander Oppenkowski

Please, check Uploads by Aleksander Oppenkowski – most of them are worse duplicates of what is already uploaded to Commons and all of them have false copyright descriptions. I decided not to use the Nominate for deletion button because there are too many of these graphics. The user is currently blocked on PL Wikipedia as a consequnce of swapping illustrations.
Ambiroz (talk) 09:46, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

@Ambiroz: See Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Aleksander Oppenkowski#Files uploaded by Aleksander Oppenkowski (talk · contribs) 2. The user got a final warning 10:10, 4 November 2023 (UTC). — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 23:51, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

User is uploading multiple copyvios, seems to have no understanding of what Commons is

Legitaxi (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user has almost exclusively uploaded content that has an unacceptable license (one is CC-BY, and that seems to be an accident). His background is evidently Indonesian and I don't understand Indonesian/Malaysian, so maybe someone can reach out to help him understand the scope of Commons? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:21, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

What's up Justin, any posts in particular that bring your attention? Were you talking about the pictures I've uploaded? Legitaxi (talk) 03:34, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

@Legitaxi: all, and I do mean all, of your uploads appear to be copyrighted materials with false claims of a free license. - Jmabel ! talk 06:02, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

gotcha, I'll look up for the right source. It's harder to pinpoint the source when the uploads are so common on the web. Legitaxi (talk) 06:55, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Btw, I saw some veteran users uploaded images that were sourced from reddit and put its username as the author. Is that fine? Legitaxi (talk) 07:20, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

@Legitaxi: No, but it is en:whataboutism. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 08:45, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

@Jeff G.I don't get your statement, can you elaborate? Legitaxi (talk) 10:19, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

@Legitaxi: he means that the fact that someone else got it wrong doesn't entitle you to do it wrong. - Jmabel ! talk 15:51, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

@JmabelNo, I wouldn't do that. I honestly asked how that kind of thing happened. So can I give you list of authors who took images from reddit, so you can delete their posts? Legitaxi (talk) 18:43, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

@Legitaxi: a list of authors/users would be asking someone else to do a bunch of detective work to work out what images you are talking about. If there are images here from Reddit that look like copyvios feel free either to link them here or simply to start DRs yourself. (Keep in mind: the fact that an image is on Reddit is not ipso facto proof that it is a copyvio. For example, someone who owns the copyright of an image can post it on Reddit and explicitly offer a license appropriate for Commons; they can follow up with VRT; and it is also possible for someone to post an image to Reddit that for one or another reason is in the public domain.) - Jmabel ! talk 21:42, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Done. I warned Legitaxi, copyvios are deleted. Taivo (talk) 10:16, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

File:Шефнер Вадим БСП титул.JPG

Please delete previous versions, at least one of them is copyvio. Komarof (talk) 06:10, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

@Komarof: I'm going to presume you know what you are doing here, and delete all but the most recent upload. - Jmabel ! talk 16:10, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Spanish speaking administrator

Could an administrator who understands Spanish mind taking a look at User talk:Carloseugenio? It looks like User:Carloseugenio uploaded some photos taken by his uncle that were found in some family archives. The post on the user talk page is from August 2020 and the file in question was deleted in July 2020 so maybe it no longer matters, except that Carloseugenio also uploaded File:Bertita-harding-1955.jpg, File:Bertita-harding-1930.jpg, File:JN Macias y otros con Carranza.jpg, File:Jose Natividad Macias.jpg and File:Huevecillos de mariposa.png. The older photos are most likely not "own work" per se, but they might be from the same archive and might be better licensed as {{PD-heir}} or some other license. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:44, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

I've now contacted him on his talk page. I don't think it's an "heir" situation, but I think some of these would be in the public domain. They are actually quite important photos (of notable people) and if they are not yet in the public domain, we'd want to make sure to restore them someday when that is legal. - Jmabel ! talk 13:08, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Select few administrators have taken it upon themselves to block image editing

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Let's try to keep the conversation all in one place. You opened another discussion at Commons_talk:Overwriting_existing_files#Policy_change_should_be_reverted that's already received responses. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 01:42, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm not even sure who to complain about with regards to this, but a select few set of administrators have taken it upon themselves to block the editing of images across all languages of Wikipedia. This change needs to be immediately reverted. It is against the ethos and standard practice of Wikipedia which is to blacklist problematic pages, rather than this new process which is a select whitelisting of a few images as requests come on. See Commons:Overwriting_existing_files/requests. Ergzay (talk) 19:47, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

File:Manuel Gonzalez-Meneses.jpg

El autor del retrato, el pintor Rafael Cuenca Muñoz murió en Madrid en 1967. Emilio Luque (talk) 11:04, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

@Emilio Luque: entonces es bastante claro que no puede ser propia obra de User:Armando-Martin, no es de 2008 y la licensia no vale nada. Según en:Copyright_law_of_Spain#Duration_of_the_rights_of_exploitation no entra en el dominio público hasta 2048. - Jmabel ! talk 11:56, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Solo soy autor de la fotografía y no de la obra original. La fotografía se hizo con consentimiento del Museo en el que se encuentra expuesta. Armando-Martin (talk) 19:25, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Pero los derechos del autor no pertenecen al museo tampoco. Son propriedad del heredero o herederos del pintor. El museo puede permitir que alguien saque una foto, pero no que da una licensia para la obra derivada. - Jmabel ! talk 02:17, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Renaming and adjusting multiple mislabeled images

In a review of images located in Panama, I came across a group of photos that were imported from Panoramio: Category:Photos from Panoramio ID 1465176. Some images claim to be tagged and with metadata located in Panama City, but when the photos are seen in detail, it turns out that they coincide with other photos from the same site tagged in a town in Thailand; see File:Panama City, Panama - panoramio (12).jpg vs. File:Nikhom Khao Bo Kaeo, Phayuha Khiri District, Nakhon Sawan, Thailand - panoramio (4).jpg (is the same house).

It's possible that the metadata uploaded in Panoramio was wrong and instead of detecting that were a site in Thailand, reclassified in Panama and that is how it was brought to Commons. In fact, the user registered on Panoramio is from Thailand and the rest of his photos show scenes from that country.

In summary, I request that you review the category and replace the name and metadata of the following mislabeled files:

Taichi (talk) 03:48, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

user rights &roles (copy to another user name)

Hi there folks, I cannot edit anymore under Mattes due to a login problem. I have registered with the user name Mateus2019 afterwards. Could someone transfer my old user roles to the new account please? These rights were given to me about 10+ years ago:

patroller rights
rollback rights
license reviewer rights
file mover rights

... Thanks a lot and have a nice day --Mateus2019 (talk • contribs • blocks • protections • deletions • moves • rights • rights changes) (talk) 17:46, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

@Mateus2019: Hi. I kindly ask you to go through the license reviewer process again as it is a community role and policies and guidelines might have changed in these years. I'll be happy to re-grant the filemover and rollback rights, can you just provide a link to the edit or log from the 'Mattes' account indicating that 'Mateus2019' is the alternative account? It could be anything, userpage edit or something. Thanks! -- CptViraj (talk) 06:31, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

I just relooked and noticed that filemover was removed from your current account by Multichill for "Doing renames not in line with Commons:File renaming. Personal attacks.", so won't be able to grant that, too. You'll have to go through COM:RFR or ask them. -- CptViraj (talk) 06:34, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. But do I understand you right? I must undergo the votings except the filemover thing? Or can I go to through the votings including the filemover? There is no edit link or log that I can give you. The topics in which I work are identical and the camera model for the first months. Good night, --Mateus2019 (talk) 16:24, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

i suggest you make new requests for reviewer and filemover.

i dont see problems in your filemoving history. RZuo (talk) 16:37, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Patroller rights would come with the license reviewer rights. As the others say, I'd make new requests for filemover and reviewer, however I'd support granting rollback (and patroller if you don't want to reapply for reviewer). Abzeronow (talk) 16:51, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Student editing class uploads

I am not active on Commons, don't know my way around, and for all the reasons discussed with Diannaa on en.wiki, don't think it optimal for me to try to learn my way around here at this stage of my life. The students from the class discussed here and at this article talk have been uploading images with little guidance, and I suspect none of them are copyright clear. Could someone here look at them?

And if anyone here can go over there, this one also:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:KhaliaBraswell64a8306cd7100.image.jpg

SandyGeorgia (talk) 16:19, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Done, one deleted as a clear copyright violation, the two others nominated for deletion. Ymblanter (talk) 22:23, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Ymblanter; here's another one. File:April Dawson.jpg Although Wiki Ed staff promises these students would stay in draft space, they haven't <sigh> SandyGeorgia (talk) 04:20, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

And File:WSSU headshot.jpg. SandyGeorgia (talk) 06:10, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Done, thanks. Ymblanter (talk) 07:20, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Name of magazine

I uploaded a magazine commonly known as Peterson's Magazine but the title page says The Ladies National Magazine, how to handle this issue? GinnevraDubois (talk) 00:27, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

@GinnevraDubois: Make sure both names are mentioned. I did it for you, but look what I did so you will know for next time. Also, that needs categories. You might create a new category for 1844 under Category:Peterson's Magazine by year and then use that. (Use the existing categories as a model.) Please feel free to ask here if there is some part of that you don't understand how to do. - Jmabel ! talk

Also, in the future, if you have a question like that, just come to Commons:Help desk. Nothing here needed an administrator, just a slightly more experienced user. - Jmabel ! talk 04:21, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks and sorry for using the wrong place to ask my question. GinnevraDubois (talk) 18:39, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Correction of location not working

File:Arma pollera - panoramio - Stefano Mazzone Geno… (1).jpg is located at a wrong position, thus leads to the cave being shown in the middle of nowhere in a map. I wanted to correct that in both metadata types. I clicked edit, clicked camera positoin, clicked edit, replaced exiting lat+log by 44.2005769, 8.3146583 and clicked "save changes" and saw the message

There is a discrepancy of 300 meters between the above coordinates and the ones stored at SDC 44°11′53″N 8°18′58″E, precision: 5 m). Please reconcile them.

20231112 Screenshot Bearbeiten von File Arma pollera...

Three issues with that:

a) Whenever I want to click the links, the Location popup appears and blocks. The popup shall only appear when clicking the location block, not he message block, or at least it shall appear not exactly over the links.

b) The message is "unusable"/"dead": Clicking the links does not do anything, the link targets can't be retrieved (e.g. by right clicking), and the text can't be selected & copied. I had to use browser dev tool "anaylse page" to get the message text as well as the link targets. This is far beyond capabilities of many users, thus shall be made more user friendly.

c) The linked page Commons:Structured data/Reconciliation is not helpful. In How to fix, it tells to remove one coordinates set – so I did delete the SDC data and repeated my edit of description and after confirmation of Location form clicked two times "save changes" (so that page shall be saved) but got

Etwas ist schiefgelaufen

Diese Aktion wurde automatisch als schädlich erkannt und deshalb nicht ausgeführt. Wenn du denkst, dass deine Aktion konstruktiv war, wende dich bitte an einen Administrator und schildere ihm, was du versucht hast beizutragen. Kurzbeschreibung der verletzten Regel: file page nonsense code bug

Well, here is the requested description of what I wanted to do.

BTW it would be user friendly to tell in the message how/where to reach admins – I had to search for a while, the search produced hundrets of results where "administrator" is somewhere in source code, documentation, or the like 🙁 Schoschi (talk) 16:58, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

@Schoschi: Angela was kind enough to create Commons:Administrators 19 years ago, Pfctdayelise was kind enough to create COM:A and COM:ADMIN redirects 18 years ago, BRUTE was kind enough to follow that up with COM:SYSOP redirect 13 years ago. Project:Administrators should work on any WMF project. I hope these edits helped. Also, you are trying to edit file pages using the VisualEditor and have triggered Special:AbuseFilter/297. Unfortunately, the VisualEditor is currently broken and therefore we need to block all edits made using the VisualEditor. If you switch to the regular Wikitext editor you can edit as usual. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 17:48, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

@Jeff I do not really get what you want to tell me with who created what how many years ago 🤷‍♂️ In case you want to show that admins can be contacted in several places, I can only tell I did not find them easily – simply adding "unter Commons:Contact us/de" behind "an einen Administrator" would have helped me finding it easily. Anyway, thank you for correcting the coordinates 🙂 I would have done on my own with your helpful hint to currently avoid the VisualEditor 🙂 Maybe I'd not have run into a+b+c when VisualEditor is running fine again. Schoschi (talk) 18:36, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Help with duplicates

Hello! In a recent project with a GLAM uploading to Category:Images from Guaixe using Pattypan, they uploaded a bunch of images twice. I have been trying to mark as duplicates some of them, but I think it could be easier for an admin to just delete the duplicated ones. All the duplicates are within the first 400 images shown in the category. Would it be possible to have some help here? Thanks! Theklan (talk) 12:43, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi Theklan. I queued up a DR with all of the duplicates I could find. Please take a look at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Images from Guaixe, make sure there aren't any false positives, and add any duplicates I missed. Let us know there that you've completed your review and I or another admin will delete them once you do. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 13:04, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Import request

Greetings, I need the history of en:TimedText:This-prounciation-audio-nonlabial.ogg.en.srt imported to TimedText:This-prounciation-audio-nonlabial.ogg.en.srt. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 19:10, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Hugo Trejo

Buenos días, subí una imagen etiquetada como de "Hugo Trejo". Tras colocarla, un usuario me informa que no pertenece al personaje, sino a "Jesús María Castro León" y es de 1958. Ya ha sido borrada del artículo. Por favor, ¿podrían revisar la imagen?. Un saludo. Gracias Mdelt 13:20, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

File:Hugo Trejo.jpg. Es el enlace a la imagen, la subió el mismo usuario que editó el artículo y en la descripción cambia el nombre al de Jesús María Castro León, lo que da lugar al equívoco--Mdelt 13:27, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

@Mdelt: Buenas. Por favor, usas {{Rename}} o nuestro RenameLink gadget. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 14:08, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Make room for the move

Hi there. If we were to apply the same pattern that has been used with other categories, we would have to move Category:Roundabout art in Aragón to Category:Roundabout art in Aragon, but I would need someone to make room for that move. I do not know if this is the place to ask for such a thing, so I apologize if it turns out it is not. And thanks in advance. Alavense (talk) 17:06, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

@Alavense: Normally you can just request the move with {{Rename}} and someone with sufficient privileges will eventually get to it. But I'll do it right now. - Jmabel ! talk 18:27, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

File:AbdoelRahiemHatief.jpg

Please delete this as a deliberate hoax. Komarof (talk) 14:52, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Done If the user who uploaded this appeared to be active, I would block, but I think that is unneeded. I wouldn't object to a block, though. - Jmabel ! talk 18:06, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Protection for timed text

On the English Wikipedia, we lock down main page content as it's a favourite target for vandals. For example, the media items from Commons get protected while for as long as they are displayed. Some of this is done by bots, and for other media files, we have the page en:Wikipedia:Main Page/Commons media protection, which User:KrinkleBot then processes. We currently have a sound file linked from the main page (for not much longer as it only has 75 minutes to run; hence this query is of generic nature). When that sound file was already on the main page, an editor uploaded timed text (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/TimedText:3-14_The_Vatican_Rag.mp3.en.srt) to go with this. User:Tamzin enquired with a Commons admin and was told that "TimedTexts are usually not protected". That's somewhat of a hole in our system. Hence, can we please have a discussion whether timed texts could and should be protected? And if the answer is yes, would that work via the Commons media protection page linked above? If that doesn't work, could the functionality of that page (or rather, the capability of KrinkleBot) be upgraded? Schwede 66 21:46, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Pinging @Krinkle as the Operator of KrinkleBot. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 22:31, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

So I do somewhat see the case for not protecting, in that most of the worst things a vandal could stick on the MP can't be done via plaintext. (Beyond that, BEANS.) As long as enwiki doesn't have a rule of creating TimedText files pre-mainpaging, I'm not sure that the benefits of protection would outweigh the harms. But we could fix that on our end on enwiki. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|she) 04:26, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

I implemented auto-protection via KrinkleBot of timed text of videos last year for this reason, just didn't think of audio files at the time. Should be trivial to add. Legoktm (talk) 05:14, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Science Photo Competition 2023 in Ukraine: Request for MassMessage

Hi! I have a quick request from organizers of the Ukrainian edition of Science Photo Competition 2023 – we'd like to invite people who participated in this context in the past to join this year's edition

List of receivers

Text of the message (first line is the subject, everything else is the body of the message; I've already accounted for having a correct signature & timestamp)

AntonProtsiuk (WMUA) (talk) 12:56, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Sent. -- CptViraj (talk) 17:50, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Category move

Plese move Category:Quality images of rail vehicles in India to Category:Quality images of rolling stock in India. It is standard by the other categories in Category:Quality images of rail vehicles. Thanks, MIGORMCZ (talk) 14:55, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Comment That was renamed by Sbb1413 yesterday, an explanation would be useful before to move all stuff back. Thanks --A.Savin 18:59, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

File:Kornelia Ninova in 2013.jpg

Please delete the version of 11:16, 25 April 2017 as copyvio. Komarof (talk) 16:43, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

That would be 12:16, 25 April 2017 (UTC). — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 16:51, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Jeff G., I'm using wiki default UTC, please double check yours (probably UK). --Komarof (talk) 17:05, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

@Komarof: My local date is Thursday, August 22, 2024, and my local time is 15:03:58 -0500 (EST). I added 5 hours to the time I saw, 07:16, and came up with 12:16 UTC. I transitioned from EDT -0400 to EST -0500 the first Sunday morning in November, which this year was 5 November. It is currently 19:38 UTC. How did you come up with 11:16? — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 19:38, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Just set UTC in your preferences temporarily and you’ll need no math to see this. Komarof (talk) 20:08, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

@Komarof: The trouble is that I think in local time now, no more overnight shifts with UTC logs. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 20:55, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Done Abzeronow (talk) 17:10, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

@Abzeronow: Thanks! — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 20:53, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Revision deletion for File:Green Party Taiwan logo.png

Please hide revisions from 3 January 2020 to 4 January 2020. These files are not verified in the VRT ticket. Thanks. SCP-2000 09:37, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Done Abzeronow (talk) 16:51, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Copyright violations by User:Wilber Jael

I came across this user because they categorized an image under Category:Transexual Action Organization (improperly since it's a defunct org from the 70s).

Looking into the account, all their uploads seem to be images taken from the social media accounts of the photo subject with their own watermark added.

Best regards, Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist (talk) 18:11, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Note: user notified. Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist (talk) 18:17, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Done Last warning sent, all files deleted. Yann (talk) 18:29, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Locking of this account

Hello, please lock my account globally on all connected projects. If this is not possible here, please let me know that I can take care of it elsewhere. Thank you, RandomDuck5000 (talk) 20:24, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

@RandomDuck5000: just to clarify, are you asking to be indefinitely blocked? - Jmabel ! talk 00:18, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

@RandomDuck5000 For requesting lock, you may go to m:SRG, but there's no possibility for self-requesting lock. Lemonaka (talk) 02:54, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't think one can self-request a lock. You're free to post a note at SRG, but I'm doubtful that it will be allowed. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:29, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Action review needed

QazyQazyQazaqstan (talk · contribs) nominated lots of photos for deletion, they were confirmed as a globally banned user planespotterA320 (talk · contribs). Their deletion may need to review Lemonaka (talk) 03:35, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

For me all deletion requests look like to have a proper reason. I do not see why we should not handle them like every deletion request. GPSLeo (talk) 06:17, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

User talk:QazyQazyQazaqstan#Please categorize your FOP nominations 2 Lemonaka (talk) 22:26, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

If I have some time tomorrow or later this week, I'll look through their FOP nominations and manually add the appropriate categories. Abzeronow (talk) 22:33, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

File moving required

I just uploaded the coat of arms of the 1st Anti-Air Artillery Regiment of the Italian Army: File:CoA mil ITA rgt artiglieria c a 001 copy.png and forgot to edit the "copy" out of the filename when I uploaded it. I wanted request to move the file to File:CoA mil ITA rgt artiglieria c a 001.png, but it turns out I can't as there was a redirect there to the 2nd Anti-Air Artillery Regiment. Please could an administrator move the file? Thank you, Noclador (talk) 09:34, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

@Noclador: I'll do this, but in the future, please don't go blanking pages! If you want a speedy deletion, use {{SD}} with one of the rationales from Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion. (A few of these have special templates of their own.) - Jmabel ! talk 22:09, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Category Merge

Please merge Category:Panchchuli into Category:Panchachuli. Both categories exist for the same Mountain. Panchachuli is the correct Spelling. ArmouredCyborg (talk) 15:13, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

I created the category redirect and updated the Wikidata item Panchachuli (Q7130311). Used this Indian government website as a source: [6]. William Graham (talk) 20:08, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Data:NumberOf/hourly.tab, Data:NumberOf/daily.tab

Please, delete these pages, because a module they was created for, now using GreenC's Wikipedia Statistics pages. MBH 07:26, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Done. - Jmabel ! talk 20:27, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Image replacement

There are two copyvio files[1][2] need to be deleted. Before that, please perform the global replacement at User_talk:CommonsDelinker/commands#Other_requests. 0x0a (talk) 16:54, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

I've initiated the global replacement. - Jmabel ! talk 20:30, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure what is going on, though. Several items removed from the User:CommonsDelinker/commands queue over 6 hours ago appear not to have executed. - Jmabel ! talk 04:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Well, bot is not always reliable and I will replace these files manually. But thank you anyway. 0x0a (talk) 04:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Native Spanish-speaking admin?

Could a native Spanish-speaking admin have a look at Commons:Categories for discussion/2023/08/Category:Directors by ethnic or national descent? I think it should be closed as "no action" and possibly deleted as inappropriate, but I hesitate to do so on my non-native understanding of a presumably slang term. - Jmabel ! talk 20:25, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Remove copyvio version of image

Please remove the copyvio version of File:Gabriel Bortoleto, entrevista 09 DEZ 2020.jpg from the file history. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 15:09, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Done — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 15:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

https://www.flickr.com/people/landrovermena/ on COM:QFI list

I'm a fairly experienced Commons:License reviewer and I'd like to appeal the decision to add this Flickr account to the Commons:Questionable Flickr images list. It seems to have been the official account for Land Rover (the car company) for Middle East and North Africa. It started in 2010, and was active through 2018, and during that time uploaded something like 11,000 Creative Commons Attribution licensed images of official Land Rover Middle East and North Africa events, many with attending celebrities. So I think it's both legitimate, and valuable. Commons_talk:Questionable_Flickr_images/Archive_5#Land_Rover_MENA indicates it was added to QFI by admin User:INeverCry by the request of User:Elisfkc; for some reason I thought it was the request of User:Christian Ferrer, but he corrected me). INeverCry is, sadly, banned now, so Christian Ferrer suggested I asked elsewhere, such as here. Christian writes he's not confident that images such as e.g. [7] or [8] have really free licenses given by Land Rover; which seems pretty straight forward to me, they are Land Rover diagrams so clearly images owned by Land Rover, who else would own them? Would you (admin(s), any or all of you) be able to reverse the decision, please? --GRuban (talk) 13:52, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

I just noticed - we already have over 5,000 images from landrovermena on Commons. Are we going to delete them all? --GRuban (talk) 15:25, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Just to clarify a bit my comment about the two images linked above, me too I'm sure the images are owned by Land Rover, and that is the problem, because of what I'm not confident is that Land Rover Middle East and North Africa, which is subordinate to Land Rover, has the right (i.e. do not have the legal competence) to gives free licenses for such media. That being said there is also potentially a lot of adequate content in the Flickr stream, and although I did not want to "white list" this Flickr account myself, I'm not strictly opposed if one, or more, of my fellow administrators make the opposite decision. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:01, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

To me, there seemed to be way too many images that had a caption of All Rights Reserved and/or images that Land Rover did not mean to actually release. I am very interested in whether Land Rover Public Relations agrees that these images were supposed to be CC-BY (contacted not through Flickr and not the MENA group, but the head office). If Land Rover PR responds that none of the images were supposed to be released and someone in the Land Rover MENA office was accidentally releasing them under CC-BY without realizing it or that account is actually not affiliated with Land Rover, then all 5,000+ should be deleted. I have emailed them and will send proof of the answer either way to VRT. Barring a response from Land Rover Public Relations, I would say to keep the status quo as is. Elisfkc (talk) 20:12, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

This is an official account by Land Rover. Why can't they release their own images under a free license? We already have had a similar discussion, and it was concluded (after a long discussion), that a free license given by an official account is valid. Yann (talk) 20:44, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

@Yann: Where may we find a reference to this account from the head office of Land Rover? — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 10:58, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't know, and I didn't look. Are you claiming that this is not a genuine account? Yann (talk) 11:00, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Yann: I don't know; I thought you did at 20:44 above. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 11:36, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Go to https://landrovermena.com/. Notice the Flickr icon at the top linking to https://www.flickr.com/landrovermena. --13:57, 20 November 2023 (UTC) GRuban (talk) 13:57, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Go to https://media.jaguarlandrover.com/news/2013/05/jaguar-land-rover-enhances-engineering-facilities-middle-east Notice the list of official sites, including, at the bottom, www.flickr.com/LandRoverMENA. If this is a fake site, they've certainly gone to great lengths to make it look real! If this is an official site, our due diligence stops there, we can not be expected to write to every company asking "that image you released on your official site - are you really sure you officially released it"? When would that end? Why would someone's word by email to a Wikimedia editor be somehow more official than someone's post on an official web site that everyone in the world could see? --GRuban (talk) 14:05, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

@Jeff G., Christian Ferrer, Elisfkc, and Yann: If, purely hypothetically, someone from Land Rover were to write back and say "no we don't release these images", how would that be different from revoking the Creative Commons Attribution license - which, we agree, I hope, is irrevocable? Remember, these 11,000 images have been published on an official site (as I hope I've shown above), for the last 5 to 13 years. If we allow a company official to say "whoops, we were wrong" how is that different than revoking the license? I'm all for letting an individual say "I clicked the wrong button", I did so myself in Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with I am an artist.jpg. This is a large company. The chance is excellent that the person writing any email will be a completely different person than the person who put the images up 13 years ago, their boss will be a different person, they may work for a different office entirely (Land Rover is a global company, and changed owners multiple times), they will have no context on the original decision. We will not be asking them "was this a mistake", we will be asking them whether they want to withdraw the license. We don't do that. --GRuban (talk) 14:30, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

@GRuban: Yes, thank you for this information. @Yann: I meant above that you wrote "This is an official account by Land Rover." — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 03:11, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks GRuban for this information. So there is no doubt that this is an official account of BMW. It is not like a local BMW dealer publishing pictures on their website. If the license were changed within a few days after publication, we could recognize that it was a mistake. If files are published for years with a free license, there is no way the license could be considered invalid. So I am removing "landrovermena" from the list of bad accounts. Yann (talk) 15:24, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

How are we certain that the person that released the image had the authority to release it? How are we certain that Land Rover MENA even had the right to publish these images? Elisfkc (talk) 19:28, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Do not take the marketing or media person of a big company for a newbie. These people aren't free to do what they want. So I reverse the question, how do you think possible that they publish thousands of pictures under a free license by mistake? Yann (talk) 19:35, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Pretty easy, someone thinks Flickr is like Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, etc, thought it was an easy way to share and host their media images, and pushed the default button for CC-BY 2.0 on the account setup, not realizing what it meant. Then, everyone else thought it was good to go and kept the default. They seem to clearly upload images just sent to them without actually going through and renaming the files to have them make sense (as seen here). They are also images that appear to belong to others (as seen here with the image also listed on Getty) taken at events sponsored by Land Rover. Elisfkc (talk) 19:50, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

@Elisfkc: So you think people in BMW MENA are dumb? This is a bad idea. Never underestimated others. On the opposite, I think that publishing marketing material under a free license is a good strategy. It helps spreading the mark and the products. Yann (talk) 15:50, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Elis, by that logic we would have to stop accepting all free licences everywhere, because "what if they made a mistake"? Sure, there are rare cases when people do make mistakes, but in general when someone does something it's because they wanted to. If we start with "but what if it was a mistake?" as a base assumption, we'd have to delete not just these 5000 images, but maybe half the content of the Commons. --GRuban (talk) 16:16, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

I think there is a difference between what the accounts look like for Delta Air Lines and this one, especially considering this Land Rover account has uploaded copyrighted images that we have proof are not their images (as I mentioned previously with the images on Getty). I am specifically looking at the way they have named the images and captions. Delta seems to have actually understood what Flickr is, while the Land Rover account seems to just be using it as a image hosting site like photobucket. Elisfkc (talk) 18:48, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

@Elisfkc: It should be noted that the image you linked above has a mention "for Jaguar Land Rover" (JLR). So the photographer WAS associated with JLR. Again you are wild-guessing things which you don't know and never will, i.e. the details of the contract between this photographer and JLR. This is not reasonable. Yann (talk) 15:06, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Comment I never said that it was a fake site, and the photographs e.g. of events are fine for me, however I find curious that marketing photos such as [9], or such as the two images previously linked, have free licenses [10]. On an other side if Land Rover don't control what is doing Land Rover MENA with the copyright of the material owned by the mark, maybe one can think it is not our buisness and that we should accept their free licenses. Personaly I think I will stay neutral on that. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:06, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Apparent authority. - Jmabel ! talk 23:31, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Requesting deletion

Dear Admins, I previously have uploaded this image which seems to be a privacy concern, for me. I have uploaded a different verion of the file now. As such, I am requesting to delete the previous version of the file. Thankyou 511KeV (talk) 06:38, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Please provide permission for the embedded thumbnail photos. Krd 08:20, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

The permission has been sent via VRT. 511KeV (talk) 08:42, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

@511KeV:

Done thanks to Krd. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 10:52, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Interwikilinking categories about (living) persons with their respective userpage(s) through Wikidata

Strange, I just connected Category:Claudia Garád with de:Benutzerin:Claudia.Garad through the "Add links" function on the bottom left of the interface.

When I tried the same with Category:Raimund Liebert and de:Benutzer:Raimund_Liebert_(WMAT) I received the error message:

Warning: Per Wikidata notability policy adding links to userpages or userspace is not allowed. Therefore this edit cannot be completed. If you think you are correct, contact an administrator.

The links in this message are not helpful as the first one redirects to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page and the second one to the non-existing https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/AN.

Why did the first interwiki-link work and the second one not? Maybe the female prefix "Benutzerin:" was not recognised as a user page?

Does it make sense to suppress this kind of interwikilink? And if so, why reference the "notability policy" as a reason?

best regards, KaiKemmann (talk) 17:22, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

@KaiKemmann: Hi,

de:Benutzer:Raimund Liebert doesn't exist. And a page in User: namespace is not sufficient to have a Wikidata item. Yann (talk) 18:36, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

@Yann: a page in User namespace is not sufficient to have a Wikidata item, but a category here on Commons with 100 or so photos (the situation here) probably is. The Wikidata threshold for notability is pretty low. - Jmabel ! talk 22:29, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I had cited the wrong userpage on the German Wikipedia above. I have corrected it now.

Thanks for your comments.

Who would be able to adjust or remove the error message, any administrator?

KaiKemmann (talk) 00:07, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

to link a user account on wikidata you need to do it like d:Q181#P4174. RZuo (talk) 02:23, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I see that someone did this on the Wikidata entry of de:Claudia.Garad but left the direct link in place.

As far as I can see the "claim: Wikimedia username (P4174)" you are proposing does not establish a direct link between the category and the userpage which is what I was aiming for as it obviously makes it easier for users to navigate the "Wikimedia universe".

KaiKemmann (talk) 13:20, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

sorry i didnt pay attention. i didnt know user pages can be added like that in "Claudia.Garad". maybe you can also add it like that once you have created an item for Raimund Liebert.

i think the message you got actually came from wikidata's abusefilter https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Special:AbuseLog&wpSearchUser=KaiKemmann , so commons cant deal with it anyway. RZuo (talk) 13:54, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Category:فرحان رانا راجپوت

This is part of a larger cross-wiki spam involving sockpuppeting as well. I had CSDed the category but an IP reverted the tag. I really don't feel the category is worth discussion. Can some admin delete it? ─ The Aafī (^talk) 17:55, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Done. Taivo (talk) 18:10, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

@Taivo Being created by sock again. Lemonaka (talk) 23:54, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Done. I protected it against recreation. Taivo (talk) 12:38, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

If only we had page creation logs here. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 14:44, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Flag of Kareli Municipality.svg SVG error

I get error, when I try to download svg-version of the file. I posted the error message at File talk:Flag of Kareli Municipality.svg. Can someone help to fix this problem? Plaga med (talk) 09:46, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Pinging @Giorgi Balakhadze as uploader. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 11:34, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

@Plaga med: I removed inkscape and sodipodi attributes, so it should work now. Glrx (talk) 20:22, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Still have an error. Plaga med (talk) 08:35, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Done Sorry, forgot to update cache. Now it works, thanks! Plaga med (talk) 11:35, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Spammers/CU issue

Thinking long and hard about this I guess I feel it is something that the community as a whole should maybe offer thoughts on. A while back I created a CU request as I had blocked a batch of spam accounts that were uploading promotional images for their bar code software. In my mind it was impossible for me to know whether I'd caught all possible accounts. In one of the project's CUs opinion it was not something they considered worth looking at and I deleted the request.

Two/three days ago - via the adverts for speedy deletion - I found another 4 accounts created over recent days all doing the same thing again. To me it is fairly obvious that there is a company behind this who have decided to continue to abuse Commons sadly. The only people who can prevent that from happening repeatedly easily and in the longer term are CUs. My first reaction was to approach the CU who had declined the request before. However to date there has been no response to this. It concerns me that Commons, not well patrolled by people looking for blatant spam, is currently vulnerable to ongoing abuse. However maybe that is just me - other views from the community are welcome. While I would be very happy to see comments from CUs it is important to remember that advanced rights are only available with the consent of the community. Thanks Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:39, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

I think you are speaking of Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Professionalbarcode, which you deleted 4 days after creation, because things went too slow in your opinion. Do you expect every CU request to be processed in less than 4 days? --Krd 14:52, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with how long anything takes - that is another matter. The indication was that it was not a valid request. Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:56, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

It is the "why" that is the issue for me here

Is there something about spamming via abusing multiple accounts that is not seen as serious?

Is it the fact that CUs see repeated similar behaviour as unlikely perhaps

Is it possible we should be looking for additional CUs?

The time taken to tag the files and deleted them plus blocking the users is considerably more than the time that would be taken preventing further abuse.

It seems appropriate to open the discussion at least and it would be helpful for all the community to understand this Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:18, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Where exactly has been said that it is an invalid request? It was said that the request doesn't have highest priority, as an answer to your question why it takes so long (i.e. 4 days). But you say it has nothing to do with how long anything takes, what is your point? Krd 17:43, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Herbythyme submitted a borderline fishing request, for which all known accounts were blocked. Herbythyme gave no evidence supporting a "sleeper check" (as only one example, this could have been time stamps indicating that accounts had a history of being created together in batches). Notwithstanding that RFCUs are seldom helpful for spammers (I can think of no spammer of this sort from the last 5 years, if not 10, not using a disposable proxy), COM:RFCU includes "Checkuser is a last resort for difficult cases" (again, all accounts were blocked--i.e., not difficult) and "Requests to run a check without evidence or with ambiguous reasoning will result in delays or the request not being investigated" (bold added). Herbythyme was impatient after several days, and ran off to AN with a complaint. As previously explained, the request was not prioritsed for the reasons noted. Herbythyme then contented himself with misrepresenting that response (as he's done again here) and ignored questions posed (as he's done again here). While one appreciates the consistency, this is thus utterly disingenuous piffle:

"[T]t was not something they considered worth looking at" - As pointed out by Krd, "not prioritsed" is entirely different than "not [...] worth looking at". This distinction was indeed explained; that Herbythyme continues the misrepresentative may suggest it is deliberate.
"My first reaction was to approach the CU who had declined the request before." - As pointed out by Krd, the request was not declined. Herbythyme withdrew it ("withdrawn") and deleted it.
"However to date there has been no response to this" - I gave Herbythyme's sarcastic and snarky comment "I fail to see any point in creating another CU req unless you are prepared to take the abuse seriously?" the response it deserved: none.
"It concerns me that Commons, not well patrolled by people looking for blatant spam" - As above, this is offered without a shred of evidence (that Herbythyme personally encounters spam does not mean anything), is contradicted by even the most cursory of glances at deletion and block logs (even from the CU "who doesn't take it seriously"), and is not a CU issue even if true. Эlcobbola _talk 19:10, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

I can weigh in on this because I've nominated a number of this company's spam files for speedy deletion -- at one point dozens at once. (I probably was the person whose nominations Herbythyme saw tbh). I don't have timestamps ready, but from my recollection the files were weeks old when I nominated them.

I'm not convinced CU is the best solution anymore given that this company seems to have slowed their roll recently. But the thing is that manually searching for these files is a bit difficult because the company keeps changing the keywords they use, the image descriptions seem to be ChatGPT generated and thus not consistent enough to search on, and that searching keywords relating to software are fairly noise heavy to begin with. Without getting too specific, the company also seems to make stuff other than barcode software, which means you'd need other keywords to find it.

As far as Commons not being "well patrolled," I don't think Herbythyme is saying that people aren't patrolling for spam, but rather that spam is regularly getting through our checks and filters and often sticking around for years. This is a larger issue, however -- vandalism and spam regularly sticks around for over a decade -- and is not limited to Commons. Gnomingstuff (talk) 22:25, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

It's a pity no one other than CUs have offered an opinion however at leat now I understand the situation so thanks for that. Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:10, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

I would support your CU nomination Trade (talk) 01:48, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Follow up of a deletion request

Hi, since the admin that closed Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:World War II recruitment posters from France probably didn't see the message where I pinged him after his closure, I forward my request here. TL;DR : the author's works are to no avail under free licensing, it was a mistake that my institution made and that was echoed here by commons users in good faith. Red-tailed hawk agreed with this rationale, and proceeded with the deletion, problem is that there is some more which can be found here Category:Posters by Sogno, so please also delete the images listed in this category. Thanks in advance ! RenéLC (talk) 11:08, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi! Yes, I agree that you should open a DR for the rest of those files. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 14:13, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi, there are actually individual DR [11], [12], [13], [14] [15] for those files open since September/October. Couldn't you just delete those files according to your conclusion on the closed DR given that it is exactly the same rationale ? --RenéLC (talk) 15:47, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Done I added a category "Undelete in 2074". Yann (talk) 16:28, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

OOPS, it is 2049. Yann (talk) 17:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Copyvios / out of scope images by Alone boy paresh gohil (talk · contribs)

Hi -- this user appears to have uploaded a bunch of images, and spot-checking them suggests that the backgrounds were grabbed from the Web. They all seem out of scope on top of that, just quotations that seem self-promotional. Was told that rather than tagging everything manually (which it would be great not to do) ask an admin to nuke things, so doing that now... Gnomingstuff (talk) 22:04, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Done Nuked. Thanks. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 22:14, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Move request

Please move Category:Quality images of rolling stock in the United States to Category:Quality images of rail vehicles in the United States for unification. Thanks, MIGORMCZ (talk) 09:36, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

@MIGORMCZ: Why do you want to revert this move of yours, and preface it by having the target cat removed to make room? We have COM:CSD#G6 for that. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 11:27, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: When I made this move last year, I had no idea about the consensus in replacing "rolling stock" with "rail vehicles". At the same time, I don't know all the local rules of Wikimedia Commons in detail, on my home wiki such moves are requested on the Administrators' noticeboard. MIGORMCZ (talk) 11:41, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Request

GTA V's logo at this image's file history should be deleted, as it is above the threshold of originality. There are lots of deletion requests related to that image. Thanks, RodRabelo7 (talk) 23:30, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

I've deleted the one with the V. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 00:02, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

User removed the deletion nomination

The user (Syazwi Irfan) removed the deletion nomination for the file he uploaded called "File:Castille War.png" while the discussion is still ongoing. Furthermore, he also admitted of obtaining the image from a blog site without any license or permission thus violating the copyright laws of Brunei Darussalam. For the info, all the relevant discussion can be found at: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Castille war.png. JellyLotus (talk) 08:37, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Also, I suspected that he also uploaded others' work obtained from the internet based on his contributions list. I suggest an investigation should be done on this user. Link to contributions Special:Contributions/Syazwi Irfan JellyLotus (talk) 08:41, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Done Reverted and user warned Gbawden (talk) 08:56, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much! JellyLotus (talk) 09:07, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Suppress higher resolution version of File:Manila by night.jpg

Can an admin suppress the higher-resolution version of this Flickr import that is governed by the unfree licensing? Inferring from an input by Clindberg at Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2023/07#Higher-resolution after Flickr licence change, we should generally honor the Flickr photographer's decision to change to unfree license and just instead keep the lower resolution copy here that was imported during the time the Flickr image was under the commercial CC license. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:06, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Done. --A.Savin 02:29, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:37, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:37, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

The evil that men do... on Commons

The other day, I came across the contributions of Kukurydziarz (talk · contribs) (now banned) and discovered that he had transferred tens of thousands of files from Flickr without ever adding a category (I added a single, basic category for all the files from Warsaw, Kraków, and Prague). I also came across the contributions of 6D (talk · contribs), who may or may not be the same person, and who has also transferred gazillions of files from Flickr without ever adding a category. Of course, their instrument was the wretched Flickr2Commons, a tool that does more harm than good, because it does not invite to due diligence. I feel very discouraged by that state of things. To know that there are so many files floating around without anybody being able to find them by a category search, which is the most precise search. What's in store for nerds like us? More blows. Sad. Edelseider (talk) 11:08, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

No one seems to have noticed this topic, because another one was posted at the same time... --Edelseider (talk) 11:00, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Sadly this is not the only instance - there are thousands of uncategorized images on commons. Don't be discouraged - if we we keep working at it we will get there Gbawden (talk) 11:15, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Indeed, a group of us are currently working on categorizing files that were marked uncategorized in 2017. Category:Media needing categories is where you can find things that don't have categories yet. Abzeronow (talk) 16:01, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Off topic but is there a way generate a list of images that lacks category by uploader? Trade (talk) 16:25, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Undeletion requests waiting

Hi, Some undeletion requests are waiting. I guess the requests about the videos are pending partly due to the number of files to be undeleted. There is no opposition, so I can take care of that part Monday if there is no objection. Yann (talk) 10:28, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

I undeleted all files of the videos requests. Some files can't be undeleted due to phab:T291137. Yann (talk) 13:14, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Main Page

We may want to follow some other projects and ensure that the main page can't be deleted. GMG ^talk 16:06, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

@GreenMeansGo: The Main Page is currently admin protected. Isn't that sufficient? Only admins can delete pages anyway. Yann (talk) 16:31, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't seem to give the normal prompt to provide a rationale, or maybe I have something enabled that I've forgotten about. Anyway, I deleted the main page for like four seconds. So mea culpa. GMG ^talk 16:37, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Enwiki's main page has a sui generis bit of code that prevents it from being deleted. While it certainly prevents compromised admin accounts from deleting the page, it was primarily done because of extreme enwiki administrator stupidity.

I don't think this is necessary. If you're tempted to try to delete the main page on a live production wiki, you should be desysopped. If you have poor account security practices that leads to you being easily compromised, you should be desysopped. If you think it's okay to flood the servers with thousands of useless edits to try to get the page over the 5,000 revision mark to prevent it from being deleted, you should be desysopped. There's no need to annoy the sysadmins with stopping things that shouldn't even be considered by people entrusted with advanced permissions. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 16:42, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

I just restored it's protection settings. Just a friendly info note for admins: protection doesn't get restored automatically with a page undeletion, one will have to do it manually. -- CptViraj (talk) 16:56, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Sorry again. I wasn't trying to be a jerk. Just having a discussion about protection levels above admin, and I figured it would give me a final confirmation prompt like I normally see. GMG ^talk 16:59, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

GreenMeansGo reports that the confirmation screen where you are prompted for your reason for deleting the page never showed up. That is an unexpected software behavior that should 100% be looked into. I don’t think GMG actually meant to try to delete the main page to see if it would work. I don’t think it is productive to discuss desysopping or sanctions here in light of the apparent technical problems. Mz7 (talk) 21:19, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Let me (attempt to) confirm. Leaving this comment here so I don't get desysopped :). —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:05, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

The confirmation page showed up for me. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:08, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Nice. I took a look at User:GreenMeansGo/common.js, and it doesn't seem to have anything unusual. Is there any gadget in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets that might provide a one-click delete button? If not, I suspect this is probably some kind of user error... like maybe GMG accidentally pressed the "enter" key when the confirmation page showed up. It seems some fish is likely in order. [16] works as well :) Mz7 (talk) 23:25, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

It's very possibly purely user error. I did have a VPN open on the right for work and Commons open on the left. But I can't stress enough that it was definitely not intentional. GMG ^talk 00:22, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Possible repeated copyright violations

I'm not sure why my delete nomination button and the talk page suddenly does not work today on my current device perhaps due to software issues, so I'll make my report here.

The user in question is Syazwi Irfan. Based on my observation, he is known to be truly notorious when it comes to editing or uploading to both Wikipedia and Wikimedia. Two of his work were previously removed due to copyright issues and his current problems might be the same. I guess he did not learn anything at all on the rules, and kept on repeating the same thing.

Current work which has potential copyright issues:

1. File:Royal Brunei Navy Flag in 1601.png - likely to be taken from an external site and poorly edited with obvious broken edges and small traces of the color black or other color can be seen on the right side which implies that it might be removed from the original source. And the other issue is that, he interpreted the yellow color based on an old sketch that depicts a ship with a flag, it sounds possible but there is no confirmation whatsoever.

2. File:Sultanate Of Sulu War Flag.png - I'm not sure where the original came from since I did not find anything through reverse search but it is likely that this could be found on websites, social media pages, or videos. The only thing that I suspected is that, why is the image blurry and poor quality which made me question why he uploaded it without mentioning the specific tools or software used to create his "own work". JellyLotus (talk) 07:29, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

What?? i made all of this. I use pixlr e as my editing program. It always like that, if you don't believe me use it and make flag. You will understand. Syazwi Irfan (talk) 08:17, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Well if you want to upload any forms of graphics, you should at least make it clear enough with the necessary details and less errors. Any tiny bits of errors or suspicious details could lead to presumptions. JellyLotus (talk) 08:26, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

The Royal Brunei Navy Flag in 1601 Flag should be kept just removed from the article main article and should be renamed as a Alleged Royal Brunei Navy Flag in 1601 Flag. Syazwi Irfan (talk) 08:21, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

If you can fix the broken details, then it might erase some suspicions. Other than that, renaming it sounds like a good idea since the original form is still unconfirmed. Thanks for the clarification. JellyLotus (talk) 08:29, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

I will try to remove all the broken details but it might be really hard. Syazwi Irfan (talk) 10:01, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Please take your time. One of our aims is to improve any Brunei-related articles or media with quality while at the same time avoiding potential ethical and legal issues which may harm our reputation as editors. Any improvements in quality usually takes a lot of time and effort to be done. Take this opportunity to learn on how to provide the relevant details for current and future uploads to avoid any problems on both Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons. For the admins, I think this issue shall not be prolonged any longer and considered settled as the uploader came forward and offered his explanation. JellyLotus (talk) 10:29, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Inconsistent wording at policy and template

I noticed an inconsistency between the wording of the Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion policy and the {{No permission since}} template. Under F4. Failed license review the policy states "... or files tagged with OTRS pending for over 30 days, may also be speedily deleted under this criterion." But the template states "Unless this issue is resolved, the file will be deleted seven days after this tag was added ...". We should change the template to match the policy and also need to check the translations. GPSLeo (talk) 21:44, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

@GPSLeo: {{subst:PP}} gives the files 30 days plus the length of the permissions-commons queue to live, by invoking {{Permission pending}}, which invokes {{No VRTS permission since}} at the appropriate time, which sets Category:No VRTS permission and activates a {{Nuke}} link for Admins to use. The theory is that the VRT customer will get 30 days from the first reply by an Agent to get their permission together, and that first reply will likely not happen until the ticket containing their email message reaches the head of the queue. That queue length (or "Current backlog (oldest unanswered mail or ticket)" per {{Permissions backlog}}) is at Commons:Volunteer Response Team/backlog and listed at {{Permissions backlog}}, is currently showing 3 days, and is updated periodically by Krd. The queues for permissions-[languagecode] have different lengths, but those aren't considered here, which can bite some customers who write in under-represented languages. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 22:17, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Expediting a deletion request

I wonder whether one of you could expedite this deletion request. The reason for the request is that the image in question is desired for a Did you know nomination on the English Wikipedia. As you can see in the discussion on the nomination page, there is an unwillingness to wait any longer. I'd be grateful if somebody could close the nomination and I don't really care what the outcome is, I'd just like to see it being resolved. Schwede 66 01:10, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Done -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:38, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Renascer.logo.jpg

Could an administrator cancel this deletion request and Speedy delete this file, please? It is a blatant copyright violation from the telenovela trailer at TV Globo's official channel on YouTube. Francisco (talk) 11:41, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

This is {{PD-textlogo}}. Yann (talk) 12:26, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

I agree with Yann. A perfect illustration of why not to speedy-delete something like this based on one person's opinion. - Jmabel ! talk 16:12, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

How often do admins send things to OS?

Paradise Chronicle's suggestion that Kadı make 100 successful OS requests before applying to be an Oversighter seemed absurd to me; I have nearly 20,000 deletions and have only ever gone to the OS team four times - twice for people uploading sensitive personal documents (NOTWEBHOST stuff) and twice for personal attacks beyond the pale. Out of curiosity I was wondering if other admins had similar numbers or not. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:18, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes, 100 successful OS requests doesn't realist. I don't think we lack Oversighters, so it doesn't matter much to me. There is much more need for Checkusers. Yann (talk) 23:37, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

No point of having more checkusers if they just keep rejecting most requests Trade (talk) 12:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Looks like I have made 10 requests, mostly CSAM pending action by Legal/T&S. 100 is unreasonably high IMO.

I haven't commented at Kadi's OS request yet, but I think that more oversighters in a more diverse set of timezones are needed; the current team has had 6+-hour response times just due to being asleep, causing me to flag down a steward instead sometimes. On one hand, an active admin who also already has the viewsuppressed right would probably be preferable (AntiCompositeNumber comes to mind :)). On the other hand, nothing says we can't appoint more than one new oversighter! —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:43, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

@Mdaniels5757: They have to stand for election. Of course, ACN would be a shoe-in, but so would Martin Urbanec (for Admin first). — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 23:52, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Martin had a RFA here in 2020 which was not successful and they'd have to be more active in Commons as far as admin-areas for a successful 2nd attempt. Abzeronow (talk) 16:12, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm at 18 requests, for the record, plus one emergency that someone else contacted me for but I passed off to another steward to handle. I count 7 emergency steward OS actions in the last year. (The query says 8, but one was no-actioned as local OSers got to it first). That's higher than most wikis with local oversighters, and is probably a result of timezone overlap as @Mdaniels5757 noted. As for me, it's unlikely I'd run particularly soon, but I might in the future if there's still a need. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 00:07, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

I have never made an OS request and I do not feel any need for OS right. Regular deletion and version hiding are enough for me. Taivo (talk) 18:58, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Chiming in here as an enwiki oversighter, I feel that the Commons could use additional oversighters. While I have not kept a count of the number of OS requests I've made here, one of the most common types is when a minor reveals too much information about themselves, to the point of uploading a picture of themselves to the Commons. It is important for the safety of these users that these kinds of oversight requests be expedited, and I feel that the Commons OS team's response time could be improved with additional oversighters, particularly one in a region that overlaps with US time zones. Best, Mz7 (talk) 22:15, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

"I've made here, one of the most common types is when a minor reveals too much information about themselves, to the point of uploading a picture of themselves to the Commons." I tried to do that once hut were told that it didn't justified a revision deletion Trade (talk) 12:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

That doesn't reflect my experience. Typically it occurs after a minor discloses their age on an enwiki page and includes a photo of themselves. In that case, we would suppress the age on enwiki, and then ask that the photo be suppressed here on commons. So far, all of the requests I've made along those lines have been approved. (The specific age of the minor plays a role in the decision to suppress—if the age is 14 years old or younger, we will almost always suppress on enwiki, whereas if it's a 16-year-old editor, we may allow it.) Mz7 (talk) 21:36, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I believe once on Commons, at least only one time that sticks in my memory. IIRC the WMF had to contact the police and he later went to jail. It was...unpleasant content. GMG ^talk 01:38, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

I do think @Mz7: makes a good point here though. It's not just about how many OS they have, but also what time zone they're in and what languages they speak. GMG ^talk 02:17, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

File:DrshivambjpIND.png

No clear permissions have been received on this. VRT has not received any response concerning this file since 29 April 2023. Can some admin just speedy-delete it? I just thought asking here was better than CSD'ing it. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 18:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

@TheAafi:

Done Abzeronow (talk) 19:22, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Done. Also I deleted a selfie and self-promotional userpage and warned the user against spamming. Taivo (talk) 10:44, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Please move the files back to their original names

@Billinghurst: has unnecessarily renamed all the illustrations in Category:The Gentle Grafter (1908) in violation of COM:MOVE. The files were clearly named with the title of the book in which they appear, the date of publication, and the number of the page on which they occurred. The moves are a violation of established official community guidelines for the renaming of files. I post here because (a) the move is the action of an administrator, and (b) moving the files back requires admin privileges. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:30, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I have to say: given that the old names are still there as redirects, the new names look to me to be tremendously more useful to any reuser other than possibly Wikitext or something else putting together a replica of the whole work. - Jmabel ! talk 00:56, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm curious which principle of COM:MOVE you are applying here? The previous names were harmonize[d across] the names of a set of images across multiple volumes. The changes mean that the set is no longer harmonized. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:06, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Harmonised hasn't traditionally been used in that scenario, and has been more for where the works are used in templates, eg. "Flags of ...", soccer uniforms parts, train network components, consecutive pages of a book where they are constructed to build a whole. They have been done to a constructed purpose to a constructed outcome. In this specific case, I can also say that the first part of the filename is replicating the name of the work, and the latter part of each filename identifies the source, so a harmonisation exists. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:39, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Except that it isn't. The first part of the filename did replicate the name of the work, but after the renaming, it no longer did. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:54, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Comment As mentioned, the files were moved to a descriptive name that reflects what is in the image and the speech quotes that pertained to the work, not the source of the work, which is usually part of the source of any work. The files are still named with the title of the book, and the edition; the page number was not retained in the title though remains within the description of the work. The category of the works has a named representation of the redirects available for those who see them. The files as they were named and uploaded do not allow for broader identification and further categorisation, and when further categorised are less meaningful and relatively ambiguous. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:00, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm curious how "Of course, it’s brown paper" and "Instead of the Lieut. and the Duke" are more descriptive file names? And which principle of COM:MOVE are you applying here? --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:06, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Umm, how about you go and look at the images and their source pages, it should be self-evident how the descriptions were derived. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:42, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

You've responded to my question, but did not answer the question that I asked. "Of course, it’s brown paper" is a caption accompanying an image, and so belongs in the caption field. How does the caption describe what is in the image any better than the page number on which the image appeared? What does "Of course, it’s brown paper" tell anyone about what is depicted in the image? The image is in black and white, with no brown at all. "Of course, it's..." adds no information at all, so we are left with the word "paper" as the rationale for renaming the file. Why not instead just put the caption into the caption field of the template? You have continued to evade my question: Which principle of COM:MOVE are you applying here? The naming policy clearly indicates that "Files can be renamed after they have been created, but only under some circumstances", and directs to COM:MOVE, which lists six situations for renaming files. Which criterion of those six was applied in this situation? --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:54, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, while I appreciate the improvements made to the file description pages and category page (adding captions, {{Wikidata Infobox}}, and the Wikidata work), I agree that the file renames was a bad call. The existing file names were logical, descriptive, internally consistent (and consistent with relevant other files on Commons), and conformant with a larger naming schema for the short-story collections of O. Henry. And while no naming schema is perfect, it is also definitely the case that the new one is not obviously better or more correct than the already established one, so a unilateral mass move without discussion was inappropriate.

As for the specifics of the naming schemas, the new schema makes very little sense. These are illustrations from a specific book, and make sense only in the context of that book (unless actually remixed and recontextualized). The caption for the illustrations is a phrase from the text of the book that the image is trying to illustrate, but it is not any kind of a title for it and does not really describe the image in any meaningful way. Nobody is going to search for these using a phrase like "Of course, it’s brown paper" (or in any case would preferably get the search hit from the file description page). The title of the book and the page number on which it appeared on the other hand, is descriptive: it is the illustration from that book and on that page. It is also a very practical schema for where the images were intended to be used: a transcription of that particular book on English Wikisource, where the image will be used and appear in the context of that page. To prefer the new schema is fine, of course (see "no schema is perfect" above), but to unilaterally move the files to it is inappropriate. Xover (talk) 18:06, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Closure request of Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 109#Proposal: Clarify topic ban

Would an uninvolved administrator be willing to close that discussion? It involves the scope of an editor's topic ban, so it might well be useful to have formal closure. I'm involved as proposer, so I can't close it myself. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 17:17, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Done Yann (talk) 20:32, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Mass copyvio uploads

Could someone look at Anwesh Reddy Singireddy (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user uploads and mass delete. I've tagged many, but there's just a lot more to find the source and tag for. I don't think there are any images that aren't copyvios (there may be a stray govt image that is mistagged as own work but I haven't found any such one so far). I believe it's just an enthusiastic new user who doesn't understand copyrights. Thanks. —SpacemanSpiff 13:09, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

These are pretty clear copyright violations, so I mass-deleted all the uploads. Ymblanter (talk) 13:16, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Deletion of version of file

Could you please delete the version "23:06, 31 December 2023" of File:Sam Kok 1928 (3).djvu? The reason is the version is corrupted. Thank you so much. -- Adder of Eden (talk) 16:45, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Do you mean the version at "16:06, 31 December 2023" ? Abzeronow (talk) 16:59, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes. The first version that appears to be corrupted. Thank you so much. --Adder of Eden (talk) 17:03, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Done Abzeronow (talk) 17:05, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Đại Việt quốc/Story of a recognized sockpuppet

The following discussion is closed, and will be archived soon.

This page has a lot of false accusations and personal attacks. Đại Việt quốc opened a checkuser case against another editor (the victim of "Story of a recognized sockpuppet"), but our checkuser DHN has refused to do it due to lack of evidences. This page needs to be deleted. Thanks! Nguyentrongphu (talk) 01:53, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Info That's just commentators' opinion about the another editor you said, so there's nothing the administrator can do on this issue you reported, but since it "targeted" to one of your best partner => Therefore, I agree to get this page deleted. DefenderTienMinh07 (talk) 19:11, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Stop sprouting nonsense. I have no partner in Wikipedia. Nguyentrongphu (talk) 05:12, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Done Commons is not the place for that. If there are issues, they should be reported on the respective project. Yann (talk) 19:35, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@Yann: FYI, if such a page is not appropriate, then I'm happy to have it deleted. However, that user TUIBAJAVE has a whole collection of user pages containing "false accusations and personal attacks" against me as well as other users in the viwp project. I actually reported that at vi:Wikipedia:Tin nhắn cho bảo quản viên/Lưu 2023 3#Các trung tâm nghiên cứu xung đột của Khả Vân Đại Hãn, which user:Nguyentrongphu himself concluded that it does not violate anything, neither vi:Wikipedia:Trang thành viên and vi:Wikipedia:Những gì không phải là Wikipedia, despite the those two guidelines clearly indicated the violations. Seems like viwp is quite a ruleless project. Đại Việt quốc (talk) 03:11, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

@Đại Việt quốc: in short, you are saying vi-wiki is full of stupid drama, so you decided to import some of it into Commons. No. Just no. - Jmabel ! talk 03:29, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel: Sorry about that. It's just that the fact that such violations being tolerated seems kinda annyoing, and I don't know where to express them. Đại Việt quốc (talk) 04:06, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

You need to stop causing trouble, or else, you may be blocked in Commons too. The local admins are paying their attention to you now. Nguyentrongphu (talk) 05:23, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

And what exactly is the trouble you are indicating. Otherwise, this is indeed a false accusation. Đại Việt quốc (talk) 05:25, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

You are not clean user, you have a lot of puppets. Do not deny TUIBAJAVE (talk) 05:35, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

User:阮先生，瘾君子 - a sockpuppet of Đại Việt quốc. He use Vietnam government threat to me (TUIBAJAVE Thức đêm thức hôm viết luôn bé hỉ... Đúng là được cho phép dùng tên thật rồi có khác ha :))))) Hôm nay ta đánh giá rất cao và chính thức khuyến khích bé cứ viết nhiều, càng nhiều vô càng tốt á. Vì một nguồn tin đã cho ta biết là cả cái trang vi-wiki bị chính quyền đưa vào danh sách cam, ngang hàng mấy trang phản động cấp 2 vì các bài viết về biển đảo rồi. Để sau này có dịp người ta đào sâu hơn sẽ lòi ra thêm đây là một trang diễn đàn độc hại nữa thì ú... ta nói nó đã gì đâu. Ta xin thoái lui để có gì ngày đó đến ta cũng đã mất dấu lâu rồi, không sợ liên lụy nữa. Bé cứ ở lại viết tiếp đi nhá, viết càng nhiều sau này có gì người ta điều tra càng có nhiều điều nói lên lắm đó) TUIBAJAVE (talk) 05:05, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

I emphasize: Đại Việt quốc made a threat to me. TUIBAJAVE (talk) 05:10, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

He have a long history about threat in Vietnamese Wikipedia, insulting religion, use puppets to attack, and make fake consensus. Everybody can check here Yêu cầu kiểm định tài khoản/Đại Việt quốc (that mean: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Đại Việt quốc) TUIBAJAVE (talk) 05:17, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Đại Việt quốc is a LTA in Vi Wikipedia. He has been using socks since 2020. I've blocked probably 20-30 of his socks. The Vi Wikipedia community ignores him because he's a well-known sock and has caused a lot of trouble for the community. He wants to it to become a battleground. He has also threatened the community and said he wanted to stab TUIBAJAVE in real life. TUIBAJAVE is writing a list of pages on LTAs similar to this page in English Wikipedia. Nguyentrongphu (talk) 05:18, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Info I am totally aware that whatever is from other projects should not be brought up here, that's considered inappropriate. However, given that these two people are doing such a thing, I'm going to just leave this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nguyentrongphu here. Đại Việt quốc (talk) 05:41, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

that's funny. what do you mean, everything about me and about you, not him Nguyentrongphu. Why do you show that thing. For what? TUIBAJAVE (talk) 05:49, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Nice try, don't act like you haven't been blocked in English Wikipedia. In fact, many of your old socks were blocked in English Wikipedia. Also, my block in English Wikipedia is irrelevant here. I'm done with you. I'll let the local admins here deal with you if necessary. Nguyentrongphu (talk) 05:58, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

I think it kind of does https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nguyentrongphu&oldid=1051611662 , given the disruptive edits you have done in English Wikipedia. Đại Việt quốc (talk) 06:09, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

My block in English Wikipedia has nothing to do here. You're disrupting this project. You've been socking a lot in Vietnamese and English Wikipedias for the last few years, and that's a problem. Please stop before you get yourself blocked here too. Nguyentrongphu (talk) 06:13, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Take this page vi:Thành viên:TUIBAJAVE/Trung tâm nghiên cứu xung đột (phiên bản hạn chế)/Chiến tranh Vịt Quắc Sả – Khả Vân lần thứ nhất for example. Perhaps, a Google Translate tool may tell whether the contents in that page is similar, at all, to en:Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse page. Or is it in fact a collection of false accusations and personal attacks against someone. Đại Việt quốc (talk) 05:29, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Stop making false accusation like you did in the past 3 years. All I see is facts. Google Translate is crap because it is not accurate. Nguyentrongphu (talk) 06:08, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

It's not very accurate, but at least it is not biased, right? It can still be understood, to some extent. Didn't you say we should let the admins decide? So why not let them look through it to see the "facts". Đại Việt quốc (talk) 06:11, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

No. that's not good for you. Today, Commons Wikimedia know about you clearly. enjoy your time TUIBAJAVE (talk) 06:19, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Sure, sounds good to me. Nguyentrongphu (talk) 06:14, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

No. stop to say anything. final, Admin Common attention to you, a man many puppets. TUIBAJAVE (talk) 05:42, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

And, important, you recognize yourself is a puppet at here (in Common): "con rối này (tôi)". And second, you told me that you accept: I can write everything ("thích viết gì thì cứ viết") TUIBAJAVE (talk) 05:56, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

This discussion is closed. @Nguyentrongphu, Đại Việt quốc, and TUIBAJAVE: consider this a formal warning. Do not continue to import vi-wiki drama to Commons. The only thing I'm willing to hear further from you on this topic is if one or more of you want to apologize for disrupting Commons, and even then that apology had better not contain a "but". If any of you continue this discussion either here or elsewhere on Commons, I will block you for at least a year. End of story. - Jmabel ! talk 06:43, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

The above discussion is closed, and will be archived soon.

Apparently people are not willing to let go of this

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jmabel&oldid=837613895#vi-Wikipedia_dramas

I am blocking User:Đại Việt quốc for a month and unilaterally deleting the obviously out-of-scope File:MyFirstBlog30Dec2023.pdf. If someone else decides to block User:Nguyentrongphu, I will not object. User:JrandWP appears to have been just trying to be helpful in explaining what is going on, and should certainly not be blocked for this. - Jmabel ! talk 18:25, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Before someone blocks me, let me at least explain myself. First of all, I NEVER wanted to import drama to Commons. I simply reported an incident then defended myself afterwards. After the warning from admin Jmabel, I already let it go. However, I saw a misused picture, so I simply reported Đại Việt quốc for the second time. That's all. If anything, I will just become a victim of collateral damage from reporting a misused image. As you all can see, my last 50 edits in Commons can trace back to 2010. That means I don't want to make any trouble here and have no intention to stick around. You guys will probably never see me again. Thank you for everything! Nguyentrongphu (talk) 19:27, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

File:Steamboat Willie (1928) by Walt Disney.webm, File:Steamboat Willie.png

For some strange reason these two files are cascade protected so I can't edit them. Could please anyone add the Template:Urheberrechtlich geschützt? By German law, the movie unfortunately is still protected until 2042. For the png also the Template:Trademarked is missing. Pleaso add this, too. -- Chaddy (talk) 16:32, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@Chaddy: not a strange-reason. These files are auto-protected because they are on the Main Pages of en-wiki and zh-wiki respectively. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 16:34, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

I know, but this kind of protection even for trustworthy experienced, long-time users is not very reasonable. -- Chaddy (talk) 16:37, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

I removed the video from Commons:Auto-protected files/wikipedia/en, and added this template to both files. File:Steamboat Willie.png is protected because of some use on Chinese Wikipedia. I am not sure about the trademark. The character depicted in later versions of Mickey films is still under a copyright, but is there a trademark on this version? Yann (talk) 16:57, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

KrinkleBot readded the file in Commons:Auto-protected files/wikipedia/en, and I don't understand why, as it is not in the Main Page any more. Yann (talk) 17:44, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@Yann, It's because images on en:Wikipedia:Picture of the day/On the main pages are also auto-protected. ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^{^(talk)} 18:09, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so far! But yes, the mouse is still trademark protected. Thus, the template is needed. -- Chaddy (talk) 20:13, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

I added {{Trademarked}} to File:Steamboat Willie.png. —RP88 (talk) 20:52, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much! -- Chaddy (talk) 02:06, 3 January 2024 (UTC)