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.
On metawiki I have been working on an upgrade to the {{PP-template}} that require a symbol for permanent protection. Could someone upload an svg of PP lock with an infinity symbol? Thanks a lot! (sorry if this is the wrong place to post this) – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 05:09, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
@Jmabel: Oh! I thought 'why' (instead of 'where'). To answer your (actual) question: There would only be one lock icon, which would be placed next to the lock indicating the protection level. So, the symbol would be in the position as the other lock icons. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 22:37, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
* @Ilovemydoodle: I can't make head or tail of that. You say "there would only be one lock icon" and then you refer to "other lock icons" and you refer to the "only one lock icon" being "next to the lock" (I have no idea what "the lock" is if it is not the "lock icon"). Let me be more concrete: you referred initially to {{PP-template}}. That makes use of File:Cascade-protection-shackle-double-chain-link.svg. You want an infinity symbol added to that. Do you want it to replace the chainlinks in that symbol? Do you want to keep the chainlinks as they are and put an infinity symbol under the lock? Or do you want something else? - Jmabel ! talk04:55, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
I'm definitely discovering I'm out of my depth when it comes to editing an SVG file. I probably should learn that, but not quickly enough to help you. But let's see if we can define this well enough to ask someone to create it. Tell me if any of the following is wrong:
Rather than green, it should use a solid red, preferably the exact shade found around the lower half of the hand in en:File:Stop_hand_nuvola.svg.
Rather than the chain-link, it should use an infinity symbol ("∞").
@Ilovemydoodle: Question: do you want that infinity symbol on the same angle as the shackle in the example you gave, or just in the usual horizontal orientation?
Just to clarify: I would be able to edit successfully if that shackle had been a Unicode symbol, but it's not, it's a path, and I don't know enough to replace it with text rather than a path, or to rework a path. I imagine that for someone who knows (for example) Inkscape rather than editing the SVG file as text this is all pretty trivial. - Jmabel ! talk05:41, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Something that might be important is that "permanent" is a different idea (time-length) than what kind of protection. The enwiki set, as Jeff G. notes, focuses on semi, full, move, upload, etc. and doesn't distinguish time-limited vs indefinite. Obviously it's up to meta what to do on meta, but you'd need to decide if you are going to focus only on the time-length, or are going to have two icons on a locked page (type of protection an time-length), or need a separate "infinity" variant of each type. This all re-iterates Jmabel's concern that it's not very clear what exactly you want: need a well-defined situation and solution if you're asking for help implementing a given solution. DMacks (talk) 15:23, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
@DMacks: It will be enabled by default on indefinitely protected pages, but there will be an option to disable it.
This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 09:17, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
Currently at the Proposals Village pump there's a discussion entitled "9 - Remove requirement that Quality images be the work of Commons contributors", in it I proposed an alternative where I noted that rather than tearing down the current system, we should probably just construct a new system next to it. To which I wrote: "This way we can preserve the unique incentive for photographers to have their own works be promoted to Quality Images and also create a separate incentive with a whole separate process for "Non-Wikimedia Commons originals" (or however we should refer to imported works). While both "Quality imports" would refer to images and "Quality images" would refer to images imported from somewhere else (the photographer's mobile telephone, laptop, desktop, camera, Etc.) The names would be recognisable enough to let people know which images were created specifically by Commonswiki photographers and which ones were merely imported by Commonswiki contributors from external sources. This would please those that want to keep QI exclusive and preserve the incentives for photographers and it would create more incentives for importers to find high quality images (due to the dopamine rush)." Later the original proposer, user "Nosferattus" wrote: "Well I spend a lot of time and effort combing through thousands of wildlife images on iNaturalist and Flickr and picking the few that are really high quality to import into Commons. The fact that I can't get these images designated as "quality" and thus more likely to be found by reusers is very discouraging to me. Instead they are just lost in the sea of poor to mediocre Commons wildlife photos. So it feels like a waste of time. Lumping me in with promotional agencies feels even more discouraging. It seems like my contributions here are not really valued." These are actually good points. However, because the current QI system doesn't really seem to specify that the images need to be uploaded by contributors to the Wikimedia Commons themselves, only that they have to be of contributors this user questioned this alternative system with "And then what happens when a photographer of an image in "Quality imports" creates a Commons account (or is discovered to have a Commons account)? Do we then have a third process for migrating images from "Quality imports" to "Quality images"? Such a system is just neednessly complex, IMO." Though I'm not sure if that's how it works, for example I know that Professor Gary Lee Todd is a Flickr photographer who has provided this website with many thousands of images from museums and archaeological sites but they later made a Commonswiki account to import images from his account that weren't uploaded, does this mean that I can now nominate "my uploads" using Flickr2Commons from this person to QI because he's a Wikimedia Commons contributor? Personally, I think that creating a separate system that just mirrors the current infrastructure set up for QI (thus not needing much work to be done for it to be set up) could work, but there are doubts, so before proposing it I'd like to get feedback on what this potential proposal should and shouldn't have. -- — Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 07:15, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: , My bad, I meant to note that there is currently a proposal for expanding "Quality images" to also include non-Commonswiki original works, but I wanted to see if there are any issues with creating a potential separate system entitled "Quality imports" which is separate from the current proposal because it doesn't redefine the current system but creates a parallel system for works originating by non-Commonswiki contributors (like imports from other websites). --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 11:27, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
I support any proposal that makes it easier for users to separate the wheat from the chaff. I don't understand why discussions here are focused on the needs of Commons editors rather than Commons users. Finding good images on Commons is an exercise in frustration even if you know how to navigate our ridiculous category system. Is it any surprise that people would rather pay hundreds of dollars to buy our images on Getty and Alamy rather than getting them here for free? If people are so concerned about retaining and incentivizing editors, they should realize that we aren't going to get any new editors if the site doesn't attract users and the best way to attract users is to make our quality content easy to find. Artisaurus (talk) 15:50, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
We have several images of the grave of Raisa Gorbacheva. (see File:Raisa Maksimovna Gorbačëva.JPG for example.) Sadly the Russian Freedom of Panorama Law does not allow commercial use of images of statues. What is the status of these images, given that similar ones could be posted because her husband will be buried next to her grave.Graham Beards (talk) 07:23, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Not the grave as a whole is an unfree motif, but the statue. So I think this image is perhaps de minimis, while the rest (4 photos as of now) should be nominated for deletion for sure. Regards --A.Savin09:39, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
In this case IMHO it's not just about the bust, but also the sculptural composition -- the shapes might be creative enough. --A.Savin20:25, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Because of the timeline (just after File:Basel tram 2017 4.jpg) I thougth it was the same type of tram. However looking at the windows, it is clearly not the Bombardier Flexity 2. Wich tram type is it?Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:31, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
I tried enabling MediaWiki:Gadget-GoogleImagesTineye, and it simply doesn't not show in my browser. For reference, I'm using Mozilla Firefox on a Windows desktop, and I'm using the old 2010 Vector interface. Actually, most gadgets don't seem to work. I have the same issue with the QI gadget, I had to manually write my candidates (no votes :() there. Tet (talk) 14:40, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
@Tet In vector, you need to click the "more" button at the top right, to the right of the View/Edit/History tabs. The TinEye gadget should show up there. But if the QI gadget does not work either, you might want to check if your browser is blocking them somehow. --El Grafo (talk) 08:18, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Photo of mural depicting work of Le Corbusier in a cartoonesque style permitted?
I am aware that photos of works by Le Corbusier are not permitted on Commons. But when visiting Ronchamp (the location of Le Corbusier's famous chapel) I saw a mural in the Rue de la Chapelle (just off the Rue Le Corbusier) in Ronchamp. I think it's rather a nice "cartoon" of this building. It is shown on Google Street View, the geolocation is 47.70032, 6.63059, so please have a look. I took a photo of it. Would it be permissible to upload this to Commons, so that readers of the article about this chapel (on 28 Wikipedias) at least have some idea how it looks? Kind regards, MartinD (talk) 15:32, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
@MartinD: I'm so sorry! I meant to use CTRL-C to copy-paste to the edit summary & instead annihilated my content.
I don't see any way that mural could fail to be copyrighted, and there is no Freedom of Panorama in France, so I think unfortunately we cannot have it on Commons. - Jmabel ! talk20:00, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi Jmabel, thank you for your clarification. Well, that's clear, we will have to do without a picture then. A pity, as I rather liked this mural.;) Kind regards, MartinD (talk) 11:17, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
@A.Savin: I would think so, but they are currently unrelated in the hierarchy. Of course (paceOxyman), the emphasis on track in the former makes this a little tricker. - Jmabel ! talk00:30, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
"Provisional rail tracks" implies a track constructed for some test purpose, involving an eventual railway line. "Construction railways" are quite distinct: they're railways (probably temporary) built to support the construction of something, probably not railway related at all. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:34, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
Well Category:Trench railways and demonstration railways such as Category:Decauville Railway Tien-Tsin–Tshing-Yang would be examples of temporary railways. But the problem here seems to be that one category focuses on the tracks, the other about the whole railway including rail vehicles, bridges earth works etc. A possible way to bring the two together would be to create a subcat of both the categories called something like Category:Construction railway tracks. I find the use of the word Provisional here confusing as it could mean laid tentatively, conditionally or probationary with a view to becoming permanent, but the category description states it means temporarily Oxyman (talk) 23:57, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
Procedure for Uploading an Image on Behalf of Another Person
Someone I know would like me to upload an image to the Commons on her behalf. She is the copyright holder for the image. Isn't there some way to do this whereby I upload the image and the copyright holder submits a proper copyright release form to the Commons? Can someone point me to the legally correct way of handling this situation? Thanks! Nolabob (talk) 21:30, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
not used Commons in a long time ... is this still something for here?
Hi, In Belgium there is supermarkt active w:en:Makro. It will most likely be closed very soon. Before it closes down I was thinking of making an extensive photo shoot of the inside of a Makro. - Will need permission of the director of that store, will be some work. - Because I have no been active here in a very long time I just wanted to ask of something like this is still welcome here. The idea is to upload a large collection of photos of the store, it's own brand products, to document what a Marko-store is/was in 2022 (before it is gone). - Just for illustration of the Wikipedia articles about Makro the current available photos are enough Category:Makro. The idea is just to document it for potential use later, to archive it. - I do not want to do all this effort if something like this is considered out of scope here. Walter (talk) 11:47, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
There is a general aversion to showing commercial products. (No Promotion is a strong feeling in the NL and B Wikimedia communities) No one wants to see supermarket selves. It has to be really specific to Makro. Wich uniforms are being used? I never visited the shops so I cant give you advise on what is typical 'Makro' and usefull to document.Smiley.toerist (talk) 13:27, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
It's been a while since I was in one. Inside there really isn't that much that is typical for Makro. Probably just the signs telling you which products are where and where the entrance, check out and exit is. LeeGer (talk) 13:41, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Well, that it is the Makro is more of a coincidence. That is just the chain that is now being sold in to its different business unites and as a result it is to be expected that soon 'Makro' will no longer exist. It has a few elements that are special but fundamentally, yes, it is just a supermarket. But that is not really the point. - The point would be to just document how 'a Makro' looked inside. Now is that not especially interesting but there is potential in the future it will be to some. But do document it that has to happen now. - I recently was in a heritage museum where a mock-up supermarket was build from around the 1950's and a bankoffice of a long closed bank. That did give me this idea. It seems to be a good idea. But maybe this is not the place for this, that is way I ask this. Walter (talk) 14:13, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
The products I was thinking of photographing would be of their store brand. That most likely would no longer exist soon. Special for Makro is their huge package volume the sell products in. In a much larger volume package then any other Belgian supermarket open to end customers. Walter (talk) 14:24, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Photos that I think can be interesting are wide angle photos or 180 or 360° photos. This to reflect the "atmosphere" in the store. Wouter (talk) 14:47, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
The issue is going to be to avoid too much that is images of copyrighted product packaging. But, for example, things like a meat or fish section will have much less of that issue; similarly the checkout area. - Jmabel ! talk15:02, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
In think I will continue with this idea. And maybe just upload a small sample now. Keep the rest and wait until 'Makro' does not exist anymore. That will probably make things more easy. Walter (talk) 15:34, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
I mean at the level of Wikimedia Commons. - At the level of Makro; the on-duty manager told me to call the store director to ask her permission for this. So if it happens I will have permission at the local store level (or maybe higher up) for an inside photo shoot. Will ask for written confirmation. That is not the issue. - My worries are at the Commons level of being accused to copyright claims or promotion or something like this. If the brand is defunct that risk should be lower. Walter (talk) 17:19, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
@Walter: The issue isn't "promotion." The issue is having the appropriate license for any of their branding/packaging material that is copyrighted. And that copyright will persist (and be assigned to some entity) after the company/brand is gone. So you want to clear those rights while it is still readily apparent who can license them. - Jmabel ! talk04:58, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
I think their branded stuff is probably worth documenting even if Commons isn't the place where you can upload it. Not everything valuable in this world belongs on Commons. - Jmabel ! talk15:03, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Just make all the photos you get a (documented) permission from Makro for. But do not ask at Commnons. Either upload, or upload everything to Flickr and wait for it to be imported to Commons by one of the mass flickr importers - the easier way for you. [it is only, that a direct upload to commons would be cc-by-sa-4.0, but flickr is 2.0] --C.Suthorn (talk) 16:04, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
@Smiley.toerist: I would not be some sure. It is surprisingly hard to find decent images of for example playground on Commons. The same goes for example for things like bollards, hampshire gates and so on. I just tried to replace this one and failed. And maybe also for supermarket interiors we miss things? That can be useful in 10, 20 or 30 years. Maybe even later for some historians? @Walter: - for me high-quality images of supermarket interior are welcome Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:27, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
I have asked Makro Belgium for permission & explained the idea. The main focus would be the general look, setup of the store. The different departments. - And also to try to get few things take make Makro special captured. Like that you need a Makro card to be able to enter the store. Originally the where for businesses to buy products, not end customers. The still sell under there own brands products in very large containers. Like a 5 liter bucket of mayonaise. In that I am also interested. That is also special for Belgium. - Makro is just being sold to new owners and the are braking up Makro to sell it in parts. So it is a tricky periode for the current management. Walter (talk) 22:31, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Graphs of Dutch public libraries statistics: what is a suitable category?
I've made some graphs of statistics concerning Dutch public libraries, not specific ones but aggregated national numbers. What would be a suitable subcategory? I'm thinking of "Statistics of libraries in the Netherlands", would that be OK? Kind regards, MartinD (talk) 14:51, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Is the recipient of a business letter from 1964 the copyright holder of that letter? I realize the recipient is the owner of the physical copy of the letter, but it is not clear to me that this is the same as being the copyright holder. This is in the United States. Thanks in advance for the clarification on this. Nolabob (talk) 22:25, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
@Nolabob: In this case, the copyright holder is either the company that employed the person that wrote the letter at the time, or the writer themselves if they were a freelancer or the business owner. By any means, the recipient is never the copyright holder of a letter. Anyhow, since this is from the US, the letter is in the public domain unless it includes an explicit copyright notice (which is most likely not the case). So you could use {{PD-US-no notice}} as a licence for uploading a scan or faithful photo of the letter. De728631 (talk) 22:36, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
If I am understanding correctly, in the United States, the letter is in the public domain (and therefore can be uploaded to the Commons) unless it is has an explicit copyright notice. Correct? Thank you! Nolabob (talk) 22:44, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Yes, that's it. Unless there is a notice like "Copyright Foo Inc., 1964" or something similar included, you can upload it here. De728631 (talk) 22:50, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
@Nolabob one thing to keep in mind, though, is that the above only applies to published (or registered) works. As far as I understand Commons:Publication#United_States, merely sending a letter would not be considered publication. Date of publication matters here, not date of creation. If the work letter was never published, suddenly the author's year of death becomes important (to row of the Hirtle chart). El Grafo (talk) 14:19, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
I don't see why it necessarily need a copyright notice. In w:Salinger v. Random House, Inc., there doesn't seem to have been even an attempt to claim that Salinger's letters to his publishers needed a copyright notice. Letters would generally be unpublished and not needing a copyright notice until if and when they were published, a requirement that stopped being needed in 1989.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:31, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
It now seems that the letter in question can NOT be uploaded to the Commons because it was not actually published but merely sent and received. So, unless I hear otherwise, I will not upload the letter. I appreciate the continuing discussion of this matter. Nolabob (talk) 20:57, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Looking for Commons & Wikidata wizards!
Apologies if this message isn't in your native language and/or you've seen it somewhere else. Feel free to translate, distribute further, etc.
Hey all. I need to hire soon a contractor who is knowledgeable about these 2 beloved projects, which as you may recall are pretty high on the list of Foundation's priorities for this fiscal year. To be clear: you don't have to have, like, millions of contributions across both of them: we do need you to know a fair bit about the projects and their communities, and how they work. (This means that people who do not necessarily consider themselves Wikimedians, but do have GLAM or research experience on these 2 projects, may also apply.)
Please see details on Greenhouse. If this message isn't for you, maybe you do know someone who would be a great fit! I think we may close our call in a week or so, FYI. Thanks for reading. Have a lovely rest of your week. --Elitre (WMF) (talk) 11:04, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
PS: Bonus link about getting a job at WMF generally speaking, one never knows...
Revised Enforcement Draft Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct
The Committee collaborated to revise these draft guidelines based on input gathered from the community discussion period from May through July, as well as the community vote that concluded in March 2022. The revisions are focused on the following four areas:
To identify the type, purpose, and applicability of the UCoC training;
To simplify the language for more accessible translation and comprehension by non-experts;
To explore the concept of affirmation, including its pros and cons;
To review the balancing of the privacy of the accuser and the accused
The Committee requests comments and suggestions about these revisions by 8 October 2022. From there, the Revisions Committee anticipates further revising the guidelines based on community input.
Everyone may share comments in a number of places. Facilitators welcome comments in any language on the Revisions Guideline Talk Page. Comments can also be shared on talk pages of translations, at local discussions, or during conversation hours. There are planned live discussions about the UCoC enforcement draft guidelines; please see Meta times and details: Conversation hours
The facilitation team supporting this review period hopes to reach a large number of communities. If you do not see a conversation happening in your community, please organize a discussion. Facilitators can assist you in setting up the conversations. Discussions will be summarized and presented to the drafting committee every two weeks. The summaries will be published here.
Category:Churches in Lviv Oblast by raion is populated with raions that mostly ceased to exist as part of a reform of administrative divisions in 2020, so the category probably requires a considerable amount of maintenance. In my home Wikipedia, I would add a maintenance template. What do we do here? (Unfortunately, this seems to not have been [fully] updated yet in Wikidata either.) Stilfehler (talk) 23:41, 11 September 2022 (UTC) I just got a feedback from Wikidata: a revision is planned there but (obviously for lack of manpower) not started yet. I also learned that the reform was not only in Lviv Oblast but nationwide. Stilfehler (talk) 15:49, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. The issue is temporarily fixed by use of a maintenance template. --Stilfehler (talk) 16:07, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
PD-Japan-exempt for emblems and flags
We have Category:PD-Japan-exempt (flags) and Category:PD-Japan-exempt (logos and emblems), each with ~700 flags/emblems, seemingly mostly for cities, prefectures, and/or other local governments. However, the text in Template:PD-Japan-exempt doesn't seem to indicate that such would be in the public domain, as I don't think they would count as "notifications, instructions, circular notices and the like" (which pretty clearly, to me at least, seems to only encompass textual works). However, I don't know much about Japanese law, and since it's translated from Japanese there may be some mistranslation. Does the Japanese Copyright Act actually enable us to use such emblems produced by local governments? Eiim (talk) 15:40, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
It's iffy. When you have a logo and emblem, you have two different copyrights: the definition and the representation. You can read more here: Commons:Coats of arms.
There is a good argument that the definition is not copyrightable, but the representation is. So if uploaders drew their own...
To simplify reuse of the images, I added {{Remove border}} to all of them. Thanks to its tracking category, a few of us removed them and the category is now mostly clean.
However, one a few of these templates were removed, resulting in not all images being cropped. One of the edit summaries I found (when there was one), was:
"Removed pointless template. The image can be cropped without it or just not cropped in the first place" [1]
I think you misread my comment above, I'm not interested in more of Adamant1 comments. I don't see how "The image can be cropped without it or just not cropped in the first place" is helpful. Enhancing999 (talk) 09:27, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
If the comment was helpful or not, I don't think using this discussion as a shoe in to continue taking personal swipes at me is helpful either. Personally, I don't really care if your interested in my comments or not.
I'll agree that the comment you cited could have been clearer. That said, I don't really see why it matters since I more then clarified why I removed the templates in other discussions that you were involved in. Plus, the purpose of this discussion isn't "lets review irrelevant random comments made by Adamant1" either. Look, we both could have handled the situation better. No harm, no foul. We have a chance to work it out now though. So lets just do that. Would you rather figure out what the best way forward here is or waste everyone's time re-litigating the original disagreement? Personally, I rather do the former. I could just as easily drag you through the dirt to prove a point if I wanted to since your behavior was less then amicable, but I rather just figure out what the best option here is instead of going there. --Adamant1 (talk) 21:48, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping. As far as I aware this was already settled when Enhancing999 and I discussed it on their talk page and the talk page for the template. I had made it extremely clear at the time in both places that I didn't have an issue with them cropping the borders, as long as none of the actual images were cropped in the process. Unfortunately the last message I received from Enhancing999 about it was them accusing me of harassment. So I thought the best thing to do would be to not have anything further to do with them or the files that I removed the templates from. Otherwise, I probably would have reverted some of them. Unfortunately some of the images clearly can't be cropped without removing some of the image. So I don't think the template should be restored in those cases. Either way though, I guess that's on Enhancing999 for accusing me of crap. It's ridiculous to accuse someone of harassment and then expect them to edit the files your accusing them of harassment over.
Outside of that, my preferred option for how to deal with would be either B or C (probably C) since parts of images get cropped out all the time, not just when Enhancing999 does it. Plus some Wikiprojects (like Wikiproject Postcards for instance) prefers images to have the borders. So this is something that IMO should be dealt with regardless of the images of the train stations that Enhancing999 wants to crop. That said, there's zero reason they can't just upload new versions either, but I'm willing to defer to other people about it. --Adamant1 (talk) 03:21, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
I request you that added the Santali Language in Template:Lang-mp on Wikimedia Commons.
I request you added this Santali Wikimedia Commons Main Page in Template:Lang-mp.This is Santali Template Main Page and This is Santali Wikimedia Commons main page is ᱢᱩᱬᱩᱛ ᱥᱟᱦᱴᱟ. Santali Wikimedia Commons add this other languages Template. ᱵᱤᱨᱢᱚᱞ (talk) 03:56, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
The link above should be c:ᱢᱩᱬᱩᱛ ᱥᱟᱦᱴᱟ without the pipe. ISO code “sat”. I'm not familiar with {{Lang-mp-loader}} but <!--sat-->{{Lang-mp-loader|sat|ᱢᱩᱬᱩᱛ ᱥᱟᱦᱴᱟ}} =
Francophone WikiConvention registration is open until November 10 - banner for two weeks
Hi everyone,
The francophone annual meeting is coming back from November 17 to 20. It will be held in person only, in Paris. The program is available on meta and registration is open until November 10.
I would like to ask central notice for a banner that would show to french speaking users with more than 100 edits. Would that be ok with you ?
I asked the same question on wikipedia, the fr.wiktionnary, wikisource, and wikidata.
Best regards, --Adélaïde Calais WMFr (talk) 15:40, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
Bulk renames
I assume that there exists both a method for efficiently renaming several hundred files whose names all have an identical problem, and a more specific place to request that this be done.
@DragonflySixtyseven just make sure when you put in a bot request you are as precise as possible about what you want, so that if someone fulfills the request as written you'll be happy with the result. - Jmabel ! talk19:54, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
Determining if a photo of art is public domain if the artwork is public domain?
I had always understood that a simple photo reproduction of 2-D artwork (like a photo) cannot have a separate copyright from the 2-D artwork itself. But looking into this, it seems slightly more nuanced: if given special lighting or just a part of it, it seems that a photo might have a separate copyright. Is there a guide to this somewhere in Wikimedia? I have seen a bunch of 2-D pieces of art where the photographer lists it as some form of CC (or even GNU) license, but I suspect they are in the public domain as simply a reproduction of public domain 2-D art. I don't want to be changing these pages to public domain unless I check so I'm sure they are so. (If I do know for sure, I think I'd be changing a lot of images to state they are in the public domain, as I'm often going through these images.) Can someone please help clarify this? MPSchneiderLC (talk) 13:15, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
@MPSchneiderLC: In general, if only the 2-D artwork itself is shown, Commons considers this an uncreative photographic process. However, different countries have different histories on how they've handled this. The UK in particular has at times recognized "sweat of brow" claims. If you want real expertise on this, you'd probably better ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright rather than the main VP. - Jmabel ! talk15:25, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Freedom of panorama in Japan (outdoor memorials and indoor advertisement)
Hello everyone. I'm currently working with fellow authors on the page series of Japanese figure skater Yuzuru Hanyu on English Wikipedia, and we'd like to get it to a featured topic. In that context, I have questions regarding copyright and licensing of some self-taken pictures in Japan that we'd like to add to those articles.
On the sub-page about Hanyu's Olympic seasons (currently nominated for FAC), we've already included images of his two monuments and handprint memorial (outdoor) at the International Center Station in Sendai. These memorials are permanent installations in 2D, presented in 2017/19, and show drawings of Hanyu at the 2014 and 2018 Winter Olympics. We were told to add a fitting FoP tag to these images, but it seems that we used the wrong template (as these pictures are not about architecture in the first place). I am not familiar with copyright tags and templates at all, so I'd be very happy about help here.
On Hanyu's main bios page, we'd like to show his public presence (which is unusually large for an amateur athlete) in a visual form. For that, we took pictures of indoor advertisements, which had made the national news. Two photos were taken at Tokyo International Airport (1, 2) and another two at JR Central Tokyo Station (1, 2). I want to know if these images violate any copyright rules in terms of permanent/temporary installment, 2D artwork, FoP or whatever. We would like to use one or two of them for the article.
There is no ill intention behind these uploads. If there is any issue with the pictures, they can be deleted immediately, of course. I just want to make sure that we are allowed to use them on Wikipedia for encyclopedic purposes, especially now in the course of FAC nominations. Thank you very much in advance. Henni147 (talk) 10:39, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
At some point today, regular TOCs seem to have vanished from Commons, as noted by another user at the German language Commons:Forum. They were still available as of 9:44 am (German time) this morning, as evidenced by this edit I would not have made if I hadn't seen something was wrong in the TOC.
Hello,
There has been some discussion in the news of the Canadian government changing copyright law next year so that copyright is extended from 50 years after the artist's death to 70 years. On articles I've edited I can think of a few images that pass the 50 years criteria but not 70 years. If the law is changed, would all Wikimedia images that don't meet the new standard have to be removed or would there be a "grandfather" situation where those images that met the old standard be allowed to stay. Thank you. Curiocurio (talk) 16:38, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
I think it depends on the details of the law and how it handles those cases. Often works that are already in the public domain stay there (like works of authors who died in 1971 and entered the PD in Canada in 2022 will stay in the PD), while works of authors who died in 1973 will then not enter the PD in Canada until 2044. Works of authors who died in 1972 could be treated one way or the other depending on when the change is effective. The other possibility, that works who entered the PD let's say in 2021 will be protected again until 2041 is less likely IMO, but not impossible; it has happened in some countries. A "grandfather" situation is only likely IMO if the law provides for it, see {{PD-Switzerland-photo}} for just such a thing with Swiss photographs. --Rosenzweigτ17:04, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
OK, now I do know their intentions because I was looking for the text of the law (or, more precisely as of now, the bill). It's here, part 5, division 16 of a huge omnibus bill (the Budget Implementation Act, 2022, No. 1) changing all kinds of laws. There is a Transitional Provision in there that says:
No revival of copyright 280 Section 6, subsections 6.2(2) and 7(1) and (3) and section 9 of the Copyright Act, as enacted by sections 276 to 279, do not have the effect of reviving the copyright in any work in which the copyright had expired before the day on which sections 276 to 279 come into force.
So @Rosenzweig: if I read well, whatever is in PD because of the 50-pma years rule remains in pd and the rule applies for 1972 onward? (btw 70 years is a crap. 50 is more than appropriate. Put Sir Paul McCartney, may he live 200 years, mind you! But as for now the Lennon/McCartney songs are copyrighted AT LEAST until 2092, which mean 120+ years the latest ones...) -- Blackcat20:16, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
The date the changes take effect is yet to be determined. If it's still in 2022, works by authors who died in 1972 or later should receive the new 70 years term. If the date is in 2023, it should be works by authors who died in 1973 or later. We'll see. --Rosenzweigτ20:23, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
@JWilz12345: No. Bill C19 is only about the duration of copyright terms, while bill C244 (a private member's bill, first reading) wants to "amend the Copyright Act in order to allow the circumvention of a technological protection measure in a computer program if the circumvention is solely for the purpose of the diagnosis, maintenance or repair of a product in which the program is embedded", like software in tractors I guess which has been causing trouble for their owners in recent years. So that bill seems to be a "right to repair" effort. --Rosenzweigτ04:20, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Is there a template, or some other standard way to mark images that have been digitally enhanced beyond what the original image contained? Case in point here: QEII. File history mentions a that the new file is a higher resolution, but not the fact that the image has been enhanced using some tool which predicts details not originally available. HTGS (talk) 22:57, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
I assume there’s no template warning as I hoped, but I wonder if this is a good place to discuss one? (I’m far less familiar with Commons than Wikipedia.) HTGS (talk) 23:08, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
None of these are really appropriate. We definitely should have one or more templates for this. And there needs to be a distinction between different types of enhancements of real photographs (upscaling, colorization, ...) on the one hand and images that were created from scratch by an AI such as en:DALL-E. --El Grafo (talk) 09:26, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Non-copyright restrictions on photography in Egypt
In Egypt, there are non-copyright restrictions on photography in public places, last updated in July 2022. According to secondary English-language coverage of the most recent photography law, photography of certain subjects (e.g. children), with professional equipment, for commercial purposes, or which can "damage the country's image", is prohibited without a government permit, but smartphone photos for personal use are okay.[1][2][3] I have not located an official copy of the current regulations, or how these regulations affect publication or reuse of photos and videos taken in Egypt. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:37, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Just my two sense but the whole Category:Streets on the Isle of Wight thing sounds weird. Really, the whole "on" thing in general does. It might work for a small island with only a few streets that isn't an official administrative boundary, or something like a hill, but the Isle of Wight is a county and it has multiple streets. No other county level category tree has "on" for the child categories. Even Category:Streets on the Isle of Wight is the child category of Category:Streets in England by county. There's also already other "in" categories for Isles. For instance [["Category:Roads in the Isle of Man, Category:Roads in Anglesey Etc. Etc. So "on" doesn't seem to follow any precedent or established naming practices. At the end of the day though the streets aren't "on the Isle of Wight", they are "in the county of the Isle of Wight." --Adamant1 (talk) 10:43, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
While they are in the county they are on the island, and when anyone is refering to the Isle of Wight, they are referring to the island, not the administrative county, unless they work for the council. As I say, "on the Isle of Wight" is the standard usage, in speech and in writing. Even the Counties of England template was modified long ago to take this into account. Simon Burchell (talk) 11:12, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
I am with @Simon Burchell on this. Things "in the Isle of Wight" could be underground infrastructure, but stuff on the surface is on the island. Comparatively, we have streets in the borough of Manhattan, but on Manhattan Island. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me14:25, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Anyone who is familiar with commons would realise that the whole matter has already been considered and decided upon. To the extent that the template has been changed to accommodate this. Unilaterally changing this is just inconsiderate of others and disrespectful of the community here. Blackcat is a problematic admin with a string of edit conflicts and admin tool abuses to his name, also he doesn't have the command and comprehension of English that he claims to have. Best just to repair the category and if the problem admin continues to create an issue report him at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problemsOxyman (talk) 14:22, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Apart the pointless things from the user above, I just wish to point out that @Green Giant: , who's a native speaker of English, on that topic, suggested here that he was prone to the form "In". Since he's a native speaker I trust him. So, what's the correct form then? - Blackcat14:33, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
A single post from one user on your very own talkpage shouldn't overturn a decided upon consensus this should be obvious to any respectful user here and pointing out that you are a problematic admin is not a pointless thing but valuable contextual information to comprehend your behaviour. Oxyman (talk) 14:41, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
I am also a native speaker, and live close to the Isle of Wight. The correct form is "on the Isle of Wight". Islanders say "on the Isle of Wight", the council says "on the Isle of Wight", everyone in my region says "on the Isle of Wight".
In addition to the above mentioned categories, the following have also been moved from their original names:
@Simon Burchell: , maybe I haven't been clear. To me, doesn't matter the form. I had that information and acted accordingly. If from discussion emerges consensus for "on", I'm the first to change all in "on" the isle of Wight. -- Blackcat14:48, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
I lean toward "in".
A Beatles song ("When I'm 64") uses "in the Isle of Wight", so it is apparently reasonably colloquial.
With respect, the Beatles are from Liverpool, in the north, and their English usage is different. I would offer that an attempt to "regularise" the English language is a futile and thankless task. English is an irregular language with many idiosyncrasies. The consensus is already that usage should be "on the Isle of Wight". Simon Burchell (talk) 14:56, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Isle of Wight resident here. We say "on the Isle of Wight". And by we I mean everyone - absolutely everyone. Having lived here continuously almost my entire life the only times I've seen "in" used are by the occasional business who use standardised signs and don't take the island's more unique status into consideration. Being completely honest coming over here and using the phrase "in the Isle of Wight" would get you laughed out the room by locals. Some great photos of the island by the way, Simon. Editor5807speak00:34, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
For me I guess this comes down to if the names of categories should follow the local conventions of a small minority of Commons editor who attend local city counsel meetings and think "on" is fine because that's how city counsel members phrase it, or should the category names follow how most everyone else in the English speaking world speaks and 99% of the categories are already named. This is a global project after all and the names of categories are supposed to follow the most common usage. I assume that doesn't mean "the most common usage in my neighborhood" or whatever either. Otherwise we could play the "lets follow hyper local naming conventions" game all day until categories are essentially useless out of just being somewhere to dump random files.
Personally as someone not from the Isle of Wright I would never think to do a search for something like "sports on the Isle of Wight." It's just not that type of place. Chalk it up to me being a speaker of American English or whatever, but the ability of people who don't speak a hyper specific form of British English where it's "Sports on the Isle of Wight" still need to be able to find what they are looking for. That isn't served well by disregarding how the rest of the world outside of the Isle of Wight speaks. --Adamant1 (talk) 03:33, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
@Multichill: That's why I'm listening to what English-speaking people have to say on the topic. But is there a clear consensus leaning towards either form? -- Blackcat22:12, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
there is a clear and established consensus I'd hardly call the outcome of a discussion on a random administrator board that had less participants then this does "a clear and established discussion." Especially considering there are as many people in this discussion that want the categories to be "in" then there was in that discussion who thought it should be "on." Personally, I see no reason Blackcat should have to "form the new consensus" about it when there wasn't a formal process done to "form a consensus" in the first place. --Adamant1 (talk) 20:10, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
A consensus is a consensus. I find it strange how you want to belittle a previous consensus as invalid just because it disagrees with your current opinion. A consensus of any scale or quality remains valid until a new consensus is formed. Yes, this current discussion is of a larger scale but it is a logical fallacy to try to link it to Blackcat's actions before the discussion started. My point is solely that when conducting a large scale renaming of an existing set of categories, it is best to consult a group of editors and not rely on the personal opinion of an individual editor. This is especially important where you are working in a language where you have a limited grasp of nuance. Have the discussion, form a new consensus and then act. From Hill To Shore (talk) 06:41, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
It wasn't a consensus though. At least not in any way that matters. In no way am I belittling anyone or anything by saying so, but all that happened was someone asked an admin to move all the categories and they did. It's a pretty routine occurrence. 99% of the time when someone asks an admin to move something they just do it and their actions don't reflect the wishes of the broader consensus in any way, shape, or form. Claiming I'm somehow belittling anything by saying so really comes off like a bad faithed strawman. We can disagree about what makes something without you needlessly disparaging me about it.
That said, I don't mind there being a wider discussion about it, we are having one here, but it's not like you can't make the same ridiculous gripe about how people who think it should be "in" just have a limited grasp of the nuances of English no matter where or how the discussion ultimately takes place. I can almost guarantee that if no who thinks it should be "on" has a better argument then that now they aren't going to have one later. So why waste everyone's time with it? Really, we should just discount the whole "limited grasp of nuance" thing as derogatory, irrelevant nonsense on it's face and be done with this since that's literally all you seem to have. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:54, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
I am a professional writer and commentator on the Isle of Wight. This discussion is a not a new one. It is a valid discussion to have albeit the tone has not always been positive, so I'm grateful to Simon Burchell for bringing the point up. Both positions have some merit and neither are wrong. Nonetheless consistency does require choosing one or the other form. It is true that most writers on, or familiar with, the Island would use the 'on' form and that is a characteristic of the way language is used for this particular location. But to be consistent with other locations it is often found as 'in' when used by those from elsewhere. I note that Google Trends shows 'on' as a more popular form, and has done so consistently for a long time. Using the geographical tools one can infer that the 'in' form has an association with Isle of Wight County, Virginia (which is not an island). Whereas in the UK the 'on' form is always dominant. It seems unlikely that we will form a consensus on this issue as there are clearly two current usages, both correct. However I see no reason that the less popular and less distinctive 'in' form should displace the 'on' form, and unless there is a demonstrable benefit from doing so I would not support changing these categories, or any others, to 'in'. Naturenet (talk) 09:55, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
obviously, these two rules are true: 1. use "on" for an island; 2. use "in" for an administrative division.
then comes a problem: what if the name of an administrative division contains the word "island"?
(when the word doesnt contain "island", e.g. iceland (island), taiwan (island), nobody disputes the use of "in". when an island is not an administrative division by itself (e.g. some of these w:List_of_islands_by_area#Islands), most people would happily use "on", i assume?)
@Wouterhagens: I don't know about detecting "no description", but you can use the alphabetic Table of Contents to skip past the "-i---i-" files, then take one "previous page" to start immediately after them on the lower part of this page. - Jmabel ! talk18:11, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, that helps to skip large amounts of files that I don't think need a category anymore because they are already in hidden categories. Wouter (talk) 19:34, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
What are the rules guiding the uploads of screenshots from films on Commons for use on Wikipedia? Production companies and studios release trailers and still shots as part of their promotion to be widely used. Can we upload screenshots of these to Commons to give film related articles more visual appeal to readers? Danidamiobi (talk) 14:33, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Some older U.S. stills and trailers were released without copyright notice or registration back when that was required for copyright, and those were immediately in the public domain. However, this only applies to those few and, frankly, if you are not expert in the area you are unlikely to identify ones that haven't already been added. - Jmabel ! talk15:22, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
1. How about personalities’ Instagram videos. How can they be repurposed on Wikipedia? i.e If Lupita Nyong’o posts a video of her making comments (for example with the Smithsonian Institution), can we use it?
2. How about that videos production companies/studios/media companies and other organizations make available? e.g. this provided with Chimanda.
3. Can I use images from websites released by a media company by adding the company as author and add the URL of the website I got it from as a source with CC BY-ND 4.0. I see it done here with [[5]]. Can I use the first image on this New York Times article on Genevieve Nnaji's article and cite Netflix as author and New York Times as source?
4. Is this instance of a screenshot from a movie scene used on Genevieve Nnaji's article valid?
@Danidamiobi: Most likely none of that can be used on Commons. File:Black Panther Wakanda Forever logo.png is too simple to copyright, which is why we can have it: its simplicity (just typography) places it in the {{Public domain}}, although you will note that it has a warning that it is trademarked.
We do not accept NC or ND licenses. Also, you cannot offer/introduce any license on copyrighted material where you are not the copyright holder. Only the copyright holder can issue a license.
I understand your answer on copyrights. Can I simply upload a material that is not copyrighted or restricted at the source page, cite the source page and author and indicate that it's not my work? Danidamiobi (talk) 14:46, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Thank you to everyone who participated in the 2022 Board of Trustees election process. Your participation helps seat the trustees the community seeks on the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.
These are the preliminary results of the 2022 Board of Trustees election:
You may see more information about the Results and Statistics of this Board election.
The Board will complete their review of the most voted candidates, including conducting background checks. The Board plans to appoint new trustees at their meeting in December.
Best,
Movement Strategy and Governance
This message was sent on behalf of the Board Selection Task Force and the Elections Committee.
The Wikimedia sound logo contest launched last week and we have been positively surprised with the global response received. As of September 21 @ 17:00 UTC, there were 615 submissions from 94 countries, all of them diligently screened by a small team of dedicated volunteers. With so much enthusiasm and still 3.5 weeks to go, we are happy to invite you to listen in. In order to preserve the anonymity of each submission and to make it all more accessible and user friendly, we will regularly share random compilations of them. Enjoy listening and many thanks to those of you who have submitted or helped spread the call.
I think the easiest way is to give the new category to an existing image and then click on the red link. This makes sense to me because an empty category is usually useless. -- Andreas Stiasny (talk) 17:44, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Commons is a media repository, not a newspaper archive. Files that contain mostly text are not really our concern unless they are of particular use for one of our sister projects. It's a bit of a grey area. We do have scans of selected old books that serve as basis for getting them into Wikisource, but I would advise against batch uploading piles of newspaper scans. See also Commons:Project_scope#PDF_and_DjVu_formats. El Grafo (talk) 07:36, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Quite clearly stated, Wikimedia Commons is a free media repository, we accept PDF when they are of potential use on other projects (e.g. scans for Wikisource). PierreSelim (talk) 14:53, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
IMO this is in scope for Commons. However please take care to insert complete information (content description, date, author, source, etc.) at least in the original langage (Chinese here) and at least a summary in English. Thanks, Yann (talk) 19:01, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Lelo Sejean
Hi, I have found that 3 different accounts uploaded low quality images of this football player. They were tagged as CSD F10, and deleted by Fitindia (then restored), Túrelio and I. This guy has only 3,520 results on Google Search, but has already a WD entry. So either Google failed to report about a notable football player, or we have a team (read socks) trying to promote him. Any idea? Yann (talk) 14:56, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
As you might know, for the last 6 years, we have been documenting butterfly taxons endemic to eastern and north-eastern part of India through the Wiki Loves Butterfly project. Our aim has been to increase the amount of free license materials along with enrichment of related content on different Wikimedia sites. Our project was previously supported by 4 Rapid Grants and currently the fifth phase is running under the Project Grants.
Since the beginning of the project in 2016, we have gained a considerable amount of expertise, maturity and confidence to successfully plan and execute field-documentations and expand our area of activity in remote deep forests of north-east India. We are now applying for the Wikimedia Community Fund so that we can expand our activities in our next phase to bring more quantity and quality to the topic.
Hi everyone, happy to share a second batch of sound logo submission with you – enjoy listening. As well, this is a reminder that on Thursday September 29, 15:00-16:00 UTC, we'll be having a Music Production Workshop and drop-in clinic with our expert partner MassiveMusic. Please join to ask questions and discuss topics that will help you with your sound logo submission.
Is it OK to upload them here (which would enable to request deletion at OSM Wiki). Is it necessary to do something extra? Is such action welcome/unwelcome?
@Mateusz Konieczny: I've certainly seen other cases where we've imported files from other, non-Wikimedia, wikis. I think it would be helpful to ensure that an archive site like https://web.archive.org has a copy of each file page on the OSM Wiki before it is deleted. You might try tagging the images with {{LicenseReview}} to ask that a trusted user cross-check the licence, though last time I looked the licence review queue was enormous.
Slightly to my surprise, CommonsHelper more or less works when pointed at the OSM Wiki (enter "wiki" and "openstreetmap" in the two boxes to form the domain name). If nothing else this shows our usual way to preserve the original upload log from the source wiki. --bjh21 (talk) 15:24, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
I have tried to find my own answer, but have read some much, I can hardly parse it all: I work for a state gov't agency in Texas(US). If I upload an image of a sign/graphic that includes that agency's logo, what do I attach to show it is a gov't logo?--Buddpaul (talk) 15:04, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Do you know whether the logo is still copyrighted? If it is, and if it's at all prominent in the picture, we may not be able to have that image on Commons. - Jmabel ! talk21:44, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
after death of mahsa amin, a 22 years old iranian girl. i desided to create a typography of her portrait. but because she died young i finished it incomplete and wrote it as a sentence, like this artwork: I Can See the Whole Room...and There's Nobody in It!
dose my upload violate any Wikimedia rule and should be deleted? i use proper categories for it.
i used picture of her that can be found in for example nytimes, guardian , and guardian mentioned that image source is twitter. and in twitter post they mentioned that image is from her Instagram account. almose all news agencies used that photo. Roxjor (talk) 18:41, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Ok. Then there is probably a problem with copyright. Images on Twitter are not free and usage by newspapers has no meaning wrt copyright. Your image might be a derivative work. However, to judge whether or not a permission by the original photographer is required needs an evaluation by users experienced with artworks (I am not). You may bypass this by tracking down the true photographer, which might not be easy wrt the political situation in Iran. But, if you are able to do so, you might ask him/her directly whether he/she allows to use said photography for the creation of your artwork (needs confirmation by sending an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (OTRS). --Túrelio (talk) 18:59, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
guys, i found the source of image, the newyork times mentioned the source is iranwire.com, the family of girl gave that photo to iran wire. i :::::emailed them (however i don't know my art is derivative and need permission or not?): hello,
""A picture of Mahsa Amini provided to Iran Wire by her family. The authorities have said she died of heart failure; her family say she had been in :::::good health."". about copyright of your upload do you give us premission to use this derivitative version on commons.wikimedio.org or no? if no :::::please email me and if yes pleas email : permissions-commons@wikimedia.org
As of now, there isn't anywhere where this is being used on Wikipedia and I don't see why it would be used on Wikipedia anyways. The fact that an anonymous editor created an image and wants it publicized (see this discussion) doesn't mean it's appropriate for Commons to host. It is for all intends and purpose COM:SPAM, no matter how sincere the uploader is creating the work. Still, I don't see a point in deleting it at the moment. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 21:24, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
hello, it's a protest art. ([6]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protest_art). i am iranian and worry about what happing in my country. right now we are against iranian regime. i designed this artwork. i want they use it. every artist like others use his artworks. i just told other people in discussion may my art useful for you. but my main propose is to share it freely for all people. it's a typography, and a protest art, it is useful. i am pretty sure 98% of 86 millions media uploaded on commons not used anywhere on meta projects. i deleted my acconut years ago. i'm not an active wikipedian right now. but if it's not propre for commons or has copyright problem, please request for delet it. i try to upload it another host or keep it in my pc as a part of my digital arts. i can't use my real ip or name because i'm worry about going to prison. more than 40 iranian killed in past 10 days by iranian police and thousands gone to jail. Roxjor (talk) 21:37, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Is there any such thing as the power to close and delete without the full sysop powers and responsibilities? ~ R.T.G07:03, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Not that I'm aware of. Something like a deletion-only admin has been discussed intensely at least once in the past, though. --El Grafo (talk) 07:11, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Some projects has 'eliminators', users that only have the power to delete (or restore) files. I don't know if this proposal was discussed here. Érico(talk)23:30, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
I've given it a low level of protection: 6 months of requiring that users who edit it be autoconfirmed. If another admin feels something stronger is in order, feel free. - Jmabel ! talk14:37, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
Can I make templates related to opium poppies and cannabis?
Opium poppy and cannabis are legal or illegal in different countries.
For example, the cultivation of opium poppies in South Korea is strictly prohibited, but the cultivation of opium poppies in the United Kingdom is legal except where opium is not harvested.
Similarly, cannabis is legal in Thailand, whereas in South Korea only authorized persons are allowed to harvest seeds for edible purposes or stems for textile purposes.
These templates are used for files containing opium poppies and cannabis, indicating whether opium poppies and cannabis are legal in different countries.
So, can I make templates related to opium poppies and cannabis?
@Ox1997cow: As far as I know none of our files actually contains opium poppies or cannabis. At most they contain images (or maybe sounds) of those plants, and those images and sounds are not restricted even in places where the plants are. So I can't see any reason why we'd need these templates. Commons isn't here to provide legal advice on everything represented in our files: at most we should comment on how the files can be re-used. bjh21 (talk) 16:18, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
However, opium poppies are sometimes grown secretly in countries where cultivation is illegal because of their pretty flowers. See example. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 (All five cases are photos taken in South Korea, where cultivation is strictly prohibited.) Ox1997cow (talk) 16:23, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
Sorry. It's an error. The correct sentense is this: I think it's useful to warn a copycat crime growing opium poppies. Ox1997cow (talk) 01:20, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
The Pérez Art Museum Miami (PAMM) is seeking a creative and driven Wikipedian In Residence (WIR) to improve coverage of their collections on Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons, and Wikidata. PAMM is a modern and contemporary art museum dedicated to collecting and exhibiting international art of the 20th and 21st centuries.
The WIR would be helping PAMM establish Wikipedia programming institution-wide. The Wikipedian In Residence will work closely with the digital team at PAMM with access to curators and staff for support and training.
On Wikidata, the WIR will add structured data and expand items about painting objects, artists, collections, installations, exhibits, and events. On Wikimedia Commons, photos of living artists will be taken and added with appropriate categorization. On Wikipedia, the WIR will improve articles about PAMM's artists, their key collections, and the notable art movements of which they are a part. The WIR will also engage community through edit-a-thons, virtual events, and staff trainings.
They WIR will have a dedicated, expert strategic advisor helping them onboard into the role and plan their activities with weekly check-ins and ongoing support.
A good candidate will have some (but not necessarily all) of the desired skills and experience. We encourage a diversity of candidates to apply even if your resume doesn't meet every qualification.
Hi @JWilz12345! Sorry for the delay in responding. PAMM is a modern and contemporary museum, so many of their works would not be eligible for uploading to Commons. The institution understands this and wants to focus on other aspects of their collection, such as images of the artists themselves, which they would arrange and release under an open license. Ocaasi (talk) 18:20, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi @Danidamiobi! This position is open to remote applicants. Those who can contribute to Spanish Wikipedia as well as English, and/or travel occasionally to South Florida will be given preference. If you're interested, do a quick application with just a resume and cover letter (and skip the rest of the questions). Ocaasi (talk) 18:20, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 09:17, 6 September 2022 (UTC) 
Note: The proposal is now live at "Commons:Village pump/Proposals.
17:28, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Frank_W._Benson_-_Against_the_Sky,_circa_1910_-_AI_upscaled.png){kind=link}
![[3]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:China_emperors_summer_palace_closeup_6_increased_in_resolution_by_4X_using_Topaz_Gigapixel_AI_(50949723386).jpg){kind=link}
![[4]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Masha_Bruskin_(1924-1941)_(crop)_(Remini_enhanced).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[5]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Black_Panther_Wakanda_Forever_logo.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Question The museum is apparently located in Miami, the United States. The United States has no freedom of panorama for free uses of non-architecture public art still under sculptors' or muralists' copyrights. Are all works in the museum made by long-deceased artists (dead for more than 70 years)? If not all, is the museum the current patrimonial rights holder of artists' copyrights over more recent works? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:14, 4 October 2022 (UTC)