User talk:Dcoetzee

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

Archives:

Contents

A kitten for you![edit]

Kitten in a helmet.jpg

I just saw your wonderful initiative at Commons:Equipment exchange. I'll upgrade my equipment soon, and I was wondering what to do with my old body and lenses. Thanks for this inspiring idea.

Jastrow (Λέγετε) 18:34, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Just a simple discrete "Bravo". --Foroa (talk) 18:46, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you! It'll be great to see others getting equipment to free content contributors who need them too. Remember to ping COM:VP if you do, I found that was necessary to attract sufficient interest. Dcoetzee (talk) 00:10, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Tougher kitten for you[edit]

Cat guarding the beer fridge.jpg
A full size kitten that is tough enough to guard a beer fridge from the dogs. Ditto above.--Canoe1967 (talk) 00:19, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you! Dcoetzee (talk) 00:55, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

You are very welcome.

--Canoe1967 (talk) 05:36, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Commons fair use upload bot, section 2[edit]

Just a simple request — when you have the bot upload to en:wp, would you please tell it not to copy any deletion templates? Because {{delete}} over there is a redirect to en:'s equivalent of {{Speedydelete}}, any images that it uploads are immediately tagged for speedy deletion with the DR's reasoning becoming the (just about always) invalid rationale for speedy deletion over there. Nyttend (talk) 14:06, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Done. However note that fair use delete shouldn't generally be applied during an unresolved deletion request. Dcoetzee (talk) 15:27, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Commons_fair_use_upload_bot[edit]

Continuing the talk here (User_talk:Dcoetzee/Archive_2012-07-27#Commons_fair_use_upload_bot), can you please add support to ml.wikipedia for this bot? --Sreejith K (talk) 21:32, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you![edit]

Commons barnstar.png The Commons Barnstar
For all the images you've uploaded from NPG, especially the ones of writers and poets. I've been adding these to articles and downloading copies for myself for a couple years now, so I figured it was time to give you a quick thanks. INeverCry 00:06, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
No problem! It's people like you that make the legal risk worthwhile. :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 04:45, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

File:Bendix Trophy.jpg[edit]

Hi, I was unaware this was up for deletion, or I would have spoken before. The image was taken by a Wikipedia editor at the Smithsonian, IIRC, and released into PD by him. There can be no question of this being copyrighted by the race owners, as it is a photograph taken of a publicly displayed object of historical significance. This would even qualify were it under fair use, as the article is now completely without images. Please advise, can this be undeleted, or is a community discussion necessary? KillerChihuahua (talk) 06:49, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi, the issue was not with the photograph, which was released under a free license, but with the trophy itself which may have been a copyrighted sculpture, if copyright was registered and renewed for it. In case you want to re-upload it to English Wikipedia as a fair use candidate let me know, but you'll have to be prepared to write a fair use rationale. Dcoetzee (talk) 06:57, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Commons fair use upload bot[edit]

So I just noticed en:File:RBHSWildlogo - from Commons.png which was transferred over to enwiki with the {{copyvio}} template intact, which is used there for text copyvios and doesn't really apply to something that's being considered for fair use to begin with. Maybe the bot should just cut that template out when it transfers it? VernoWhitney (talk) 02:04, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Done! Dcoetzee (talk) 20:12, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! VernoWhitney (talk) 13:12, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Fair use bot[edit]

There is a question in Administrators Noticeboard on how soon can we get this bot support more projects. Here is the link to the discussion. Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#PD-India. Can you share your thoughts there? --Sreejith K (talk) 21:07, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I would like to know why you are requesting deletion on my photo[edit]

I posted over on the request for deletion page at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Google_Cr-48.jpg , but I am wondering why you want to delete my photo. I took it myself on my own desk at home, and i'm just using it for a userbox on my Wikipedia page. Please reconsider. Thanks, and have a great day/night.--Nyswimmer (talk) 00:24, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the delayed response. See the deletion request page- I think Mattbuck explained well. Dcoetzee (talk) 18:07, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Google art project extension[edit]

Good evening. Dear Dcoetzee, I will truly and deeply respect you for the great work you are doing - propagandiruete world culture to the masses. I ask for my importunity, but would very much like you to continue the work started once you have laid out the case and new collections of images from the Google art project. I and all who are interested in art will be very grateful. Please write whether to wait for the new collection in the pages wikimedia?

Hi, thanks for the reminder. I'm just a bit busy but I'll get to it as soon as I can. :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 21:54, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

License discussion[edit]

Sorry, I didn't know you are getting frustrated. Thanks for your input so far, and would appreciate it if you could continue giving input. --Eternal-Entropy (talk) 19:59, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

C2RMF images[edit]

Hello,

How did you download the images for Category:High-resolution images from C2RMF? I ask because I found [1], but I could only get this size with the API, and uploaded it here.

Thank you. InverseHypercube 04:51, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi InverseHypercube. I wrote a program to do this which retrieves a large set of tiles and then stitches them together. I'm retrieving the image you gave now, but I'm surprised because it wasn't listed in their gallery of high-resolution works. Could you point me to a more complete list of high-resolution works hosted on C2RMF's site? I would like to get them all. Thanks! Dcoetzee (talk) 10:06, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
Ah, that's how. Have you considered posting the source so other people can operate it in the future? That's what I did for a very similar program of mine.
I just found that image here. By Googling "http://merovingio.c2rmf.cnrs.fr/iipimage/showcase/*" I also found [2] and [3]. [4], [5], [6], and [7] have the infrared reflectographs; maybe those could be uploaded too? InverseHypercube 01:05, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
I will post source, although there are two halves to the program, one which runs in Windows to retrieve tiles and one which runs in Linux to assemble tiles, which makes it a bit awkward. There is the risk though that they may react by trying to prevent my program from working (C2RMF seems less concerned with this than NPG). I had no idea you could use wildcards in Google URL searches! I am reluctant to upload the infrared or xray photographs (or even raking light photographs) because I have no idea whether those are in the public domain - there is no case law concerning such things. It'd be helpful if I could ask you to upload low-res versions of the (normal visible light) ones you linked above, so that I can upload over them and save the trouble of filling out an artwork template. :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 04:17, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Sounds good. I will do so. InverseHypercube 05:01, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
By the way, you can use wildcards in any Google search. I only found out about this recently; it's very useful! InverseHypercube 05:10, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, there was only one new one. Here it is: File:Deposition of Christ C2RMF.jpg. InverseHypercube 05:37, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

File:Block matrix multiplication.svg[edit]

If it's ok I fixed/cleaned the square root into a shape (rather than two symbols), regrouped the shapes/text for (hopefully) easier editing in the future (dots are one group, everything else is the background), and rotated the triple-dots (the "...") vertical and 45 degrees rather than using additional characters, which may appear as a white box.

I didn't change anything else - your originality remains intact!

Thanks very much for uploading this, especially adding it to matrix multiplication! Best, Maschen (talk) 07:56, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! I couldn't figure out how to do those things and appreciate your edits. Dcoetzee (talk) 09:14, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Kindness Barnstar Hires.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
For donating your D300 to another user. Pine 20:00, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Thank you :-) I'm already happy to see the works they're producing, so well worth it. Dcoetzee (talk) 09:17, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Question[edit]

Hi Derrick. Can you take a quick look at this image I just uploaded: File:Ebenezer Elliott 2.jpg? The image is obviously pd-old as the subject died in 1849 and the site states c1800 for the date of the painting, but because of the UK copyright stuff in the EXIF, I wonder if there's anything more I should do by way of tags etc? Thanks for your time. INeverCry 20:47, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I added the correct tags, see the file description page history. Dcoetzee (talk) 09:20, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. I'll use that for future reference. INeverCry 18:27, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Commons_fair_use_upload_bot doesn't seem to upload[edit]

Gday Dcoetzee. Wondering about Commons fair use upload bot as it says that it has relocated the last few files to the required wikis, yet when I go to enWS and enWP, I cannot see the files at the respective wikis, and these wikis point to the Commons files. Would you mind having a look and seeing what is the issue. Thx.

It's currently blocked on the English Wikipedia (due to a combination of poor documentation and expired approval). I have a new bot request on file at en:Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/Commons_fair_use_upload_bot_2 but it may take some time. It should be working on Wikisource unless it was blocked there too - I didn't receive a talk page notice or anything there. Dcoetzee (talk) 09:17, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
The cupboard is bare s:en:Special:Contributions/Commons fair use upload bot, and no blocks, we are more robust than that anyway. <sigh> for enWP.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:54, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Okay if it's not blocked on Wikisource it might be a bug in the current code, I can investigate that when I have a chance. Dcoetzee (talk) 15:22, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
FYI Commons fair use upload bot is now unblocked on En. Thanks for your encouragement in accelerating things. Dcoetzee (talk) 15:14, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Very welcome. I hate it when we get so wrapped up in the minutiæ process and perfection that we fail the reality check.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:45, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Any progress? Any success?  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:09, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
It's enabled now, on an indefinite trial. Feel free to use it. Dcoetzee (talk) 17:27, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Not that dashed enWP! <eyeroll> you were going to look why it wasn't working to more important sites like English Wikisource, especially as local admins have a tendency to delete DjVu files used for transcriptions and break whole works in a very ugly way.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:37, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Special:Contributions/Commons_fair_use_upload_bot for the OGV file has failed at s:Special:Contributions/Commons_fair_use_upload_bot, so it is still not uploading to enWS. :-(  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:41, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
I'll investigate when I have an opportunity but I'm super busy. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:48, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
PING. Any success on helping all the sister wikis utilise this feature? It would be nice if it worked beyond enWP.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:30, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Billinghurst, I investigated and there was no problem with the bot other than its documentation. Works that are intended to be transferred due to being PD in the US but not the source country must not be tagged {{Fair use delete}}, but instead be tagged {{PD-US-1923-abroad-delete}}. Since Wikisource doesn't accept fair use uploads, it was not uploading files labelled {{Fair use delete}} to there. I've updated the user page with these instructions - hope this helps. Dcoetzee (talk) 04:12, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Joseph Grimaldi[edit]

Hi there, I see you have uploaded the lede image to the above and wanted to ask a question. I plan to take the article to FAC in the next few weeks and I'm just going through all the images. I note a possible issue with the source and wondered if you could take a look for me. There seems to be a tag on it which tells me it may or may not be copyright. I do hope not as I think the image is great and would love to carry on using it. All the best! Cassianto (talk) 20:55, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

The image is in the public domain in the United States. The tag relates to the National Portrait Gallery dispute. See en:National Portrait Gallery and Wikimedia Foundation copyright dispute. Commons would not host an image which you cannot use. Dcoetzee (talk) 15:04, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
Many thanks! -- Cassianto (talk) 22:44, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Frame[edit]

Hello Dcoetzee,

Your bot uploaded this, but by looking at it I can't be sure if it's a true frame that must be cropped, or a trompe l'oeil which is part of the painting. What do you think?--- Darwin Ahoy! 14:24, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Darwin, there are some cracks and flakes of wood near the top of the frame suggesting it is a real-life frame rather than a painting. As such I've marked the image with {{non-free frame}}. Dcoetzee (talk) 06:48, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. :) --- Darwin Ahoy! 09:30, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

El Lissitzky paintings (Colecção Berardo)[edit]

Hello Dcoetzee, I was wondering if your bot will upload the El Lissitzky works at Colecção Berardo? There are more works by Liubov Sergeievna Popova which are PD-1923, besides the one it uploaded. Will it upload everything at some point? Thanks, --- Darwin Ahoy! 03:08, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

By default I only upload works that the bot can identify as freely licensed - many works in that collection require manual review due either to incomplete information or complex licensing situations. However I'll take a look at them now and get as many as possible up. Note that in the case of Liubov Sergeievna Popova, I actually can upload works published after 1923, because he died more than 70 years before 1996, the URAA date. Dcoetzee (talk) 03:11, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
(Popova is a she ;) ) There's no need to hurry them, I was only curious because it is (sadly) the only Portuguese Museum in that project. BTW, all Portuguese painters who died before 1942 are URAA-free, we are exempt from that thing for the time being. Unfortunately there seems to be very few of them there, I've only found Amadeo Souza-Cardozo to the moment...--- Darwin Ahoy! 03:29, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
(Oops!) I see now, Portugal had 50 pma on the URAA date, so it doesn't apply to authors who died before 1946 (so all works PD in Portugal are currently PD in US too). I'm about to go back and make sure I get all the Portuguese works up that I can from that collection. Dcoetzee (talk) 03:45, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes, we are safe until 1946 (and until 1971 for photos, which only had 25 years protection after creation at the URAA date). Actually, if it's not asking too much, there is a painting there at Google Art Project on which I have a special interest - The Island of Madeira, by John Glover. The entire collection by this artist can be uploaded, indeed, since he died in 1849. Thank you very much for the excellent work you have done with Google Art Project, it's really amazing. Do you need help with anything there? Like manual review of some collections? I'll do some categorization as well, I noticed that a lot of them are still uncategorised.--- Darwin Ahoy! 03:53, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
I've now uploaded all possible works from Colecção Berardo and the Glover work is at File:John Glover - The Island of Madeira - Google Art Project.jpg (I'll get his other works later). Categorization would be welcome - in my experience the easiest way to do categorization quickly is to find works that already have other versions at Commons and then copy categories from them (and also link them in the commons_other_works field). I'm also looking for images that have existing inferior versions with a large number of uses, so that I can replace them with my global image replace tool, and start getting the new GAP images into active use. License review isn't needed yet because I'm still uploading a lot of works that are very clearly in the public domain at this time, but there will be work to do later in that area. Thanks for your offers! Dcoetzee (talk) 04:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much! About the replacements, I've initially done them with the Amadeo de Souza-Cardoso paintings but then I realized that the new versions, while incredibly better in quality at close view, in thumbnail view are not as bright as the older, less quality versions. It could probably be fixed by fiddling with curves and levels in GIMP, but I'm afraid to do that with those new versions (even uploading as different versions) since perhaps they have the actual true colours of the paintwork. --- Darwin Ahoy! 15:36, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Although the Google Art Project scans tend to be very accurate, I wouldn't hesitate to upload level-adjusted versions under a different filename to make them more clearly visible in articles. Level adjusting doesn't alter hues, and if done correctly only changes how the range of values maps to screen values, similar to adjusting the exposure of a photograph, rather than changing the painting. I would definitely do this where it's needed to replace existing images while achieving similar utility. Dcoetzee (talk) 17:33, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Thank you again for that information, I didn't knew that. I generally use the Gimp curves instead of levels because it is more precise, but I suppose it is the same. One last question, if you do not mind: Is Google Art Project a work in progress? Are they continuously adding new artworks? if yes, are you planning to keep up with the uploads? Thanks, --- Darwin Ahoy! 00:22, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
(Curves is fine too.) So far, I have no evidence that they have been adding new works, but I've only been watching them over a short time scale. They added a huge number of works last March or so, but I don't know if they've been gradually adding more. If they do, I have all the necessary tools to keep up with them, but it will require some modifications to invalidate some of my cached files. Dealing with the 32000 already present will be enough to keep me busy for a while. :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 07:08, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Bot updates[edit]

Hi, it would be nice if:

  • the bot does not undo our correction works as in this cat
  • uses proper disambiguation or in other words, the same name as the artist category name
  • uses standard sort keying as in other categories (now artists are sorted according to their first name)

Thank you. --Foroa (talk) 06:25, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

I've fixed the bug with undoing changes to categories. I believe it would be undesirable to use the same name as the artist category name, in case there are issues due to multiple artists with the same name (for example, if it uploads a work by John Doe the Elder, attributed to "John Doe", and marks it as by John Doe the Younger because Category:John_Doe redirects to Category:John Doe the Younger, for example because they are more well-known, that would be incorrect). However I'm happy to assist in renaming categories. It is also undesirable in general to sort artists according to their last name, as in some cultures the surname comes first, and the bot is unable to distinguish these cases - humans are free to add sort keys in cases where they are valid. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:43, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Oops, bug wasn't fixed, is actually fixed now. Dcoetzee (talk) 04:27, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
99 % of people sorts on Commons are surname first, while surnames are more similar in many languages, first names vary more from language to language. I guess that you defend your position primarily because other sorts would be a significant complication for your bot. --Foroa (talk) 05:57, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Not at all, this would be quite trivial to do. I'm just very reluctant to have the bot making guesses regarding what the correct sort key should be. In fact, I just encountered a case where it would have considerably complicated the correct merging of categories if I had done the sortkey you suggested (see Category:Google Art Project works by Francisco de Goya y Lucientes and its redirects). I might consider renaming and redoing the sort keys at a later time after the artist categories on them have been validated - I could just copy the sort keys from the artist categories at that time. Dcoetzee (talk) 06:01, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Can you show me two international categories where people are not sorted to their surname ? --Foroa (talk) 06:20, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
The bigger issue for me is that many works in the Google Art Project database include other information in the artist name field, such as date of birth, nationality, title, whatever. Some artists conventionally have surnames omitted, like Michelangelo, while others do not. It would be very challenging to reliably identify surnames for the purpose of sortkeys. Like I said, I will later on run a bot pass that will copy sort keys from the artist categories that these categories are included in, after they have been validated to some extent by human review. Dcoetzee (talk) 06:30, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
I apologize for sticking my nose in your business, but many of the old Portuguese painters should not be sorted by surname, and others are known by a double surname. Rafael Bordalo Pinheiro, Vieira Lusitano, Garcia Fernandes, Vieira Portuense, Amadeo de Souza Cardoso, and many others. At least in the case of the Portuguese, it really has to have human review. --- Darwin Ahoy! 00:14, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Commons Archive[edit]

I tried to upload an NEF at the Commons Archive, but it wouldn't work. It's not that it fails after I click the "Upload file" button at the bottom; it doesn't even get to that step. The file path simply won't show up next to "Source filename" and is just rejected. Ironically, the only files it seems to take are regular JPEGs. Could you look into this issue? Also, could you make me an admin while you're at it? Thanks, King of ♠ 08:19, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

It seems to be a little buggy, I seem to have to put it in twice before it will upload. I'm not sure why. I'll take a look at it soon. Dcoetzee (talk) 16:34, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Trying twice does not work for me. However, I was able to find this hack: On my own computer, I renamed the .zip and .jpg and selected it in the upload form. Then I changed "Destination filename" back to a .zip. -- King of ♠ 03:23, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Sorry for the trouble - I'll investigate soon. Dcoetzee (talk) 04:11, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

GFDL[edit]

Dcoetzee,

Your comment in the Featured picture candidates GFDL discussion was picked up and seconded by several others. Currently a new proposal is being drafted at Commons:Village pump/Proposals. There have been several false starts, where Rd232 made several poorly worded proposals (IMO) and it turns out he doesn't support them anyway. So I'm working on a new draft proposal. You'll find it in the Rebooted proposal subsection beginning with the text "Proposal: The GFDL is no longer considered ..." What do you make of it as a proposal text? You might want to read the stuff Eric Möller wrote too. I want to make sure it will deal with the problems as you see them and is clear enough that a reasonable discussion can follow. Colin (talk) 12:31, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion[edit]

Karl Brullov - The Last Day of Pompeii - Google Art Project.jpg
This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Karl Brullov - The Last Day of Pompeii - Google Art Project.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Karl Brullov - The Last Day of Pompeii - Google Art Project.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Cscr-featured.svg

/FPCBot (talk) 13:04, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Google project <--> Statens Museum for Kunst-uploads[edit]

Hallo Dcoetzee, I do not know, do you think this category?. The here uploaded 158 pictures of the Statens Museum for Kunst (Copenhagen) of their corresponding pixel size of your pictures from the Google project. Greetings and thanks for the beautiful pictures --Botaurus (talk) 10:48, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

I think it's a nice category. The resolution and quality is good, it includes some sculptures (which can't be included from Google Art Project due to PD-Art restrictions). When both projects provide an image, either would be suitable for article use. For most of these, however, {{possibly-PD}} should be added, since many of them are in the public domain in the United States and other PD-Art nations. Dcoetzee (talk) 11:00, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
That may be. Most are old PD-100. What I mean, This is to duplicate and therefore unnecessary uploads - just in case you have not already uploaded all the relevant pictures. --Botaurus (talk) 11:05, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
It would be relatively difficult for me to figure out which images these are and exclude them from the upload. It's easier to delete and redirect the copies later on. Additionally, the new description page may contain some metadata worth merging. Dcoetzee (talk) 11:58, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

google art uploads[edit]

I like the bot's uploads and have been categorizing some. I've noticed a couple of issues:

FYI... Boo-Boo Baroo (talk) 16:37, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Occasionally 3D objects slip through because GAP mislabels them as having object type "painting," but this should be pretty rare. I usually keep an eye out for these in post-upload manual review. The mapping from medium to medium templates is set up in Template:Google Art Project medium, and I mistakenly assumed oil on panel and canvas were the same thing (fixed now). Reuploading images under the same name is due to a bug with my caching system, I'll just disable it for now. I can make it go back and reupload those under separate names. Thanks for the heads up. Dcoetzee (talk) 17:22, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

F2ComButton[edit]

Hi. Re; User:Odie5533/F2ComButton/f2com_button.user.js. I find this very useful for uploading from Flickr to Commons, but it stopped working several months ago. The creator of he script has not edited on Commons for a while and has not responded to comments on his talk page for a long time. I guess that there has been some modifications to Flickr on Commons that are not compatible with the script. Can you fix it or do you know anyone that might be able to fix it? I have also asked User talk:MGA73. - Snowmanradio (talk) 21:04, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

I tried it earlier and it didn't work for me either. I may be able to fix it but I'm swamped as it is so probably not any time soon. Dcoetzee (talk) 21:45, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Thank for your reply. Snowmanradio (talk) 10:49, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Google Art Project files descriptions[edit]

I think will be good idea to use language templates for Title/Medium/Dimensions/Current location/Notes/Source/Photographer fields. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:05, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

I already use localized templates or language templates to render almost all of these in Template:Google Art Project. They are added by the template and should not be included in the template parameters, as that would be redundant. Some of the fields do contain English (like the Source field) but you can easily fix this by editing Template:Google Art Project (I already modified the Source field to use Template:From Google Art Project which is internationalized but needs more translations). Dcoetzee (talk) 16:26, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Antoine Benoist - Louis XIV (1638 - 1715) - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

I am afraid, dear Dcoetzee, this portrait is not a two-dimensional work of art.--Thorvaldsson (talk) 14:28, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, at the time I had not yet programmed the bot to check if the file had been deleted before. It should not return. Dcoetzee (talk) 18:27, 20 October 2012 (UTC)


Category:Google Art Project works by James Abbott McNeil Whistler[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Google Art Project works by James Abbott McNeil Whistler has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

There are two cats in that nomination, resulting I think from automatic processing of errors and inconsistencies in the input dataset. Since you are running this I imagine you will know how to report this to GAP, I couldn't find any instructions for doing so. I imagine I will notice other problems, what is the best way to deal with them? Like this or otherwise? --Mirokado (talk) 00:13, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, please don't nominate the category for deletion - instead use {{catredirect}} to redirect it to the correctly spelt category (e.g. {{catredirect|Google Art Project works by James Abbott McNeill Whistler}}). Delete all content from the category description page except for the catredirect tag. Also, I have scripts to rename categories, so if you find any more of these with lots of files let me know - I've fixed several already myself. I don't believe there is any way to report errors in metadata to the Google Art Project, although I have indeed found many such errors. Dcoetzee (talk) 00:17, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response. I have withdrawn the nomination, or at any rate attempted to, and both those cats are now redirects as suggested. --Mirokado (talk) 00:47, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your help! Dcoetzee (talk) 00:52, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Fair use file move to Wikipedia[edit]

Hi Dcoetzee, can you move this file to Wikipedia for fair use? It's a copyrighted image that the uploader tagged as PD. Thanks - M0rphzone (talk) 02:25, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Category:Google Art Project works in The Royal Collection, London[edit]

Hi Dcoetzee, the place London should be deleted, because in the cat are works from all locations of the collection.

see Category:Royal Collection of the United Kingdom, http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/collection--Oursana (talk) 23:14, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Okay but other nations have royal collections as well. Do you think it should be "Google Art Project works in The Royal Collection of the United Kingdom"? I can do that. Dcoetzee (talk) 23:20, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, that would be perfect. We can keep Category:Google Art Project works in The Royal Collection, London as sub cat, like Category:Google Art Project works in Art in the Royal Collection of the United Kingdom in Windsor Castle I did. Have a nice day and thanks for your excellent work--Oursana (talk) 06:31, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Done. Dcoetzee (talk) 01:34, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Category:Google Art Project works by William Henry Fox Talbot (British‎[edit]

Could you move the files to Category:Google Art Project works by William Henry Fox Talbot and Category:Henry Fox Talbot. After this I would suggest to delete not redirect the cat to Category:Google Art Project works by William Henry Fox Talbot (British‎. I think redirektion is not useful as nobody would use the category with the amendment British. Thank you--Oursana (talk) 08:29, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Done, thanks for identifying this one. The redirected category is useful for the ongoing upload process, because I have a lot more works to upload and some of them will be mislabelled in the same manner (otherwise it will just re-create that category). Dcoetzee (talk) 01:18, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Google Art Project‎[edit]

When a file is in Category:Google Art Project works by artist‎ and/or Category:Google Art Project works by collection don't you think it is over categorization to keep it in this category?--Oursana (talk) 08:38, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

In reflection, yes. However, the original 1000 images were placed in the main category, and it would be inconsistent to have them there and the new ones not be there. All of them need to be subcategorized properly before the main category can be shelved. This can be done automatically but will require more scripting. Dcoetzee (talk) 01:36, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Lake-Side Publishing Co., corner Clark & Adams Streets, by Lovejoy & Foster.png[edit]

Has it always been like this? --Nemo 11:20, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid I have no idea. That was 3 years ago and I uploaded many thousands of images like that. I don't think the code I have to reupload it would even still work. Dcoetzee (talk) 01:23, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Do you have a better version of File:Canada's Dedication Day at the Columbian Exposition, by Kilburn, B. W. (Benjamin West), 1827-1909.png?[edit]

Deutsch | English | Español | Suomi | Français | עברית | Magyar | 日本語 | Македонски | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Svenska | +/−


Thank you for your submission of File:Canada's Dedication Day at the Columbian Exposition, by Kilburn, B. W. (Benjamin West), 1827-1909.png. While all submissions are useful, do you think you might be able to supply a better quality version of the same, or similar, content? In many cases, the largest and highest resolution possible is the most useful version to have available. (MediaWiki has automatic resizing functionality, so there is no need for multiple versions of the same image at different sizes, users can select any size and the software will generate and cache the needed resolution on the fly.)

If you can supply the same exact image as File:Canada%27s Dedication Day at the Columbian Exposition, by Kilburn, B. W. (Benjamin West), 1827-1909.png at a larger resolution (or media at a higher bitrate, etc.), please just upload it over the original, users will get the new higher quality version with no further effort on your part. If on the other hand, the content is only similar, it is best to select a new image name, as there may be uses already where some aspect of the existing media was key to the usage. In the latter case, if you can provide a crosslink reference to the new image in the older one and vice versa, that will be extremely helpful.

Again, thank you very much for your contribution, it is appreciated.

Seems to be cut offMcZusatz (talk) 12:55, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Like I said before, that was over 3 years ago and one of tens of thousands of files, and I don't know if my code for that batch upload will even still work. I also don't really have time to look into it right now. Dcoetzee (talk) 23:35, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
No problem. I did a manual fix. Should be ok now. --McZusatz (talk) 12:17, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts, Moscow[edit]

Hi Derrick! Dear, please help me to download pictures in high resolution from the site http://www.arts-museum.ru. For example http://www.arts-museum.ru/data/fonds/europe_and_america/j/2001_3000/6628_Yupiter_i_Kallisto/index.php Or, if you would be so kind, I would like to ask you to download some images to me and put in Wikimedia. I will be very grateful to you for it. thank you in advance. And if you know how to remove watermarks from pictures without quality loss? Write process.

I don't have time to look at this right now, but I do like a challenge. The watermarks are stored in the underlying image data, so they're quite difficult to remove, but they're translucent, so it is possible. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:26, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi Derrick! Recalls its request that is addressed to you a year ago. Can you do anything? I'd love you to be able to cope with the challenge. Thank you in advance and I'm sorry to trouble you, because without you can not be without.
Help, heilp me!!!!!! Derrick, help please upload the pictures from the site http://www.arts-museum.ru/data/fonds/europe_and_america/j/2001_3000/6628_Yupiter_i_Kallisto/index.php
I'm sorry but I'm overwhelmed as it is by the Google Art Project uploads, so I won't have time for this. Dcoetzee (talk) 03:28, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps then, when you're done with Google Art Project uploads. I beg you not to refuse help.

Omit Metadata[edit]

Hi Dcoetzee, you somewhere posted that you could remove any particular piece of private metadata. Could you possibly omit the name and address/number of the photographer of the following files (he doesn't want this information to be displayed publicly): http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Festsaal_Schloss_Lustheim.jpg#file and http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Saalansicht_Schloss_Lustheim.jpg. This would be great. Thank you

I can, but they are likely to have to submit their CC0 release through OTRS, since there is no apparent connection between them and the uploader. Dcoetzee (talk) 19:07, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
Done. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:22, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much indeed! The one image I finally used seems to be fine with regard to the copyrights (which I may grant). Next time, I will mind the metadata before uploading any image.

Thanks[edit]

I am delighted with the work you have done with the files Google Art. I saw only one small mistake: in the National Museum of Delhi you missed a small masterpiece - Radha and Krishna in the boat of love. http://www.googleartproject.com/ru/collection/national-museum-delhi/artwork/radha-and-krishna-in-the-boat-of-love-unknown/6880441/ If it will not be difficult, please download the file in Wikicommons. In addition, there were many new museums. Especially valuable, in my opinion, are the Poldi Pezzoli Museum and Fondazione Musei Senesi. You have a lot of work ahead. I wish you success.

Eugene a

There are many works yet to process. I will prioritize any collections you have a particular interest in, like the three mentioned above. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:56, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Starry Night[edit]

Hi,

Just a note. Your histmerge deletion of this file seems to have resulted in User:CommonsDelinker removing the file from multiple wikis. -- Razimantv (talk) 07:42, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

*sigh* That's because CommonsDelinker is very, very stupid. I'm going to have to revert it. I can automatically go over its contribs across all possible wikis to find its bad edits to revert. Dcoetzee (talk) 07:44, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
That would be great. I have manually reverted the bot on all pages about the painting. Not masochistic enough to find the other pages the bot has removed the image from -- Razimantv (talk) 07:51, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Well thankfully the log contains a complete list and is queryable, so I won't have to do an exhaustive search, and I can automate the reverting. However I'm concerned because I've done history merges on several other images recently, and I'll have to go back and check them all to make sure CommonsDelinker wasn't being stupid then. Dcoetzee (talk) 08:05, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
These edits are now completely reverted. I'll investigate if any of my other history merges triggered it and revert them too as needed. Dcoetzee (talk) 08:46, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
I checked and none of my other history merges triggered CommonsDelinker. It seems the timing of this one was just particularly unlucky. Thanks so much for letting me know. Dcoetzee (talk) 08:50, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
:) Best wishes -- Razimantv (talk) 08:56, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Jacopo Bassano (Jacopo dal Ponte) - The Adoration of the Kings - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Hi Dcoetzee,

just want to tell you, that the death year is only shown on edit-page, that is a pity, perhaps you can manage this.

Many many thanks for all your work.--Oursana (talk) 02:38, 2 November 2012 (UTC) Compare File:Jacopo Bassano, il vecchio - Adoration of the Magi - Google Art Project.jpg by same!! artist. I will delink the files and redirect.--Oursana (talk) 02:51, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Currently the template uses the "artist_pretty_display_date" parameter which usually includes the death date, but mysteriously does not here. You can override it by entering the desired artist name/date (or a creator template) into the commons_artist field, which I've done now. Dcoetzee (talk) 03:43, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you--Oursana (talk) 08:08, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

volume[edit]

Can you turn up the volume of the file File:Je ne comprends pas.ogg please ? Fête (talk) 23:53, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Slaapkamer[edit]

Don't want to discourage the search for excellence in fine-art reproduction, but we have dozens of images of different versions of this -- just search "van gogh bedroom"... -- AnonMoos (talk) 08:43, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

(assuming you're referring to File:Vincent van Gogh - De slaapkamer - Google Art Project.jpg) I'm well aware of that. This version is higher quality, much higher resolution, and already used in several articles. (Certainly none of the other versions are 30,000 pixels wide). Moreover, you are probably confusing Van Gogh's three different versions of Bedroom in Arles, which are not identical (see subcats of Category:Bedroom in Arles). If you're referring to File:Vincent van Gogh - De slaapkamer - Google Art Project - edited.jpg, I didn't like that edit and ended up deleting it. Dcoetzee (talk) 08:47, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
OK -- I'm not singling you out personally, but it seems to me that what's most needed now on the Slaapkamer front is the imposition of a little order or structure, and not the uploading of yet further scans (even if the scans are individually great...). AnonMoos (talk) 08:59, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
The category structure seems fine to me, there is a category for all digitizations of each work. I normally try to globally replace all uses of competing images by the superior images from GAP, but in this case I haven't done it yet because the GAP version is pretty dark and I'd like to ensure that the colours are accurate. In any case this image has been up since February - I only uploaded a higher res version just now. Dcoetzee (talk) 09:12, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

non-pd photos[edit]

Thanks for your reply (up above). Still sorting through the uploads--it's interesting. I believe Category:Google Art Project works by Tombazis Nikolaos are photos from the 1950s so I'm assuming they should be excluded. However you obv. know more about this stuff than me.

As an aside, when you categorize paintings yourself that you and your bot have uploaded, could I suggest making sure the standard three categories (at least IMO) "Name of painter/Painter's paintings", "Year/decade paintings", and the museum/collection are used? Genre or subject or whatever is nice too, when available, but that's scattershot and depends on art knowledge. Boo-Boo Baroo (talk) 19:48, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

That set was uploaded automatically due to an error in the metadata (Tombazis died in 1986, not 1896!) Thanks for catching it. I often forget about the date categories but those are useful ones to add. I'm a little reluctant to work with date categories because they feel so large and assorted, but I realise they have their uses. For the most part I'll be depending on others for categorization, as I have a ton more license sorting and uploading work to do on this set and it will take many months. Dcoetzee (talk) 22:43, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, as with most categories they have their uses, but usually have no use. :-) I've been thinking about "tags" lately and how interesting it would be to organize Commons that way; relying on computed searching of intersections of non-correlated tags like "Van Gogh" and "Paris" and "1886" and "Louvre" and "oil painting" rather than "Category:1880s Van Gogh paintings in the Louvre" type of thing. Because the degree of detail in categorization here ranges from little to way too fine-grained. I'm a newbie and I don't know if there are suggested categorization schemes for different topics on this project, but if there are they appear to not be followed. Thus I haven't looked. Boo-Boo Baroo (talk) 23:14, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
I think a system of tags and/or facets would be vastly superior, but it would take a lot of time and work to roll out a new feature, especially with usability testing. (If you're not familiar with facet systems, see the left sidebar here for an example). Categorization granularity is inconsistent at best. I think the hierarchy can have advantages for browsing, but it can also be generated dynamically from a tag system. Will think about ways to propose a design for this for the future. Dcoetzee (talk) 23:59, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that would be a fundamental change. Came here to say that File:Drouar (French, Paris (possibly André Drouart, recorded 1674–88)) - Armor of Infante Luis, Prince of Asturias - Google Art Project.jpg needs to be deleted as a 3D photograph. If you'd prefer I don't bring these to your talk page, let me know what to do instead. Is there a speedy deletion ability for files like this? Boo-Boo Baroo (talk) 00:59, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you! There is, you can tag them with the {{copyvio}} tag - that'll ensure someone deletes it as soon as possible. But please do bring them to me as well, so that I can identify any potential issues with my software leading to incorrect uploads. :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 15:14, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Will do. New subject: could you take a look at the overwrite I've uploaded here. This is obviously the source of the GAP file, but the file size is significantly larger. (The file is from the museum's own web site, which has an interesting initiative called "High resolution public domain" files. Do you agree with the premise that bigger file size is better? I could have looked at both images beyond natural resolution to look for artifact quality, but didn't. Possibly the method by which your system stitches together GAP files reduces their native "quality"? Secondly, if you agree, is overwriting the GAP file OK with you? If you disagree on either point, feel free to revert my overwrite. I should focus on new files anyway.

Ideally you could point your bot at the LACMA site [I realize it's not that simple!] if it hasn't already been done (I don't think so). The overall site entry point, specifically for the hi-res images, is here or, before being shunted off to an IP addressed server, [8]. Presumably that collection includes a decent number of real 3d photographs which LACMA is apparently releasing into the public domain, potentially adding some very high quality 3d art photos to Commons. I am just starting to look, and want to proceed, but as you know manual transfer is so time consuming. Boo-Boo Baroo (talk) 06:26, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

You're absolutely correct that GAP's images appear to be based directly on the museum's images, and that the original images are higher quality as indicated by the higher filesize (GAP image tiles are low in quality compared to this, and also get re-encoded during the stitching process). Unfortunately I don't have time right now to automate the process of uploading LACMA's higher-quality files - for the time being I would focus on images that are in use. Dcoetzee (talk) 21:45, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Request for your opinion[edit]

Since I'm told that you're a copyright expert, would you please weigh in on Commons:Deletion_requests/File:ESO_Trailer_2011.ogv? Thanks, --Pine 18:50, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

I emailed ESO. They updated the video's page to indicate that the Google Earth portion of the video is not CC and they asked us to delete the video. Would you be willing to delete or does it need to wait for a full seven days in Deletion requests? --Pine 19:12, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
We're not going to delete the video. We need to remove the Google Earth portion, but the rest is available under an irrevocable CC license and they can't compel us to remove it. Dcoetzee (talk) 03:14, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion[edit]

Sandro Botticelli - La nascita di Venere - Google Art Project - edited.jpg
This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Sandro Botticelli - La nascita di Venere - Google Art Project - edited.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sandro Botticelli - La nascita di Venere - Google Art Project - edited.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Cscr-featured.svg

/FPCBot (talk) 22:08, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Copyright Question[edit]

File:Ardabil Carpet.jpg is an image created by the museum of a huge carpet, my question is, is a carpet considered 2D? If not then wouldn't these images be copyright violations, the museum didn't release the image, it was just taken from their website. It's nominated at FPC at Wikipedia, where I initially brought my concern. Thought I'd ask you since you seem to have a good grasp on what's copyrightable when it comes to museum produced works. ;-) — raeky (talk | edits) 11:50, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

A rectangular textile like this without tassels or other 3D features I usually classify as being eligible for PD-Art. No PD-Art work is truly 2D - paint has texture and so on. It's matter of whether the object is 1. static in appearance, and 2. the depth of the relief is small enough. If both of these apply, then the photographer's contribution is necessarily minimal. I think both of those apply to a carpet like this. Note that I am extrapolating from deletion precedent and reasoning; there is little case law to draw on in this area. Dcoetzee (talk) 12:00, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Fair enough, just wanted to make sure it was all above-board. As far as I know it fits those features. It is a UK museum, so they probably see it differently. — raeky (talk | edits) 12:02, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Almost no PD-Art works on Commons are definitely PD under UK law (see Commons:Reuse_of_PD-Art_photographs#United_Kingdom_.2F_UK) but that doesn't matter, we only have to satisfy US law to host it. Commons usually requires works to also be PD in the source country, but PD-Art is an explicit exception. Dcoetzee (talk) 12:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Vincenzo Laviosa (Italian - Franklin D. Roosevelt - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Vincenzo Laviosa (Italian - Franklin D. Roosevelt - Google Art Project.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Dcoetzee (talk) 18:05, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Commons fair use upload bot[edit]

Hi, how can I help you to localise this bot for the Slovene (sl) Wikipedia? --Eleassar (t/p) 13:42, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

The main things I need are:
See sl:Predloga:Obvestilo o predlogu iz Zbirke za pošteno uporabo. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:53, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Translations of these edit summaries: "Bot notice: Fair use candidate from Commons: (filename)". "Bot creating image redirect to local re-upload of image being deleted at Commons". "Reverting incorrect removal by CommonsDelinker (file still exists on local wiki)".
[Obvestilo o botu: kandidat za pošteno uporabo iz Zbirke: (Slika:filename.jpg)], [Preusmerjanje z datoteke v Zbirki na lokalno naloženo datoteko.], [Razveljavljam neustrezno odstranitev bota CommonsDelinker (datoteka na lokalnem wikiju še vedno obstaja).] --Eleassar (t/p) 08:53, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Translations of these messages: "Wikimedia Commons file description page history". "Wikimedia Commons upload log".
[Zgodovina opisne strani datoteke v Wikimedijini Zbirki], [Zapisi o nalaganju v Wikimedijino Zbirko] --Eleassar (t/p) 08:53, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
  • If there's any bot approval process on sl Wikipedia, I may need a local user to apply on my behalf, unless this bot is exempt.
I suggest that you apply as described at sl:Wikipedija:Boti. The application should be posted here. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:53, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Any tags that should be automatically applied to the image, or categories it should be placed in, to help ensure it is processed promptly and deleted if it does not comply with your exemption doctrine.
The bot should copy all the information about the author and license, add the template sl:Template:Poštena uporaba and add the tracking category, sl:Kategorija:Slike pod pošteno uporabo, prenesene iz Zbirke. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:53, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! Dcoetzee (talk) 22:15, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Copyright consultation[edit]

Hi Derrick. I'd like to consult about an image copyright question. I was looking for an image to illustrate Carlotta Monti, a minor early actress. I found http://www.toutlecine.com/images/star/0009/00091823-carlotta-monti.html which is a shot from the 1933 film/serial Tarzan the Fearless (1933). The Internet Archive thinks Tarzan the Fearless is public domain - it doesn't explain why, but we have a whole category dedicated to a similar film with the "published without a copyright" tag: Category:Tarzan the Tiger.

Unfortunately, I don't think that particular image from toutlecine is from the Internet Archive movie reel. I suspect it's a cropped version of http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/american-actor-buster-crabbe-as-tarzan-dressed-in-a-loin-news-photo/52762759 from Getty Images. The problem is that Tarzan the Fearless was released partly as a serial, several episodes of which were lost. I couldn't find that particular scene on the Internet Archive movie, and suspect it's from one of the lost episodes. It's clearly from the movie, among other things both Getty and toutlecine say it is.

So, in sum, can we consider the toutlecine/Getty shot to be public domain? If not, how about a different still from the Archive movie? There are some images of Carlotta Monti in the movie, but none as good as that shot. --GRuban (talk) 19:42, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Post-1923 US copyright questions are very difficult. For a 1933 work to be in copyright today, it must not have been published without a copyright notice, and moreover, copyright must have been registered and renewed (see {{PD-US-not renewed}}). More than 90% of works were not renewed, and you can search renewal records online (see [9]). I know very little about more complex issues like whether an image like this would be considered a work for hire, whether images like this are conventionally registered for copyright in this industry, and so on. For more info on that stuff you could consult with Commons:Village pump/Copyright. Dcoetzee (talk) 19:46, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Commons_fair_use_upload_bot[edit]

Continuing the talk here (User_talk:Dcoetzee/Archive_2012-07-27#Commons_fair_use_upload_bot) and here (User_talk:Dcoetzee#Commons_fair_use_upload_bot), can you please add support to ml.wikipedia for this bot? --Sreejith K (talk) 06:45, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Raphaël - La Madone de Lorette - Google Art Project (677537).jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Raphaël - La Madone de Lorette - Google Art Project (677537).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Michelet-密是力 (talk) 18:51, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Delete File:Everything, Ian Davenport, lower right.jpg ?[edit]

Thanks for deleting the too extensive quote from the artwork description card on that page - you are right that it was a copyright issue. As the uploader, I'm probably going to ask for the whole image to be deleted, as I am no longer convinced that it is a "works of artistic craftsmanship" (OK under UK-FoP) as opposed to a "graphic work", but wondered if you had a view on this decision. I initially concluded it wasn't a "graphic work" because a) it wasn't hand painted but poured, and the paint puddles at the bottom in particular were essentially random rather than the product of skill; b) it is not a "painting" in the sense that a painting includes the surface it is upon [Merchandising v. Harpbond [1983] FSR 32], which in this case is the building, so this is not a "painting" (maybe "decoration"); c) it has an element of 3D at the bottom. However my argument looks a bit weak when murals and computer graphics are considered, and I think this question is far more debateable than I thought when I uploaded. Also now that the US-FOP/DMCI issue has come to the forefront, I don't think it is worth keeping this photo as there are too many difficult questions. Would you agree deletion would be wise. Thanks in advance. Rwendland (talk) 14:40, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree that this is not clearly a work of artistic craftsmanship based on descriptions of such that I've seen, but due to the unique nature of the work it's very hard to predict whether it is or not. I would probably vote delete in a discussion. If you think there are too many issues to retain it, I suggest nominating for deletion so others can also voice their opinions. If you have other photos of the same work please list them in the same request. Let me know if you need help with this. Thanks! Dcoetzee (talk) 21:39, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Google Art categories[edit]

Every now and again I notice duplicate categories for your Google Art uploads.

Is it OK if in such cases I move all the images to one category and make all the rest mere redirects?

Seems a reasonable thing to do, but I thought I'd run it by you first.

P.S. Thanks for your work! It's very very appreciated.

Primaler (talk) 22:53, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Please do! I've already done that for several such categories. And thank you. :-) Thank Google as well, they did the hard work! Dcoetzee (talk) 06:38, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Tate Images[edit]

Hi Derrick. There looks to be a Tate Images rep changing the licensing info on related images. See Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User:Tateimages. INeverCry 18:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

removal of pd-art by Tate, etc[edit]

I noticed (as you may have, if watchlisted) that a user has been removing the license template from Tate's Google Art images, e.g. [10]. As there is already a declamation of Tate's position in another template on those pages, it seems pointy. I understand their position, but clearly this particular approach is not the right one--leaving the page without a "license". Boo-Boo Baroo (talk) 18:09, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Derrick - I've reverted all their edits. I'm not quite sure how to word a warning, so I'll wait for you to take a look at this. INeverCry 18:54, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
I wouldn't have straight reverted them - some of the info, including the source link to the Tate site and the accession number, are quite useful, although they should not replace the Google data entirely since that is the immediate source. The credit line field on the other hand is much murkier - they can't claim copyright in the US where these works are in the public domain, and in places where the images are not in the public domain, people should not be using them at all without a licensing arrangement, as the templates already explain. So I would probably omit these bits. I think the first step is to merge their useful contributions appropriately, then to let them know why we did it that way. Dcoetzee (talk) 19:19, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
I've re-added the source link to the Tate site and the accession number to some of these. I noticed a few other editors doing this as well. I'm very busy, as always, with CSD and DR, so I don't know if I'll be able to get to all the rest myself. I hope this person doesn't start back up with the same changes tomorrow, as he's done these over the last few days. Can you talk to him Derrick? Maybe he can be convinced to tag these the right way. INeverCry 02:38, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
I've been working through them too, but it's taking a while. I'm almost halfway - filenames starting with G, H and J are now done. (BTW, many of the measurements were out by a factor of 10, and I've been fixing that along the way. They were wrong on Google's site too, when I've checked.) I suspect the Tate person will be back soon, since they were working their way through alphabetically and only got as far as J. --Avenue (talk) 16:08, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for helping Avenue. I've warned the user on their talk, and directed them here. They made more changes today, which I've fixed. Several of these changes were simply to remove licenses without adding any info. I've told the user that if they continue with the same line of edits they may be blocked. INeverCry 17:43, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
FYI - This IP has done some of the same editing and has posted on the Tate images talk page. I fixed one of their edits as well. INeverCry 17:53, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
All done now, I think, including the IP edits. I'm not sure if I noticed all the errors in the measurements, but that's probably a wider problem anyway. --Avenue (talk) 09:17, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
It is - Google Art Project metadata is rife with errors in every single field. The off-by-10 usually results from the use of mm in a field intended for cm. There's no simple way to fix them en masse, but we can automate fixing them for particular museums by comparison with museum websites. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:35, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
I see Tateimages (talk · contribs) has since made another edit to one of these photos, adding "Tate Photography" to the credit line.[11] Assuming they took the photo, I think it's reasonable for them to be credited for that, although perhaps Google Art also deserves credit for making it publicly available. Derrick, was your earlier objection to their credit line mainly because it included a copyright symbol "(C)"? --Avenue (talk) 15:24, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
The copyright symbol is indeed the problem. These images are not copyrighted or copyrightable in the United States or several other nations, so this is misleading. The existing tags explain the situation in detail. Merely attributing the photographer would of course be fine, but I have no idea which of these works were actually photographed in-house by staff and which had rights (presuming they exist) transferred to them contractually from third parties. Thanks to everyone for helping clean up. I also left a message at User talk:Tateimages. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:30, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Help: no-FoP Italy[edit]

Hi. When you have a moment, could you do me a favor. I decided to occupy my time to list the no-FoP files in Italy. It has been a long and difficult work that needs to be reviewed by administrators. Please, could you check if everything is correct on User:Raoli/Deletion requests/FoP Italy? Thanks! Raoli ✉ (talk) 00:23, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

I briefly reviewed your work - in cases where there is clear evidence that the architect died after 1942, and the building is not de minimis in the photo, deletion is usually a clear conclusion, but there is also the issue of threshold of originality. Many buildings are simply not copyrightable because their form is too simple. One example of a file that looks like not a deletion candidate to me is File:Genova akwarium neon.jpg, which does not show any portion of the structure other than a neon (text only) sign, a large flat wall, some concrete pillars, and an ordinary staircase. These are akin to the structures found in a warehouse or parking structure and are almost certainly not copyrightable. More careful review may be needed to identify cases that don't meet the threshold of originality - however, such images are in any case usually of low utility. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:26, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Ok You're a good administrator. ;) I will provide as soon as possible to delete files do not exceed this threshold. Thank you very much for the much-helpful advice. I think I've finally realized what I need to know about the Freedom of Panorama. The issue of the threshold of originality, however, IMO is not highlighted in the FOP page. Do you think we could improve it? Raoli ✉ (talk) 20:47, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
I think it's worth mentioning, although it is something of a separate issue, and a much more difficult one. I'm pretty confident that boring rectangular structures don't meet it, but I'm deeply uncertain over whether a photo of (say) an ordinary house in France would be allowed. There are very few deletion discussions to provide guidance here, much less case law. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:50, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
For this reason I uploaded this file - I'm sorry, but it is only in Italian for now - which lists the cases law and rules affecting the Italian copyright. I also start a deep discussion on it.wikipedia concerning this issue. Raoli ✉ (talk)
Thank you for your diligence! I'm afraid I know nothing at all about threshold of originality in Italy, but if you can shed any light on this please update COM:TOO. :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 22:40, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
I'll do it. Cheers! Raoli ✉ (talk) 22:44, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
I have contacted my lawyer to better understand the problems related to the issue of Italy no-fop and it results no one has never been convicted for it. Raoli ✉ (talk) 22:49, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Unfortunately a complete absence of case law makes it very hard to predict how boundary cases would turn out. :-( Dcoetzee (talk) 22:51, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
In Italy the term "freedom of panorama" does not exist and few people know the meaning. This thing aggravates the already dramatic Italian situation. So far, the Italian administrators of Commons turned a blind eye on the images related to the no-fop. Italy For this reason, the list is very long. The vagueness of the Italian copyright make precipitate the situation and my morale. Not is sufficient to know the Italian right because in Italy the rules are not fixed, but interpretable. This means that a judge can condemn myself for uploading a copyrighted picture and in another process another judge can absolve another person for the same offense. Bye :) Raoli ✉ (talk) 23:05, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Google_Art_Project_works_by_Oscar_Gustave_Rejlander_(British,_born_Sweden[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Google_Art_Project_works_by_Oscar_Gustave_Rejlander_(British,_born_Sweden has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

Retired electrician (talk) 12:44, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Redundant categories[edit]

Hi, could you have a look at Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2012/12/Category:Google_Art_Project_works_by_Oscar_Gustave_Rejlander_(British,_born_Sweden. Thank you. --Foroa (talk) 13:49, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

There are loads of categories for the same artist with slightly different names, a result I assume of the way Google Art Project lays out its metadata and a bot processing it. There's no use posting about them one at a time on Dcoetzee's page and individual deletion requests. If Dcoetzee doesn't feel there is a need for these hidden categories to be kept for tracking purposes, then lots of merging/redirecting/deleting could be done. I'd do it myself if I knew there was consensus--and the deletion bit would help, if anyone wants to add that for me. ;) Boo-Boo Baroo (talk) 01:16, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
Decoetzee would prefer if we move the files into the most sensible category and redirect the other categories to it, please see User talk:Dcoetzee#Category:Google Art Project works by James Abbott McNeil Whistler. --Mirokado (talk) 01:29, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
I took care of that case, thanks for letting me know. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:21, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Redundant categories[edit]

Commons:Categories for discussion/2012/12/Category:Google Art Project works by Giovanni Bellini and Titian There is only one painting concerned File:Giovanni Bellini and Titian - The Feast of the Gods - Google Art Project.jpg which i took in both cats: Category:Google Art Project works by Giovanni Bellini; Category:Google Art Project works by Titian. File is also in Category:The Feast of the Gods (Giovanni Bellini and Tiziano Vecelli) Category:Google Art Project works by Giovanni Bellini and Titian should be deleted--Oursana (talk) 22:19, 5 December 2012 (UTC). Thanks a lot--Oursana (talk) 22:38, 5 December 2012 (UTC) --Oursana (talk) 00:26, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Deleted now. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:21, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Good job on PNG resizing[edit]

If you're the one who's responsible for the current PNG thumbnailing algorithm, then congratulations for the results achieved with the 595-pixel-wide version of File:Shield of Trinity Aveling 1891.png -- in the bad old days, I really would not have uploaded that file in PNG format at all... AnonMoos (talk) 18:43, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

AFAIK pngscale hasn't been deployed on WMF servers and they're using the same PNG resizer as before (see bug 9497). However max image area was raised to 25 megapixels, see bug 41125. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:05, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
They're definitely not still using the somewhat obnoxious classic dumb PNG rescaler of at least the years 2006-2010. because that would have resulted in a 32-bit RGBA format image (in fact, you could have considered yourself lucky if it didn't generate a 64-bit RGBA format thumbnail with 16 bits per channel, as seemed to happen from time to time). AnonMoos (talk) 03:40, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm not aware of a change in the rescaler, but they might have done one. Ask a dev. Seems nice anyway. Dcoetzee (talk) 10:46, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm not actually that interested in tracking down all the exact details; just was impressed by the difference between what happened to File:Shield of Trinity Aveling 1891.png (especially since the unrescaled source image is not in explicit grayscale format) vs. what would have been done to it in past years, and thought I should give you credit if credit was due to you... SFriendly.gif -- AnonMoos (talk) 15:51, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

A doubt[edit]

Dcoetzee, I got the permission through e-mail from a federal institution here in Brazil to use one of their photos on Wikipedia. What should I do to upload that photo? --Lecen (talk) 20:07, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Lecen. Follow the instructions at COM:OTRS (you'll need to forward the e-mail to our OTRS permissions queue). Let me know if anything is unclear. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:18, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank You for the Wikipedia Picture[edit]

Hello, My name is Duane Hurst and I recently made a free (non-commercial) English web site to share information with people. I added links to your Wikipedia/Wikimedia freeware picture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Central_Perth_from_KingsPark.jpg). I also gave credit to you on my web pages for your work. Thank you for sharing with the public. My website is:

http://www.freeenglishsite.com/

I add pictures such as yours to one of the following major sections of my site: 1. World section - contains information and over 10,000 images of every world country and territory. Link at: http://www.freeenglishsite.com/world/index.htm

2. USA section - contains information and images of every USA state and territory. Link at: http://www.freeenglishsite.com/world/usa/index.htm

3. English section - "Mel and Wes" lessons in conversation format. Stories are located in various USA states and world countries such as China, England, Germany, Japan, Mexico and Thailand. Each lesson has many slang terms and idioms, which I link to my Slang Dictionary. This eventually will have over 5,000 terms. Currently, it has about 3,000 slang and idioms. I regularly add new lessons and slang terms. Link at: http://www.freeenglishsite.com/english/lessons/index.htm Slang Dictionary link at: http://www.freeenglishsite.com/english/slang/Eslang_a.htm

Prior to retirement, I taught English at several private and public universities in the United States.

Please share this free site with your friends. I hope all will enjoy the pictures and find the English information useful. Sincerely,  Duane Hurst in Utah, USA

Email address: [removed for spam protection] --65.130.202.239 01:20, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad the image was useful! Dcoetzee (talk) 20:18, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Gigapixel images from the Google Art Project[edit]

Hi Dcoetzee,

Thank you very much for uploading those Gigapixel images from the Google Art Project. Many people really appreciate this. I'm sure those high-resolution images will be of great use in the future.

However, I noticed several inconsistencies:

  • All files are located on Commons [12], with one exception, which is on the English Wikipedia [13].
  • In general, most files are named "{Artist}_-_{Artwork}_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg", with one exception: [File:In_the_Conservatory.jpg]
  • If the artist is unknown, then the first part ("{Artist}_-_") is omitted, but again there's one exception: [File:Unknown,_Iran,_17th_Century_-_Silk_Velvet_Textile_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg]
  • In most cases, both the first and the last name of the artist are included, like [File:Van_Gogh_-_Starry_Night_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg], but not always [File:Vincent_van_Gogh_-_De_slaapkamer_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg]
  • The name of the same artist is not always the same: [File:Hans_Holbein_the_Younger_-_The_Ambassadors_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg], but:[File:Hans_Holbein_der_Jüngere_-_Der_Kaufmann_Georg_Gisze_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg]
  • The name of the artwork is sometimes in English [File:Pierre-Denis_Martin_-_View_of_the_Château_de_Fontainebleau_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg], sometimes in another language [File:Sandro_Botticelli_-_La_nascita_di_Venere_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg], sometimes in both [File:Almeida_Júnior_-_Saudade_(Longing)_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg]
  • One Russian painting has a filename in Cyrillic script [File:Александр_Андреевич_Иванов_-_Явление_Христа_народу_(Явление_Мессии)_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg], but another Russian painting hasn't [File:Karl_Brullov_-_The_Last_Day_of_Pompeii_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg]

I think it's more convenient if all files are named consistently. I hope you've got time to think about this.

Michael! (talk) 22:23, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback. The work on English Wikipedia is not permitted here, because it is still in copyright in its source country. The inconsistencies in naming are due to inconsistencies in Google Art Project metadata, and due to changes between how the first Google Art Project batch and the second were processed. It would be very taxing to make the names consistent at this point, because they are widely used, for little to no benefit. Dcoetzee (talk) 22:34, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your quick reply. In my opinion, it's better to change the names as soon as possible, because they will be even more widely used soon. However, there's not much benefit, you're right about that.
Speaking about copyright, isn't there copyright on the photographs themselves, since all of those images are created only recently? Michael! (talk) 21:38, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
Michael! -- see Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp... -- AnonMoos (talk) 01:19, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
Also see Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag, which is prominently linked on the image description page of all these files. Dcoetzee (talk) 13:21, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Cawthra 1[edit]

Please explain why this image has been put forward for deletion. Thanks Weglinde (talk) 09:19, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

I expanded the explanation at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cawthra 1.jpg. Please comment there. Dcoetzee (talk) 10:42, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Unnecessary templating[edit]

Hi - are edits like this really necessary? The sculture (which isn't the main subject of the photo) is in the UK, so is valid on Commons (see {{FoP-UK}}). At a quick count, there are about 70 or so different FOP templates for different countries; adding each of them to an image to declare whether or not it's legal in that country would be ridiculous. I suggest just adding a disclaimer to the UK FOP template to say that it may not be free in all countries would be sufficient.  An optimist on the run! 13:54, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

The addition of this template was one of the primary outcomes of this RfC, and there was consensus for adding them in this recent Village pump thread. The US is a special case because the WMF is located in the US, and these images may have to be deleted in the future on that basis, so it's necessary to keep track of their US status as well as the source country - status in other nations is relatively unimportant. This is fallout from the DMCA takedowns of European sculptures in public places conducted by the WMF recently, see Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2012/11#DMCA_Take-Down. Dcoetzee (talk) 15:03, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
Commons:Freedom of panorama#United Kingdom makes it quite clear that images like these are valid (otherwise I wouldn't have uploaded them), so there's no need to threaten them with deletion. As I understand it, where the images are hosted is irrelevant - it's how the end user uses them that's important.  An optimist on the run! 15:31, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
Where the images is hosted is not irrelevant - it is illegal (and against Foundation policy) for us to host any work that is not PD or freely licensed in the US (this is why this is required at Commons:Licensing). Please read the above links for more details on the FOP situation - there is a lot of discussion there and it would be redundant to repeat it here. The UK copyright status is not in question, but the US status is uncertain. COM:FOP has not yet been updated because this problem only became a matter of discussion at the time of the recent DMCA takedown. In any case nobody is nominating the images for deletion right now, this is solely for the benefit of content reusers and to help us track the scope of the problem. Dcoetzee (talk) 16:23, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Hi. I have a similar question regarding this edit by DcoetzeeBot. The UK article about the artwork makes clear that the graffiti isn't illegal, because it was arranged in conjunction with Bristol City Council. I've reverted the bot and added {{de minimis}} and {{not-free-US-FOP}} to the file page. What do you think? Thanks. -- Trevj (talk) 10:22, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I assumed it was graffiti based on the description (which incorrectly calls it "graffiti" - which implies illegal graffiti). In any case, if it is a mural it must be deleted. FoP-UK does not extend to 2D works. Dcoetzee (talk) 13:17, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for replying. The term "graffiti" is used because it's billed as a graffiti event and is produced by graffiti artists. I'll take the COM:DM thing to the deletion discussion. -- Trevj (talk) 14:58, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
I've spotted another couple of my uploads (not photos I took) with related issues (Secret Wars 2007-01-27 Inkie.jpg, Banksy's Bristol event maybe Inkie.jpg). In these cases, I've cropped them and also believe they're COM:DM. Would you recommend that I nominate them for deletion too, in order to see what the community thinks? Thanks. -- Trevj (talk) 15:36, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
...and, regarding those two, the main subject of the photos is the artist himself - not that they actually include any identifying features such as his face. -- Trevj (talk) 15:48, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Those ones really are COM:DM, in my opinion. They are obviously pictures of the guy, and even if the artwork were removed they would still serve that purpose quite well. Dcoetzee (talk) 13:01, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

{{Not-free-US-FOP}} on sculpture in the USA[edit]

The bot recently added {{Not-free-US-FOP}} to File:Princeton University blob.jpg, which is a Henry Moore sculpture at Princeton University. It is a mistake to add this template to works that are located in the USA. Since there is no FOP available for works other than architecture, either the image is free for other reasons, or it should be deleted. The template cannot apply to a work that is in the USA. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:07, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I incorrectly assumed all of Moore's works were located in England. I didn't see the other categories on this work (or the PD-US-no notice tag, oops). I'll have to review the Moore taggings. Dcoetzee (talk) 13:15, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
I found two other Moore works mistagged (File:Daviesstatue1.jpg and File:Henry Moore, Three Piece Reclining Figure Draped (1976), MIT Campus - detail.JPG). I've now reverted all taggings of works located in the US and modified the tool to automatically skip PD-US tagged works in the future. Thank you for letting me know! Dcoetzee (talk) 13:31, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I don't know how thorough you intend to be -- there must be thousands of images that could use the tag -- but another that comes immediately to mind is Alexander Calder -- American sculptor, so his works were made in America, then shipped abroad. I think that his estate would be a whole lot more likely to prevail in a US court, arguing that US lack of FOP applied to images of his work than Moore, who was English and worked in an FOP country. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:09, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Commons Archive problems[edit]

Lovely idea, but I can't use it.

1) your cat-matching algorithm has problems. Every second time I try it (no matter how carefully), it tells me to redo it. And every other time it works.

2) I discovered this because your open proxy algorithm is greedy. Every access point I have access to - my home internet provider, my cellular provider, my university provider - was on the list.

--SJ+ 02:41, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. It looks like the Asirra extension is broken and I'll have to fall back on something else. I'm not sure which of my IP blacklists are being so overzealous - it would help a lot if you can mail me your IP addresses so I just remove the one that is blocking legit IPs. If I had your e-mail address I could also create you an account manually. Thanks! Dcoetzee (talk) 12:09, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Question for my favorite photo expert[edit]

I'm trying to help out at Deletion requests. I see Commons:Deletion_requests/2012/12/15#File:H.C3.A9l.C3.A8ne_LeBlanc.JPG. The image looks obviously like a crop of the photo in the paper, yet the image has exif data. How is this possible?--Sphilbrick (talk) 21:54, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

The image is much higher res than the news website photo. It seems clear that it was cropped from the original photo (which preserves EXIF metadata with most apps). I'm not sure how the uploader obtained the original photo - they might actually be the photographer, or they might have found it on the web somewhere. I can't find it on the web myself though. Dcoetzee (talk) 10:13, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

"medium" display in GAP uploads[edit]

Hi again. I've noticed that for a variety of GAP files that aren't simply paintings, whatever "medium/technique" is captured in the GAP template does not actually display. See this diff as an example; it's the first time I've done this. Is getting this to display something that can be changed on the programming end, within the template(s), or would manual intervention be required, such as running an automated find/replace to fill in "commons_medium" on these files? (I remember that you were able to change the display of "oil on panel" after I left you a message some months ago, simply by changing a template. On the off chance you that you are displaying these descriptions based on a mapping like "oil on panel" apparently was, I will say that there is no way to limit the set of strings representing "techniques" that will show up when describing drawings and prints.) Boo-Boo Baroo (talk) 07:32, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

The problem is that some works (like this one) enter the medium in the "object_work_type" field, while many other works use the "object_work_type" to describe what kind of thing is depicted (e.g. "painting"). There's no automatic way to tell which is which. I could modify the template to display the object work type labelled as "Work type" or something like that. Would that do? Dcoetzee (talk) 19:01, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes that would help. Thanks -- Boo-Boo Baroo (talk) 03:34, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
I've co-opted the existing "Object type" field for this purpose. The object_work_type field will now render on all images. As a reminder, please edit the "commons" fields and preserve the original Google metadata in the other fields where possible. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:10, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. I understand your reminder in general principle, but in the diff I gave that you're presumably citing, there appears to be no way to add the creator template [a standard object not added for some files because of the "artist name" inconsistencies on GAP, I assume] without leaving redundant garbage beneath it ("painter", "painter's birth-death"...). Thus the "display"-oriented deletions from the Google metadata in that case. Boo-Boo Baroo (talk) 09:00, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
If you use the "commons_artist" field instead of "artist_display_name" it should have the same effect, and also eliminate the display of the artist_role without having to remove it from the metadata. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:49, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
OK, I'll try that. In my defense, the templates are really complicated looking, likely out of necessity, but tend to discourage updating of metadata as a result... e.g. when I have occasionally updated artwork-equivalent templates for artist consistency or whatever, I skipped over anything suffixed "GAP". ;-) Boo-Boo Baroo (talk) 04:50, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for the complexity! I think it's useful though to preserve all original metadata, so that I can change if and how it's displayed at any time. FYI, all you really have to know is that anything you put in the "commons_" fields will override the corresponding Template:Artwork fields. This should make it simple to substitute whatever you want for any of the visible fields. Dcoetzee (talk) 04:53, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Uploads by Dcoetzee[edit]

Based on your comment on the VP, I have started a search on F2C and kicked off a more general search using my local Commons dump for (upload[a-z\s]{,10}\[\[:en:User:Dcoetzee|by Derrick Coetzee|from Flickr by ..User:Dcoetzee|Upload: ..User:Dcoetzee) as a lot of your uploads seem more complex than just appearing in Magnus' bot category. If this looks to be working, I'll populate Category:Uploads by Dcoetzee. Let me know if there are things this regex will fail to match, or you think it might create false matches for. Cheers -- (talk) 23:22, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 05:46, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Sadness, by Julia Margaret Cameron.jpg[edit]

Hi Dcoetzee, could you add a page number for this file? I'm planning on bringing an article which uses it to FAC and one of the reviewers has said I need a page number.Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:03, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Done. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:05, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Max Tilke[edit]

Hello Dcoetzee,

Max Tilke died in 1942. more then 70 years pssed since. All his work in the above category is before 1923. Geagea (talk) 07:59, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm aware of that. This is not a deletion tag, only a warning to future uploaders not to upload works published 1923 or later. Although his work is in the public domain in Germany, any work he published in 1923 or later is not in the public domain in the United States, because they were in copyright in 1996 and so the URAA restored their US copyright until at least 2018 (see Commons:Licensing#Uruguay_Round_Agreements_Act). Works must be in the public domain in the United States to host them on Commons. If all the current works predate 1923 then they are fine. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:47, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Stefan4 (talk) 15:07, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Clarification requested[edit]

You added the disclaimer "Although she was hired for the expo, the subject is not a pornographic actress" to the description of File:A promotional model at the AVN Adult Entertainment Expo 2012 in Las Vegas.jpg. What is the source of this claim, or is it merely an assumption on your part? In closing the deletion request, you said "the subject's main concern is that by association with the event with insufficient context, she may be thought to be a porn actress. I've added a statement clearly indicating that she is not". Being concerned that one may be thought to be a porn performer does not necessarily mean that one is not a porn performer. Is the person pictured in File:Unidentified porn actresses at AVN Adult Entertainment Expo 2012.jpg a porn performer? Are the people in File:Unknown at AVN Adult Entertainment Expo 2012 (2).jpg porn performers? I find it puzzling that you would take such extraordinary steps for a file of little value rather than simply deleting it. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 17:31, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

First of all I updated that statement to read "adult entertainment model or actress," so please don't quote the original version. This is based on info from the OTRS ticket - she made a very clear statement to this effect. The subject is not a reliable source, but this is not Wikipedia and I see no reason not to include it. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:06, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
"Adult entertainment" is euphemistic, so the real difference in your statements is the addition of "model". We know she was working as a model at an adult video entertainment convention when the picture was taken, so your statement is arguably false. What you are trying to say is that she "doesn't do porn". Is the image so valuable that we need to make these kind of disclaimers in order to keep it? Delicious carbuncle (talk) 21:54, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
I clearly stated that the image was of low value in the closing statement, but I also believe the potential harm is minimal, so that it is worthwhile to keep it, considering that the subject is satisfied. Feel free to renominate it if circumstances change. You may revise the statement if you find it misleading. Dcoetzee (talk) 21:58, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Google Art Project works attributed to Jan van Eyck, Netherlandish (active Bruges), c. 1395 - 1441[edit]

I put the only file File:Attributed to Jan van Eyck, Netherlandish (active Bruges), c. 1395 - 1441 - Saint Francis of Assisi Receiving the Stigmata - Google Art Project.jpg into Category:Google Art Project works by Jan van Eyck. I sugest to delete, not Redirect the first now empty cat, as we normally Don' t make differences in cats because of attribution. If you let me know, i will use the appropriate tags. Thank you and all my best wishes to you for 2013.--Oursana (talk) 11:58, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you - unfortunately Google is wildly inconsistent in what information it includes in its artist metadata. I would prefer to redirect at least for now, so that the bot will see what the correct category ought to be and not just recreate it. However, the correct category for that image is Category:Google Art Project works attributed to Jan van Eyck, not Category:Google Art Project works by Jan van Eyck - the latter suggests certainty about the attribution, the former unsureness, so the distinction is important to retain. Dcoetzee (talk) 12:00, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
The Information about the attribution is contained in the file, therefore we really don't need an extra cat. As i do Not remember extra cats for attributed paintings only. It is sufficent to have this Info with the file itself, as there isn't an extra cat for only attr. paintings of v Eyck or other Artists outside google Art pr.. Attr. paintings are usually contained in the cat of the artists paintings. I will furthermore keep off my hands from this matter. But I would appreciate if you could participate in my Point of view about the necessity of extra cats for only attr. paintings. Or we better have it generally discussed.--Oursana (talk) 12:40, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
There is no problem putting the image in Category:Jan van Eyck, but the use of the word "by" in a category name when a work is merely attributed to an artist is considered misleading and deceptive, and I have been told off for it before. An alternative would be to rename the categories to Category:Google Art Project: Jan van Eyck or something of that nature. Dcoetzee (talk) 12:57, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Not-PD-1923-min-year[edit]

{{Not-PD-1923-min-year}} - does it really make sense to do this? Won't it get confusing to use "1923" for later years, once later years apply? (I know we already do it for PD-1996, but that doesn't make it any better, when it could easily have been called PD-URAA... but I digress.) Maybe a separate template would be better, or else a renaming of the "1923" logic (ouch). At the least, the updating to "min-year" logic needs to be verified as complete and across the board to avoid contradictions and much confusion. Rd232 (talk) 15:03, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

This naming is based on the naming of the existing {{PD-1923}} template, which in fact performs exactly this calculation and has for over a year (current version uses the template). You're free to rename it if you want (if you replace uses) but please also rename {{PD-1923-max-year}} in some complementary way. Also be aware of how it's being used in the table - it's not intended to be a complete set of criteria for what makes a work PD in the US (terms can extend beyond this for unpublished works, etc.). Dcoetzee (talk) 15:07, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Albrecht Altdorfer - Landscape with a Footbridge - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Hallo DCoetzee, I just want to inform you, that I deleted the wrongly linked source template and use new link. Have a nice day–—Oursana (talk) 14:31, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikilivres[edit]

Thank you, Derrick, for transferring those files. Kind regards. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 00:07, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Please let me know if you find any other deleted files that require transferring. As long as the author can be confirmed to have been dead 50 years, that is sufficient for Canada. Dcoetzee (talk) 00:10, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks also for that. I think you can include works which are in the public domain in the country of origin other than Canada, even if the author is not dead for more than 50 years (i.e. Argentina), as Canada uses the rule of the shorter term. Happy New Year! Yann (talk) 15:43, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Woops, I forgot that! Canada has rule of shorter term except for the US and Mexico, according to en:Rule_of_the_shorter_term. Dcoetzee (talk) 15:46, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

GAP categories[edit]

I came across a user removing some hidden GAP categories. I assume you intend (as I would) for these to be permanent. From what I can see in the diffs, it's just a single by-museum category, but likely to spread. When I started this post, in my defense, I thought they were removing the high-level GAP category and others as well. Anyway, since I asked them for their rationale and asked them to revert, which I assume won't be done, I thought I'd let you know. Minor in the scheme of things, but I like this initiative enough to keep the metadata intact. See User_talk:A._Wagner, [14]. GAP-by-museum is useful to me. As an aside, is there a reason the template doesn't produce these? Someone on here once told me that having templates produce categories is "obscure"/not good practice and doesn't allow them to be interacted with--which I consider nonsense as some kind of general rule (and poor from a design pattern point of view)--as in this case it would prevent a category system that is very "structurally permanent" from being messed up by individual users. Cheers Boo-Boo Baroo (talk) 18:11, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

The collection categories absolutely should generally be permanent, and I simply didn't think to have the category included automatically (mostly habit due to the "good practice" argument you outline above) - I've modified the template accordingly. (Artist categories are more problematic - there are often several typographical variants for the same artist that need to be merged. ) Of course this won't stop a determined user from wiping out the "collection_display_name" field in order to remove it, but I'd hope they would be less likely to try that. Do you think I should have a bot go and kill the old explicit categories or is the redundancy not a big deal? Dcoetzee (talk) 18:22, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick reply, and for doing that. (Agree that definitely the artist categories would be impossible to hard-code.) How much would the bot effort be? Ideally, yes of course, but I suppose it does no harm to leave them, since no confusion would be caused except upon attempting to remove one manually. If they are left, then someone might question why the wikitext category is being removed (legitimately now) in the process of making other edits (by me for example), but then again, the number of people who notice a given sub-optimal edit is very very small... :) Boo-Boo Baroo (talk) 18:38, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
No trouble at all. I'll wipe them out now and update the bot not to use explicit templates in the future. Dcoetzee (talk) 18:40, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
As to your template update, what about also hard-coding c:Google Art Project itself? Boo-Boo Baroo (talk) 18:41, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
In the long run I want to empty out the main category - but that'll require recatting a bunch of legacy files that don't use the template (maybe 1000 of them). However, it would be easier to find the legacy images if I first remove all the new images from the main cat, so I think that's an appropriate next step to take. I think for most practical purposes the collection cats supersede the main cat. Dcoetzee (talk) 18:46, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Small update on this: in at least one case somebody did rename one of the Google cats (Google Art Project works in The Royal Collection, London‎ to Category:Google Art Project works in The Royal Collection of the United Kingdom) on the basis that not all of the works were in fact from London but one was from another part of the Royal Collection. I'm removing them anyway since I think it's more important the Google data match the original in this case than be completely accurate.
In another case a user moved Category:Google Art Project works in Musee de l'Orangerie to Category:Google Art Project works in Musée de l'Orangerie (fixing accent). I can make the template handle this case. Dcoetzee (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
You did, See above User talk:Dcoetzee#Category:Google Art Project works in The Royal Collection, London Unfortunately sub cat Category:Google Art Project works in Art in the Royal Collection of the United Kingdom in Windsor Castle is deleted.––Oursana (talk) 20:03, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
I can if you want rename the category to Category:Google Art Project works in The Royal Collection of the United Kingdom in the template, but I don't want to have nested subcats for Google works from different parts of the Royal Collection, as that doesn't add much value and makes matching more difficult. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:07, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
For me it's o.k. the template now is Royal Collection of the United Kingdom, and I like it this way.
Would you like to check the error here File:Bichitr - Padshahnama plate 10 - Shah-Jahan receives his three eldest sons and Asaf Khan during his accession ... - Google Art Project.jpg––Oursana (talk) 21:46, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
That error is due to "pretty_dimensions = h586 mm" in the metadata (it appears to be malformatted). Feel free to fill in commons_dimensions with the actual dimensions if you can find them. I've modified the template to place all Royal Collection, London files in Category:Google Art Project works in The Royal Collection of the United Kingdom automatically, so only that category will be used now. Dcoetzee (talk) 22:02, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Hope I haven't encouraged the creation of a monster here. Glad you can handle the exceptions. Do you happen to know if your change to this template may have a "replication/reparsing lag"? I was looking at some of the bot edits on my watchlist and some files no longer have a GAP collection category, while others with the same collection display name field do. Subjectively the number of files in Category:Google Art Project works by collection subcats looks smaller as well. Boo-Boo Baroo (talk) 03:47, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
Normally any edit to the page should refresh its generated categories - if you see any image not in a collection try to purge the page, and if it is still doesn't show up point me at it, it could be a template issue. There's no risk of images being "lost" since I can find them through Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Google Art Project, so I can do a final pass to make sure they all have collection cats. Dcoetzee (talk) 12:15, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
OK, so unless I'm on something (quite possible these days) here are two files I've purged and don't see a category on. My rudimentary analysis says that they have GAP template data that should produce a viable category, but I'm not looking very hard. The guy from Mad Men William McKinley was the example I looked at 10 hours ago. Another one I just edited and purged is File:Frederic Edwin Church - Tropical Scenery - Google Art Project.jpg. I don't see the hidden collection category on either, or for that matter, anything I pick at random from my watchlist. Boo-Boo Baroo (talk) 14:10, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
Fixed. I'm just bad at templates. :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 14:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Another redraft of Photographs of identifiable people[edit]

Commons talk:Photographs of identifiable people#Another redraft

I would very much appreciate your comments on this redraft. Thanks. -- Colin (talk) 13:11, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Committee invitation[edit]

Hi, I would like to invite you to apply to join the IEG Advisory Committee on Meta. --Pine 09:09, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Google_Art_Project_works_by_Rembrandt_Van_Rijn[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Google_Art_Project_works_by_Rembrandt_Van_Rijn has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

Jfhutson (talk) 23:01, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

bugzilla:40586[edit]

You may also want to try Chromium on Linux, I had better results with it than with Firefox (bug in see also). --Nemo 09:02, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Please add a comment to the bug too. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:13, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you![edit]

Meissen-teacup pinkrose01.jpg en:Thanks for your edits. de:Danke für deine Bearbeitungen. Steinsplitter (talk) 20:19, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you! Dcoetzee (talk) 21:18, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Portrait of a knight by Carpaccio[edit]

Hi Dcoetzee, could you please delete this category and the template?, new cat Category:Young Knight in a Landscape by Carpaccio had to be created, because as usual User:Botaurus refuses to combine one knight-file here in, because in his opinion not correctly named cat [[User talk:Botaurus-stellaris#File:Vittore Carpaccio - Giovane cavaliere in un paesaggio.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Botaurus-stellaris Thank you–—Oursana (talk) 02:58, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I made the redirect to Category:Young Knight in a Landscape by Carpaccio. As you were involved in the category naming (3 files) and one is google art project, I want to inform you. I kept the template under the old cats name.Regards–—Oursana (talk) 01:00, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Okay, no problem. Dcoetzee (talk) 05:48, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Parsing of Artist field[edit]

Hi Dcoetzee, I really appreciate your efforts in making the GAP scans available to everyone! And thanks for adding new paintings day by day.

Some trivia that I just stumbled upon: the artist of the image File:Portrait of a Woman - Google Art Project (403125).jpg was parsed as Unknown (Artist, instead of Unknown. ChristianGruen (talk) 08:11, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Not to answer for Dcoetzee, but I believe this is a result of the way the data comes across from the Google Art Project itself. The reason I'm intruding here is because I've had some related thoughts about the parsing of these artist strings -- with the goal of reducing the number of categories that end up being created for one artist. Dcoetzee, might you consider adjusting the bot's logic to exclude the part of the artist string after an opening parenthesis, when creating artist categories and artist strings in templates -- especially or at least if the paren does not close as in the case of, e.g. "Category:Google Art Project works attributed to Alexandre-Jean Noël (French‎"? There have been tons in this format -- I don't know why the parenthesis consistently doesn't close, wherever the data comes from! Another idea would be to parse any artist string in the form "stringA, stringB" to "stringB stringA" (that is, firstname lastname). I could see this leading to unexpected consequences if they do something like "John Smith, English" (which I've never seen), in which case a replacement of the sort /^(\w+), ?((\w+ ?){1,2})$/ -> \2 \1 would probably be safe, working on a single last name followed by a comma and up to two more words with no other characters (e.g. Category:Google Art Project works by Paggi, Giovanni Battista). Thanks for considering, Boo-Boo Baroo (talk) 04:21, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
This is a side effect of some bad parsing I did early on to handle a museum where they were in fact doing like "John Doe, English sculptor" for the artist field, and by the time I noticed it there were already a bunch of uploads with the unclosed parens. Changing titles is problematic because I have to avoid re-uploads of existing works, and checking the hash doesn't work if the file has been modified since upload, so I have to check prior titles as well. In short I can fix this but it'll take time and I don't really want to change it in the middle, but instead all at once. Dcoetzee (talk) 05:48, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Doectzee, Boo-Boo Baroo: thanks for your feedback! Yes, it sounds perfectly reasonable to do this some time later in a final cleanup operation. ChristianGruen (talk) 08:59, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Why We Fight[edit]

I've seen your bot use Chunked uploads to add some massive Google Art images. Could you task it to upload the Why We Fight series in full? Each instalment is about 200mb in OGV formatCrisco 1492 (talk) 15:19, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Download links: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. Thanks, if you get the chanceCrisco 1492 (talk) 15:21, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
My bot does not use chunked uploads - those files had to be uploaded manually (as you can see they were uploaded by me, not my bot). Automating chunked uploads may be possible but would require some work that cannot be justified for a series of only 8 files. Dcoetzee (talk) 18:46, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Oops, missed that. Alright, if I get to a place with a decent connection I'll try and do some.Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:05, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikilivres categorization[edit]

You mentioned at COM:VP that you desperately need help with categorization. What's the issue with categorization there? It looks like files that are moved to Wikilivres keep their categories, so is it a matter of creating those redlink categories (as well as any potential parent categories), or is there something else? What's the most efficient way to do this? I'm happy to help, just not sure how best to go about it. Thanks, cmadler (talk) 16:18, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

That isn't as simple as it sounds. Our category structure is very deep and complex - if I added all redlinked categories for every upload I'd be adding hundreds for every file, most of them containing only one thing, which would be counterproductive for its much small number of files. So far I've been compressing the category tree by skipping some levels and only including one or two parent categories for each file/category (the ones I judge to be most important, which is why it can't be automated). Additionally I have to worry about merging with their existing category system for books, which is totally different - these need to be renamed and category redirects used. Also, I'm not able to delete any pages there, and even straightforward deletion requests take weeks to process because of the small numbers of users, so mistakenly created pages are problematic. Dcoetzee (talk) 18:51, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
OK, that at least gives me some idea of what is needed. Is there a way to identify files in need of such a categorization review (an equivalent to our {{Check categories}})? cmadler (talk) 14:16, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
That's a great idea. I've created Template:Check_categories_Commons and started adding it to files uploaded by the bot that I haven't already fully processed. You can see them in Category:Media_from_Wikimedia_Commons_needing_category_review. I've attempted to put the advice I gave you here into that template. Thanks for your help. :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 20:31, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
How does one import from Commons to Wikilivres? For example, I updated the categories here, but there are two templates called in the summary. I don't know if the institution template for Kunstmuseum Basel is needed, but there are certainly enough works by Klee that it would be nice to have the Creator template for him. What is the best way to import items and maintaining the file history? cmadler (talk) 14:16, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
I usually just copy the current text, then get a permalink to the latest revision, and put in the edit summary "Imported from http://(permalink URL goes here)". This isn't really 100% CC-BY-SA compliant, you'd want to list the license too, but it's close enough and I have like dozens of them to import. Dcoetzee (talk) 09:25, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Do you know if there's a way to get Gadget-Cat-a-lot on Wikilivres? That would be very helpful. I see instructions for translating it, but that's way beyond me. Thanks, cmadler (talk) 15:02, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm not an admin so I can't port a gadget, and I'm unlikely to get a hold of an admin in a reasonable amount of time, but you can try porting it into your user space. It should hopefully just be a matter of copying and pasting it and any dependencies and modifying them to reference the subpage. Dcoetzee (talk) 01:29, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

DR question[edit]

Hi Derrick. Can you take a look at this when you get a chance? Thanks. INeverCry 21:33, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the 100% accurate photo addition[edit]

Just wanted to say thank you for adding my "Invent" photo into the commons exactly how I hoped it could be used. I appreciate that all of the owner and image attributes, plus CC licensing were listed correctly. Cheers! Dave Jenson

No problem, we require correct verified license and links so it was necessary to do. There are some concerns at Commons:Village pump/Copyright regarding whether it can be used since it includes several copyrighted logos, but we'll see how that discussion pans out. Dcoetzee (talk) 09:23, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

GNU only license OK?[edit]

How's my favorite image expert?

Almost all requests for permission include one of the CC licenses, and some also add a GNU license.

I'm looking at a handful with a GNU only request, and want to see if there are any issues.

My understanding of the GNU license requirement is that a copy of the license terms must be included with the work, although looking at this article, specifically the fourth condition:

The full text of the license, unmodified invariant sections as defined by the author if any, and any other added warranty disclaimers (such as a general disclaimer alerting readers that the document may not be accurate for example) and copyright notices from previous versions must be maintained.

I may be incorrect in assuming that the full text must be attached, perhaps a link to the terms is sufficient.

It was also my understanding, perhaps incorrect, that if both a GNU license and a CC license were attached, you can comply by meeting the requirements of one of them, which I thought was a way around the need to attach the full text.

I see a few request for permission with a GNU license listed, but no CC license, which prompts my question. For example, OTRS ticket 2013010310004893

Are we fine with this because I am wrong that the full text must be included?

I notice the request is 22 days old, which isn't as old as some I have seen, but I am worried it hasn't been processed because it isn't as simple as accepting a GNU only license.

Any light you can shed on this would help, as there are several from the same author. --Sphilbrick (talk) 17:16, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Commons currently accepts the GFDL, despite its onerous condition to include the full text of the license. Some contributors deliberately use this license in order to make reuse as awkward as possible. Needless to say, this practice is discouraged and very contentious. If an OTRS user offers an image under the GFDL only, I would ask them whether they would consider an alternative license such as a CC license in light of the onerous conditions of the GFDL, of which they might not be aware. If they still want GFDL-only, then we will accept it. Dcoetzee (talk) 21:09, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
OK thanks, that is very helpful.--Sphilbrick (talk) 01:26, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Ismael Smith - Ready - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Ismael Smith - Ready - Google Art Project.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:28, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Getty Ms. Ludwig XV 13 14v - Fiore dei Liberi - Combat with Dagger - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Getty Ms. Ludwig XV 13 14v - Fiore dei Liberi - Combat with Dagger - Google Art Project.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

~ Michael Chidester (Contact) 18:02, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Undeletion request[edit]

A few years ago, File:Mercury in color - Prockter07-edit1.jpg was erroneously deleted as a duplicate of File:Mercury in color - Prockter07 centered.jpg, which it actually wasn't. They are similar enough not to be an issue, but the deleted file was a featured picture on the English Wikipedia. In the confusion that followed, the FP banner was placed on the remaining file, although this is technically incorrect. Could you please restore the file? This seems fairly uncontroversial. The deleting admin has since retired, and I didn't want to go through an undeletion request, so I picked your name at random from the list of admins. Thank you. --Paul_012 (talk) 01:11, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem, I restored the file. You can fix up the FP tags if you like. Dcoetzee (talk) 01:13, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Okay, thanks. --Paul_012 (talk) 01:15, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Proust books[edit]

Hi, Derrick. I posted the Proust works I asked your assistance about at Wikilivres and now they are on Commons:Deletion requests/2013/01/31, in case you want to see what you are getting yourself into. I told a bureaucrat, Marc, at French Wikisource that American copyright had to be applied to these works, and he replied that the users of French Wikisource would apply the laws of France and the French-speaking countries. So I don't know what he's going to do. I don't know how long these things take (it takes at least two weeks on English Wikisource) so I will watch and wait. Thanks again, ResidentScholar (talk) 04:38, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I've sought a clear statement from the Foundation that works that are copyrighted under US law aren't permitted on any WMF project. Once this statement becomes available (soonish) you'll be able to link it in support of the deletion. There are many local projects that are currently rebelling against Foundation policy by permitting works that are copyrighted in the United States, and French Wikisource is probably one of them, but they won't be permitted to forever. Dcoetzee (talk) 03:17, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the intell! Good of you to do copyright mopwork. I did a lot of work on English Wikisource of this kind, so I'm kind of resting on my laurels, but I just happened to notice this work accidentally while cruising English Wikisource, so I followed up. Best wishes in your endeavors. ResidentScholar (talk) 05:34, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Take a look at the WMF licensing policy. Works copyrighted under US law are permitted on any WMF project except Commons, provided they are covered by a project's Exemption Doctrine Policy (e.g., en:WP:NFCC on en-wp); Commons is not permitted an EDP, so non-free works are not permitted here. With the URAA deletions, I think some projects have added EDPs; for example, I think de-wp previously had no local uploads but now allows local non-free uploads under an EDP limited to works that are free in Germany but non-free in the US. cmadler (talk) 11:09, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I was not clear about that. Of course works are allowed on local projects under an EDP, but any approved EDP must be in compliance with US fair use law (that is to say - no project can host works which cannot be legally distributed in the United States in the context in which they are used). Dcoetzee (talk) 11:22, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Kindness Barnstar Hires.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thank you for going out of your way to help me tonight. I appreciate it! MJ94 (talk) 09:13, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for helping out at Commons! (and helping quail lovers!) Dcoetzee (talk) 10:03, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

3D objects among the GAP images[edit]

E.g. File:Basin with lady and knight - Google Art Project.jpg

I don't think there are many of these at all. Is it OK to tag them for speedy deletion (after checking whether the museum claims copyright - I imagine they usually do)?

Thanks, moogsi (blah) 15:30, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Some of them sneak through because my object type rules just aren't 100% accurate. In cases like this basin I was simply unable to tell it was 3D by looking at the photograph. Feel free to tag them for speedy deletion but please also notify me so I can fix my rule set (it's okay if there are a lot of them). Dcoetzee (talk) 18:00, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Rare portrait of Elizabeth I[edit]

I see that there is a category of images of Elizabeth I by M. Gheeraerts II (d.1636) Here

  • However it does not include this rare realistic 1595 portrait of the queen by this artist as shown by this Guardian article There is a related article about this piece here

Would you consider uploading this image onto Commons...or would this risk a lawsuit...by the 'Elizabethan Gardens of North Carolina' who own the portrait? I imagine the reason the portrait has never been uploaded on Commons is because it was never placed on public exhibit until now. Just an inquiry. Feel free to reject this idea--for your peace of mind--unless you know someone who may have access to the Folger Shakespeare Library in Washington, DC. Of course, I don't know if non-flash photography is allowed there. This is indeed a unique portrait--which shows the real wrinkled Elizabeth. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 03:56, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Digital reproductions like this are not copyrightable in the US. There is no conceivable risk in uploading it. However this is an easily accessible low resolution image, so I also have no interest in upload it - anyone can do so easily enough. I checked Folger's high-res digital collection at [15] and don't see it there. Dcoetzee (talk) 08:46, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
  • OK. Thank you. It was worth an inquiry I thought since the portrait is on display at the Folger Shakespeare Library in Washington, DC, right now but they don't own it as the article states. The 'Elizabethan Gardens of North Carolina' do. Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:19, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Google Art Project institutions[edit]

Ah, I didn't know that, thankd for telling me! I haven't done it that many times, mercifully --moogsi (blah) 09:41, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Stereoscopic views of streets in Boston, Massachusetts, from Robert N. Dennis collection of stereoscopic views 2.png[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Stereoscopic views of streets in Boston, Massachusetts, from Robert N. Dennis collection of stereoscopic views 2.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:17, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Working Man's Barnstar.png The Working Man's Barnstar
For going above and beyond the call of duty and salvaging so many deleted images by uploading them to Wikilivres. Well done.

--Skeezix1000 (talk) 17:19, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Dcoetzee (talk) 17:34, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Final comment on the Elizabeth I portrait[edit]

I was wondering for a second there whether it was possible if the Folgers Shakespeare Library allowed a photo of this rare realistic portrait of the Queen to be taken but the answer is No since it is owned by a private organization called the 'Elizabethan Gardens of North Carolina..' This organization is only temporarily having it put on display at Folgers. They say this here on their website Folgers did place a copy of the portrait on their flickr Account but they disabled any downloads of the picture. I guess one can only view the display 'On Nobility and Newcomers in Renaissance Ireland' which is free (to May 19, 2013) at Folgers but no pictures. If you have a response, feel free to post a brief reply. Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 03:18, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

That's a great find. The largest-resolution version available on Flickr is at [16] and is 3.3 megapixels. This would be great for upload (although it should be tagged with {{non-free frame}} so someone can crop the frame after upload). Again, this photo is not copyrightable in the US, so there is absolutely no obstacle to uploading it. Dcoetzee (talk) 04:11, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: Can you access that rare 1595 image of Queen Elizabeth I by Marcus_Gheeraerts the Younger (on the link you noted) and upload it on Commons with your own software? The problem is that I lack the software to access the image on flickr if the flickr account owner disables the downloading of the image. The image could be given this catalogue then. What do you think? Its not the legalities....I apologise but I'm an amateur here in accessing images from web sites that prohibit downloading. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 07:19, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
    • No special software is needed to do this other than to view the source of the page. I gave you the direct link to the image. It should be accessible to anyone. In case it isn't, this link should be: [17]. Just upload it. :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 08:36, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Please remove out any unnecessary information--that might get me in trouble--such as the reference to the real owners of the portrait in N. Carolina if you feel that is advisable. I am taking a small risk here. I never did figure out how you managed to access the image whose access from flickr was disabled--though I have seen some flickr users do the method which you did.
  • PS: Did anything happen of the 'sweat of the brow' claim in the UK? Some of the Marcus Gheeraerts portraits from the NGA in London had this notice, I saw. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 10:43, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
    • I removed the frame (which is 3D and so a photo of that part is copyrightable). There is a legal theory that digital reproductions (photos of paintings) first published in the UK may be copyrightable (see Commons:Reuse_of_PD-Art_photographs#United_Kingdom_.2F_UK), but there's unclear precedent on the matter, and this is irrelevant since this photo was apparently not taken in the UK. The origin of the underlying work (the painting) is not important for determining whether PD-Art applies. Obtaining blocked images on Flickr is very easy - click Actions->View all sizes, click the largest size available, then use your web browser's "view source" function and use Find to look for "image_src". The URL of the image will be right next to it. I think the information you included in the file description page is appropriate, although somewhat incomplete - someone else can fill out an {{artwork}} template later. Dcoetzee (talk) 15:59, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Thank you. The painting has always been in the US since at least the 1950's when the N. Carolina group bought it. Its on display at the Folgers Library until May 19, 2013 in the 'On Nobility and Newcomers in Renaissance Ireland' presentation...when I assume it will return back to N. Carolina. So, unless someone can see it, I presume the portrait's dimensions will be incomplete. Anyway, I won't be doing this again, that's for sure if it wasn't for the historical importance of the portrait. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:45, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
  • I gave 1 reference for the image in a footnote. --Leoboudv (talk) 20:00, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Just a brief comment. When I tried the steps you did to upload the image(ie. View-->Source-->Find--image_src), all I got from the 'Find' option table was this link: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8377/8455163233_299d08137d_m.jpg which leads to a small 191 X 240 resolution image even though I had clicked on the highest resolution image of the painting. It seems that by blocking uploads, the flickr account owner makes sure that anyone who gets a copy gets the lowest resolution image which is not even medium. So, I don't know how you managed to get that high resolution image unless you had some extra software. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 00:33, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
    • I gave you bad instructions - don't search for image_src, search for "allsizes-photo". The link is just a couple lines under that. Dcoetzee (talk) 01:00, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
  • OK. I see the link for the max resoution photo now. Thanks, --Leoboudv (talk) 02:31, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Template:Not-free-US-FOP[edit]

It would be fine by me to ignore my question and remarks below. Jim has explained something to me here that makes me think the template's wording may be reasonably OK after all. Thincat (talk) 18:22, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

I see your bot tagged File:HMPrinceton.jpg with Template:Not-free-US-FOP. From the discussion above I realise this may have been a mistake because it was assumed the sculpture was not in the US. If so, can the tagging (and on other files) be undone please? However even if the sculpture was in the UK (after the claimed pre-1978 no notification US publication) I think the tag wording is wrong. I can, if I try very hard, image the conceivable possibility that US courts would use UK law to decide the sculpture was still under copyright. They might then decide to ignore UK FOP and apply US law to decide there is no FOP. However, the tag says "this file must be usable under freedom of panorama in its source country or it will be deleted". But the sculpture certainly does have FOP in UK law so to assert this does not support deletion or retention. The required assertion should be (shouldn't it?) that, if the sculpture is under copyright in its source country, US non-FOP might possibly apply. (I think the sculpture is in copyright in the UK). My mind reels with all this so forgive me if I have this wrong. Thincat (talk) 12:16, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
A terrible afterthought since Commons respects source country law as well as US law. Even with the sculpture in America the UK courts might say "Those damn Yankees have got it all wrong, That sculpture is still in copyright. But because the work is now in the US we respect the law of those wonderful Americans that says there is no freedom of panorama there." So, to display the photo in the UK would be a breach of copyright. Thincat (talk) 15:36, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
I don't fully understand your comments, but there are basically four cases for sculptures:
  1. the sculpture is located outside the US in a country with FOP for sculptures, and is copyrighted in the US, in which case it should be tagged {{Not-free-US-FOP}} and also have a local FoP tag for that country;
  2. the sculpture is located in a country where there is no FOP for sculptures, and is still in copyright, in which case it should be deleted;
  3. the sculpture is in the public domain in both its source country and the US, in which case the page should have tags indicating the reason why the sculpture is in the public domain in both places;
  4. the sculpture is in the public domain in the US, but not in the source country, for example because it was first published before 1923 or because it doesn't meet the US threshold of originality. In this case the FoP tag for its source country is needed, as well as a tag indicating why it is PD in the US, but no {{Not-free-US-FOP}} tag is required.
In particular: no work located in the US should ever have the {{Not-free-US-FOP}} tag, and no work that has a US public domain tag should have the Not-free-US-FOP tag (one or the other). Hope this helps. Dcoetzee (talk) 01:45, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

A brief question[edit]

Just curious since someone is using the new image of Queen E now. There is no problems with old 2D art if an image was created of it in the US but did the NPG stop their litigation on you? Until your case, I had never heard of the 'sweat of the brow' theory which is sometimes used by Cdn courts, too. I suppose that many institutions see old works of art as sources sources of revenue unfortunately.

The Cairo Museum of Egypt has banned picture taking in their building since mid-2005 but at least they had a good excuse--their building is old and small and too many tourists were stopping by the Tutankhamun exhibition taking pictures and creating traffic jams. But at least Commons has a small number of some pictures of their objects taken before the ban--or when they their objects were taken on exhibitions. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:26, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

On this 3800 year old jewelled pectoral (3D art) of a powerful 19th century BCE pharaoh, is it possible if you could use your image technology to remove the afterglow in the bottom right side of the image. The flickr account owner took a photo of it at the King Tut exhibition in Seattle. Normally, it would be at the Cairo Museum and no one could take a photo of it because of the ban there. The pectoral is very clear. I just uploaded the image today. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:23, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

That's an excellent image! I'm not totally clear on what part you mean, the blue part on the right hand side, or what? Regarding Cairo Museum's rules: that's a non-copyright restriction, and although it makes taking pictures more challenging (and may result in penalties for the photographer), it doesn't prevent us from using the resulting images (see Commons:Non-copyright restrictions). NPG never initiated litigation on me, they only sent a demand letter and then never talked to me again after they received my lawyer's response. Dcoetzee (talk) 19:33, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: Thank you about the NPG stuff. About the pectoral image, I meant the yellow and blue after glow or glare that follows the image after the pectoral on its right and bottom southeast side. Is it possible that that this area could be coloured black by you--like the rest of the background. Just a question. If it can, then one could focus more on the pectoral and not see the glare as much. FYI, there is an afterglow because in this other image, the exhibition put the pectoral next to a glass mirror. So, of course there would be a back reflection or afterglow. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 22:28, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure how easy this is to remove but I don't have time. Consider asking at Commons:Graphics lab. Dcoetzee (talk) 05:04, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
  • OK. Thank you, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:17, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Serious problem with google art project images[edit]

I am not sure how to contact you, so I just post my feedback here for you. I have downloaded some of the well known paintings originally hosted on google from your site and compared it with the one from google art project. I found while the total pixel is identical the resolution from your site is only half of the one on google. Your image are 38 pixel/inch while the original on google is 72 pixel/inch. Was this done purposely or by mistake in coding. I understand the whole purpose of hosting some of the best paintings on your site is to bypass the inconvenient "see only, no touch" rule set by google, but you are losing tremendous details. Not sure I am right. Thanks for your attention.

Please be specific about which images you mean. There should be no reduction in resolution from the maximum resolution Google Art Project images. I responded to your e-mail. Dcoetzee (talk) 00:14, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

is the bot still working[edit]

Hi, is the Commons fair use upload bot still working? 17 images marked for transferral were just deleted [18]. --WikedKentaur (talk) 06:37, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

{{PD-old-auto-1996}}[edit]

I can't see anything immediately wrong with this edit, but if you enter a deathyear of 1953 or later, this template doesn't seem to display anything at all --moogsi (blah) 10:05, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Never mind I think I got it --moogsi (blah) 10:16, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback[edit]

You may remember that back in January we talked about the possibility of enabling AFT for Commons images. I've finally written up an RFC on enabling it - would you mind taking a look before I make it public and start inviting comments? The draft proposal is at User:Andrew Gray/feedback. Thanks, Andrew Gray (talk) 11:49, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Now moved to a formal RFC: Commons:Requests for Comment/Feedback. Thanks! Andrew Gray (talk) 19:52, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Cima da Conegliano - Enthroned Madonna with Child and SS Peter, Romualdus, Benedict and Paul - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Hi Derrick, one very small thing, medium template must be {{technique|Oil|poplar}} in place of {{technique|Oil|poplar wood}} [19], I think that happened more often, at least for future. All the best ––Oursana (talk) 03:56, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Commons fair use upload bot didn't transfer a file..?[edit]

I tagged File:Brooklyn Museum - Portrait of Anita Ramírez in Black - Ignacio Zuloaga y Zabaleta - overall.jpg with {{PD-US-1923-abroad-delete}}. The bot tagged the file as a speedy deletion and it was deleted on Commons. Looking at w:Special:Contributions/Commons fair use upload bot, it doesn't appear that it uploaded anything at that time? Is the bot not working properly or am I just being dense? --moogsi (blah) 19:27, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

It's possible that it only uploads files when they're in use, that might have been the problem. I'll look more into it. Dcoetzee (talk) 19:44, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Ah, I didn't think of that. The file was only in use on uk.wiki --moogsi (blah) 21:25, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

You need Login[edit]

Hello DC,

I've had trouble uploading files larger than 100mb in commonsarchive. My connection is no more than 30Kbps, after several hours trying to upload the file, mediawiki,-you need to login. Thanks for your help. --Wilfredor (talk) 23:26, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about that - I'll investigate this. It's possible your session timed out while you were uploading, or there might be a problem with large uploads. You can try uploading it as a set of smaller files (it sounds like you're uploading a ZIP of several files). Dcoetzee (talk) 04:08, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
I try to do it one by one and the same problem resulted (No ziped). Remember that I am in the third world, it may take a whole day to upload those files uncompressed :| --Wilfredor (talk) 04:45, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Okay, sorry about that :-( I'll investigate as soon as I can. Dcoetzee (talk) 04:34, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
No problem, I will be keeping the RAW files on the hard drive, thanks --Wilfredor (talk) 13:18, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Dcoetzee/NPG legal threat/Coverage[edit]

The link

== Danish ==

* [http://www.metroxpress.dk/dk/article/2009/07/20/13/0450-83/index.xml Metroxpress: Museum vil stævne Wikipedia], 21 July 2009 (dead link)
* [http://kpn.dk/billedkunst/article1756055.ece kpn.dk: Museum truer Wikipedia-bruger med retssag], Sarah Kott
 is dead but wikimedia will not let my make a (dead link) notice. --80.161.143.239 11:30, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
This is Commons so we don't have a dead link template, but you can simply put [dead link] after them if you'd like. Thanks for taking a look at them. Dcoetzee (talk) 17:24, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Your prior participation in a discussion[edit]

You previously participated in a discussion at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sex intercourse.jpg.

There is another discussion ongoing, again, at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sex intercourse.jpg.

Please if you wish to do so you may voice your opinions and comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sex intercourse.jpg.

Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 17:26, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Hey, I responded to you at the deletion request, and would appreciate a reply. Thanks! --Conti| 10:49, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Jeanne Lanvin Vuillard.jpg[edit]

Hello, I am following Turelio's suggestion on a matter first discussed on his talk page with the same subject. My understanding is URAA does not create more rights in the USA than in France and the work is now in the public domain in France. Your opinion would be appreciated. Thanks, — Racconish Tk 17:51, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Don't bother. Somebody else explained. Cheers, — Racconish Tk 19:44, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay. The URAA can and often does in fact put a work under copyright in the US that is out of copyright in its source country. Dcoetzee (talk) 17:04, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Google Art Project style work for you[edit]

Hi Derrick. I came across somebody some nice large scans of maps by William Smith. The images are behind a flash zoomify (example) and I was wondering if your bot could stich and import them? You could just place them in Category:William Smith (geologist) and I would do the sorting and categorization. Would be great! Cheers, Amada44  talk to me 11:55, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Amada, these look like some great images to have in high res, and indeed I see no reason not to import the entire Oxford Digital Library Selected Collections. Just ripping the images is the easy part though - setting up a template and filling it in from their information pages is where some work would be required. I'll look into this when I get a chance. Dcoetzee (talk) 17:40, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Could I help you with any of that? Amada44  talk to me 15:57, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Commons:International copyright quick reference guide[edit]

Hi Derrick

I've been away from Commons for a while, and I have just seen the page Commons:International copyright quick reference guide that you started. This is a really fantastic resource, and I'd be interested to know how you collated the information. Do you have access to some good books on international copyright law? I need one or two myself, and I'd be glad of any recommendations you may have. If appropriate, you could post here, or if you prefer you could email me. Many thanks --MichaelMaggs (talk) 12:08, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Michael, as noted on the page, it is based on en:Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights, and the text of various license templates, which in turn include references to sources. Dcoetzee (talk) 17:01, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Nice work.--Sphilbrick (talk) 13:24, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

A question about EXIF in mobile uplaods[edit]

A question for my image expert.

I notice, in this deletion request a reference to no metadata. While that doesn't fully drive this recommendation, I have seen it mentioned before. I know there is a recent push (with complications) to allow mobile uploads. I spot-checked a few, and do not see any EXIF data for mobile uploads. Do you know if this is universally true? I believe that lack of EXIF often is a hint that someone scanned, rather than took a photo. If mobile uploads do not have or do not transfer EXIF, what implications does this have?--Sphilbrick (talk) 13:16, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Lack of EXIF data is often a signal of a copyvio, because the photographers usually have access to the original high-resolution images out of the camera including EXIF data, while images copied off the web are usually low-resolution thumbnails with EXIF data stripped. I don't know if cellphone cameras add EXIF metadata - if they do, the upload tool should be including it and not stripping it. If they don't, then there is nothing we can do except to clearly mark mobile uploads so that we know EXIF metadata shouldn't be expected for them. Dcoetzee (talk) 22:28, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Bot repair?[edit]

I uploaded 683 images to Category:Fotoflug 2013-05-03 - uncategorized, unfortunataly with a mistake in the code: ={de| instead of ={{de|. On my talk page I was told that you maybe could help me out with a bot repair. Is that possible? Would be awsome. --Martina talk 17:55, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

These are now fixed. Dcoetzee (talk) 03:21, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Great, thank you! --Martina talk 13:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

a heads-up[edit]

In 2011 you participated in Commons:Administrators/Requests/Jcb_(de-adminship 2). That discussion ended with User:Jcb losing his administrator privileges.

This note is to inform you that User:Odder proposed Jcb have unconconditional access to administrator privileges restored.

Commons:Administrators/Requests/Jcb (readmin) is scheduled to close on May 20th.

Cheers Geo Swan (talk) 23:41, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Greetings and Salutations[edit]

Hello -

I've been reading about your skills/abilities/interests and am extremely impressed! Also I like how you think! I'm a GLAM professional involved with projects at w:WP:GRFLM and also Commons:DPLA. My current collaborator is retiring from Wikipedia/Wikimedia - big sigh - a great loss - and since I'm not technical, I'm looking for a new project-buddy/collaborator.

Also, I am organizing an application and a team for the BL Labs Competition. I need someone with technical expertise (you?) to discuss feasibility issues around the project proposal, which could ultimately provide Commons with PD high-res images from the BL (which would need uploading - also you?).

This is v out of the blue, but hopefully some of this might be of interest, cuz I'd like to chat! Bdcousineau (talk) 21:04, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bdcousineau, these sound like great projects. I'm happy to discuss technical feasibility of projects. I should indicate though that, as a rule, with stable long-term open digital archives like DPLA, I prefer to pull media from them on an as-needed basis, rather than upload them to Commons en masse. Dcoetzee (talk) 21:41, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Fair enough. Thanks for your reply.
BL Labs: The BL is making several collections "available" for use in this competiton, including the xml/csv files across the image collections. I'm curious to see if it's useful to sort the data by rights status and date and consequently expose the digitized public domain works (and put them out via micro-website for general users to play in - following the model of the Rijks Museum). Once those files are gathered, I imagined adding a code snippet similar to what the Cooper Hewitt did here (scroll down, the wikipedia template is towards the bottom). Small and I discussed doing that with Ford artifacts, and he said it was easy enough (for him!).
As far as I can tell, the BL doesn't make it easily clear which images are PD (I'm a big fan of the OpenGLAM movement, and have watched colleges struggle to convince their superiors to open collections/change licensing ... I thought this might be an opportunity to just 're-shuffle' already open materials.)
I've been in touch with the BL people about their competition (and sat in on a google hangout) and can see that this project as above will not be cool/trendy enough for them, so that's where the sorting by date comes in. After the creation dates are established, a timeline could be generated to show when the not-PD materials become PD (BL Labs eyes light up at this part). As well, so geo-tagging could reveal pockets of "creativity" occuring as the materials were first generated. Run that thru some kind of flash movie, and you could see time lapse "explosions" of creativity. Enough already!
I've contacted the recent BL WiR to get an 'on the ground' idea of PD and other licensing issues for the images. And to get a sense of how many images may actually be PD/have been digitized.
I've located some of the tools that I think can do this (Metamodel for the sorting, Timeline JS for the timeline, and so on) I just have no idea if this will work, because I have no tech skills. Also, if the project wins, I'll need someone to do it (they can have the prize money, too) because I can't.
And about the DPLA - Small is retiring and hoped to do that upload (which is a continuation of the NARA project) before leaving. It would be great to see that one through to completion - we were in touch with both the DPLA dev team and a few DPLA admins who were excited to have Wikipedia be a first mass downloader. I've also thought of a useful app for the DPLA (again sorting/exposing PD materials on their site) since it is only the metadata on the DPLA is free, the images, not so much ... again, have an idea, lack the skill-set. That can be for later, if I find an app dev.
Thanks for reading; appreciate any comments. Deep bow, Bdcousineau (talk) 00:40, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Commonsarchive.org signup errors[edit]

Hi, commonsarchive.org it's a good idea! We are planning to recommend it from wikiArS initiative to schools of art to upload the font files from their contributions to Commons. Now we are trying to do it with students from UCA (Cádiz) that have done 3D animations with Blender. But they can't do the signUp due of and IP error suspected of being open proxy. Most are home DSL access with dynamically assigned IP. I tried to singUp receiving the same error. What can we do? We want to recommend a repository as easy as Commons to signUp for people that have their first contact with wikis. Thanks in advance --Dvdgmz (talk) 07:21, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Dvdgmz, apologies for the inconvenience. The DNS blacklist has generally been pretty aggressive so I've disabled it for now. Let me know if they encounter any further issues. Thanks! Dcoetzee (talk) 20:24, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi, again, thanks for disabling DNS blacklist. Now the signUp it's ok. But students have trouble uploading Blender files, the system says that are empty files. I'll ask somebody to give you more details. --Dvdgmz (talk) 08:02, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
You can see the error that the wiki gives on uploading blender files here: http://www.wikimedia.cat/v/images/c/ce/Error1-commonsarchive-blender.png --Dvdgmz (talk) 08:26, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Sorry about that, it was misconfigured. Please give it another try now. Dcoetzee (talk) 21:39, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. Some students are linking source fonts from there. --Dvdgmz (talk) 10:16, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Confusion in the GAP[edit]

Hallo Dcoetzee, File:Caravaggesque painter - Young man with melon - Google Art Project.jpg is a duplicate to File:Pietro Faccini - Mystic marriage of Saint Catherine - Google Art Project.jpg. Here was a false picture in the Google art project. The description of the picture "Young man with melon" degree are to this painting. This file is not contained in the GAP. regards --Botaurus (talk) 13:02, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

You are quite correct. The information on Google Art Project, which I copied, is incorrect. Unfortunately Young man with melon is not available to upload over that image, so I have deleted File:Caravaggesque painter - Young man with melon - Google Art Project.jpg. Dcoetzee (talk) 21:16, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Google Art Project in Städel/Stadel Museum Frankfurt; Lenbachhaus, München; Museum Kunstpalast, Düsseldorf[edit]

Hi Dcoetzee, are you also busy to keep up with the new collections coming to the project. I am strongly interested in Städel/Stadel Museum Frankfurt on Google Art Project and also the others, see Googles-Kunstplattform-zeigt-drei-weitere-deutsche-Museen.Thanks --Oursana (talk) 15:51, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. I'll import all new GAP images when I have a convenient opportunity to do so. Dcoetzee (talk) 21:19, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dcoetzee, I just want to make sure you haven't forgotten this. Perhaps you could download Städel museum, to start with. It would be much appreciated. Thank you and all the best--Oursana (talk) 11:21, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
I've just completed the work necessary to import new GAP files and started doing so. I'm happy to prioritize any collection/museum that anyone has a particular use for. I'll do the Städel next. Dcoetzee (talk) 12:28, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Wonderful, thank you.--Oursana (talk) 22:14, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Photography workshop[edit]

After our discussion on IRC, and as per your recommendation, I opened a request on the photo workshop page. There is now some discussion as to whether any of the photos should be modified at all. I politely request that you contribute to the discussion in question. Thank you. DS (talk) 15:25, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

I commented there. Dcoetzee (talk) 21:18, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Error uploading Blender files in Commonsarchive.org[edit]

Hi, as I said before, there are problems uploading Blender files in Commonsarchive. Could you look about it? Thanks. --Dvdgmz (talk) 08:08, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, sorry for the delay. I think I fixed the configuration errors. Can you please try again now? Thank you! Dcoetzee (talk) 21:45, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Appropriately Licensed[edit]

You participated at the earlier discussion on licence choice for Featured Pictures. A number of users felt that such restrictions should be made at policy level. Please comment at Commons:Requests for comment/AppropriatelyLicensed. This is a proposal to amend this licence policy to disallow future uploads where the sole licence is inappropriate for the media (e.g., GFDL for images). In earlier discussions there were a number of comments that, while reasonable opinions, did not align with Wikimedia's mission for free content. Please read the FAQ before commenting. Thanks -- Colin (talk) 22:55, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Commented there. Dcoetzee (talk) 21:45, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

User:Dcoetzee/NPG legal threat/Coverage[edit]

In User:Dcoetzee/NPG legal threat/Coverage so are all the danish links dead. Can you write the are death og update the links= --80.161.143.239 19:06, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

I am no longer updating this page, but anyone else is free to remove dead links or mark them as dead links. Dcoetzee (talk) 21:19, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Template:Non-free graffiti[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Template:Non-free graffiti has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this template, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Isderion (talk) 23:02, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Could need bot help[edit]

Hi Dcoetzee, I could need the help of your bot at Category:Coats of arms of families of France. This category contains an awful lot of images that have been labeled with templates like {{COAInformation}} or {{Blason-fr-en}}. That means that the category is transcluded from the template and can't be changed by Cat-a-lot. But I'd like to move all these SVG files to the subcategory Category:SVG coats of arms of families of France‎. As far as I can see, the following checks and changes should be performed by a bot:

  • Edit all SVG files in Category:Coats of arms of families of France
  • If there's only a string |catCOAof=families of France change it to |catSVGCOA=of families of France
  • If there are two strings |catCOAof=families of France and |catSVGCOA=of France reduce them to |catSVGCOA=of families of France

Would your bot be able to handle this? De728631 (talk) 16:30, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Picasa Automatic Upload Tool[edit]

Hello, I would like to encourage you to continue with your project for a Picasa Automatic Upload Tool, mentioned here. I hope you let me know if and when you finish it. I'm a fan of your other tools and I think this would be really helpful. Keep up your great work! Tucoxn (talk) 22:12, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to do this but not sure I'll have time any time soon unfortunately. My original reason for working on that tool is obsolete now, although I recognise it would have some value to others. Dcoetzee (talk) 22:28, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
"Some" value is an understatement :) . Let me know should you need any help. In any way, all the best to you. Halibutt (talk) 12:05, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Internationale melody[edit]

Please transfer the affected files to Canadian Wikilivres, to be undeleted here in October 2017. Thanks.--Jusjih (talk) 04:47, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Done. Dcoetzee (talk) 23:19, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Request[edit]

Hey, if you can remove rollback and image reviewer from my account, I would be very grateful :) Cheers. — ΛΧΣ21 06:32, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Done. Dcoetzee (talk) 06:34, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! — ΛΧΣ21 06:34, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Hey! Sorry to bother again, but could you re-add the image reviewer flag to my account? I will start using it again. Thanks! — ΛΧΣ21 16:44, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Lost image description[edit]

Nice work on superseding to File:Sir Joshua Reynolds - Colonel Acland and Lord Sydney- The Archers - Google Art Project.jpg. But pity on loss of detailed & useful description! (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 13:37, 13 September 2013 (UTC))

It looks like you and Botaurus rescued it. :-) Sorry that I forgot to do so myself. I copied over the categories. Dcoetzee (talk) 21:48, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Google Art Project[edit]

Hello Dcoetzee, this is something went wrong. See here (GAP) or for references here. greetings --Botaurus (talk) 21:21, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Botaurus, most likely at the time of upload GAP used to have a crappy photo of that painting, and have since replaced it with a better one. Thanks for updating it. Dcoetzee (talk) 21:53, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Google art project again[edit]

Hi Derrick! No you can not do again. Google art project continues. There are new collections. Huge request to you, place them Wikimedia. Thank you.

Thanks for letting me know! I will upload new images at some point when I can. :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 21:54, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Temporary file exchange[edit]

Hi! I asked a question regarding temporary file uploads on Commons, see: Commons_talk:Quality_images_candidates#.28Temporary.29_file_exchage_service_on_Wikimedia_servers_e.g._for_RAW_and_TIF_files. Poco told be that you've already implemented such a tool an an own server [20]. I've just created an account and have two suggestions:

  • I would increase the file limit to 1 GB. Panorama images in TIF format which are about 100 MB as JPG (barrier on Commons) are about 500-1024 MB as TIF.
  • Do you think a proposal for an official implementation of such a service could succeed?

It would be great if you comment my questions on the QIC talk page. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:42, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Google Art Project (request)[edit]

Hi Derrick, Huge please download these images at the highest resolution. Sincerely--IgorSokol (talk) 15:12, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

La Venaria Reale http://www.google.com/culturalinstitute/collection/la-venaria-reale?projectId=art-project

1) Vittorio Amedeo II in Maesta 1728

2) Ritratto di Carlo Emanuele III

3) Ritratto di Carlo Emanuele I

4) Ritratto di Vittorio Emanuele I

5) Ritratto di Carlo III

6) Ritratto di Emanuele Filiberto

7) Ritratto di Carlo Emanuele II

8) Ritratto di Carlo Felice

9) Ritratto di Vittorio Amedeo I

10) Ritratto di Cristina Francia (di Borbone) (1606-1663)

11) Ritratto di Amedeo VII

12) Ritratto di Filiberto I

13) Ritratto di Anna Christina Sulzbach (1770-1799)

14) Maria Cristina di Borbone

15) Enrichetta Adelaide di Savoia 1658-63 (equestrian portrait).

16) Ritratto di Maria Teresa (d'Asburgo-Este) (1773-1832)

17) Ritratto di Polissena d’Assia

18) Ritratto di Caterina (Michela) d'Asburgo

19) Ritratto di Maria Giovanna Battista (di Savoia-Nemours)

20) Ritratto di Elisabetta (Teresa) di Lorena (1711-1741)

21) Ritratto di Margherita di Valois (1523-1574)

22) Ritratto di Annа (Maria di Borbone) d'Orléans (1669-1728)

23) Ritratto di Amedeo IX

24) Ritratto di Francesca di Valois (Francesca Maddalena d'Orléans) (1648-1664)

25) Ritratto di Beatrice di Braganza (Beatrice del Portogallo) (1504-1538)

Responded by email to you. I'll try to get the works from La Venaria Reale ASAP. Dcoetzee (talk) 23:15, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
All the 2D La Venaria Reale works are now available at Category:Google Art Project works in La Venaria Reale. I don't yet have the full-resolution gigapixel tile set for the gigapixel image, but all the images are ready to use. This turned out to be more involved than expected due to a dramatic change in how their metadata is stored, requiring a new template as well - the template is still incomplete, so please let me know if you see any missing data in file descriptions that should be present. Thanks! Dcoetzee (talk) 19:42, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Derrick, Huge thanks for these pictures. I wish you all the best. I hope that your activities on downloading high quality images with the success will continue. Sincerely--IgorSokol (talk) 09:46, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

FPCBot[edit]

Hi Dcoetzee,

Do you have any idea on the problem we are facing with the FPCBot? We discussed with many, including Dschwen and Fæ; but unable to sole it. I made a post at VP; but doesn't attract any response so far. It will be very helpful if you can give any suggestion at User_talk:Daniel78#Bot_doesn.27t_close_new_nominations. JKadavoor Jee 08:20, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

As a rule I stay as far as possible away from anything involving FP. I'm busy with the latest Google Art Project upload now so probably won't be able to comment on this. Dcoetzee (talk) 15:54, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your response. :) JKadavoor Jee 16:16, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
There is nothing to express how we all appreciate your contributing from the Google Art Project Oursana (talk) 22:10, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, but really all the hard work was done by the people who preserved, restored, and digitized these works, so let's give credit to them as well. :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 06:44, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks & bot question[edit]

I'll second that barnstar-- wonderful work! I wanted to give you a barnstar myself but frankly I found the coding confusing, not to mention all the choices.  :)

I have a question about your bot. For items in the Yale Collection for British Art, the Accession Number given does not match what is at the YCBA website. For example: File:George Romney - Mrs. Thomas Phipps - Google Art Project.jpg gives Accession number YCBA/lido-TMS-1432 but the YCBA shows Accession Number B1996.12. I don't see anything like "lido-TMS-1432" on the YCBA entry. Is that a GAP number? And is it intentional to use it rather than the actual Accession Number at YCBA? Perhaps include both?

Other images, such as from the Royal Collection, have their correct RCIN number (though it doesn't always say RCIN).

On a slightly different note, can you tell me if when categorizing, images should go in both the hidden Category:Google Art Project works by George Romney and the Category:George Romney? Similarly, should an image be categorized in both Category:Paintings in the Yale Center for British Art as well as the hidden Category:Google Art Project works in Yale Center for British Art? I am looking at his category in particular and thinking that with 600 files, it probably needs subcategories, like the ones for Thomas Lawrence. Before I start moving files between categories I'd like to be sure I'm not making work for someone else.

Thank you so much for everything you do! You've always answered all of my tedious questions so nicely and you continue to contribute such significant things to commons, both in quantity and quality. Great job! Laura1822 (talk) 16:02, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. :-) The hidden Google Art Project categories are image source categories - conventionally, subcategories of artist or museum categories are based on things like artist, location, time period, etc. not image source, partly because an image may later be replaced by another image of the same work from another source, and partly because image source has nothing to do with the actual painting (as opposed to its digitization). In short, please do place it in both the hidden Google Art Project subcategories and topic categories like e.g. George Romney, Paintings in the Yale Center for British Art. You are also free to place it in non-hidden subcategories of these topic categories, like e.g. you could create Category:George Romney‎ paintings in the Yale Center for British Art (not 100% sure that's the proper name).
Regarding the accession number, that information is reproduced from Google's accession number field. They do not normally place their own identifiers in this field. The identifier "lido-TMS-1432" appears to be Yale Center's RDF online record ID (used in the URL http://collection.britishart.yale.edu/id/object/YCBA/lido-TMS-1432 which shows the RDF record). Dcoetzee (talk) 03:46, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Thanks for the explanation; the distinction between image-source-vs-underlying artwork is useful, and the instruction on the Help Categories page doesn't exclude hidden categories from its advice against over-categorization. I will work on the Romney category.
I think your GAP bot is probably the best bot-uploader I've seen yet regarding metadata, and makes my inner Librarian (as well as my inner Art Historian) happy. I see that the RDF record you point to does show the B1996.12 Accession Number down near the bottom of the page, in a link, but for some reason not as a separate identified field. Since this is the number humans use, would it be possible to provide this number also, or instead of the machine-use number? It sounds like a design/interface error from both YCBA and GAP, so I guess you'd have to write a separate bot to go grab the human-use Accession Number from the YCBA site, and my brain hurts just thinking about the complexities. Because, after all, I am sure that you were just sitting there with nothing to do waiting for a new coding assingnment.  :) Thanks for everything. Laura1822 (talk) 15:48, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm very glad that you're enjoying all the metadata. :-) I tried to include as much as I can from GAP. I agree that the accession number field should list the one humans use, and it is certainly straightforward to automate this using the RDF records, but I'm swamped until next Friday so I'll take a look later. Dcoetzee (talk) 19:50, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Wow, that's great! I'm in no hurry. I view these things long-term. I was just wondering, and coming back here to ask, whether you know of any bots or projects which are tackling things like adding GAP images to appropriate artist categories (as discussed above), adding Creator templates, etc.? Laura1822 (talk) 20:37, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
I don't, it's all very ad hoc. My bot adds Creator templates on upload whenever it can find them, which is hit and miss. Some of the adding of templates could potentially be done in Template:Google Art Project by using conditional template logic on the author field, as is currently done for institutions. The most important unfinished task for GAP, and the one I would really love to recruit help for, is inserting the images into appropriate articles, or (where that's not a good idea) noting them on the talk page. In some cases this involves generation of new articles, e.g. articles for lists of works by a particular artist. Dcoetzee (talk) 21:02, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Ah, okay. I was hoping that there was a bot or project working on those tasks, or at least an easy way to identify the files missing categories or creator templates. But the only way seems to be to manually go through all of the Uncategorized as of Date categories, looking for GAP images, which doesn't seem to be a productive use of time. I can't find a way to search either for hidden categories or for templates (e.g., uncategorized template).
Are you talking about creating articles on WP or Commons? Is there an easy way to identify GAP images that are not used in articles? Integration of tens of thousands of images into WP articles will almost certainly require a large-scale Project on the WP side. I'm sorry, but I'm not up for organizing or managing a big project. I can see the big picture, but I can't deal with the big picture.  :) Honestly, I'm overwhelmed with the scale of self-assigned mini-projects like I described above with the Romney category. I also want to go through all the Thomas Lawrence paintings and check them for categories, add Artwork templates, maybe write descriptions, and improvements of that sort. The only way I can contribute is to focus my very limited energy on small things that interest me, and I have a very bad tendency to get distracted (sometimes for days) on interesting but tangentially-related items. I wish I could do more, and I appreciate your need for volunteers, but I just can't. Laura1822 (talk) 18:11, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

User privileges[edit]

Do you know where I should go to request higher user privileges, to be able to move/rename/delete files and categories? I want to tackle a particular Gordian knot of categories here on Commons, and it would be really helpful if I could take care of these tasks myself. Thanks! Laura1822 (talk) 16:32, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

bot/file error[edit]

Sorry to keep bugging you. I found an image with a big error: File:Canaletto (Giovanni Antonio Canal) - The Bucintoro at the Molo on Ascension Day - Google Art Project.jpg is not the image indicated by the title, but in fact a copy of File:Lely, Sir Peter - Portrait of a Lady with a Blue Drape - Google Art Project.jpg. The description of the former appears go with the latter except that (1) the accession number matches the file name, and (2) the "object history" field contains different information. Laura1822 (talk) 03:02, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Bringing this back on to your radar. Can I help in any way with fixing it? Laura1822 (talk) 20:32, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Status of the NPG case[edit]

Display of images used in an exhibition at Vasamuseet, Stockholm.

I wonder what the status of the NPG case is now? I haven't seen any new actions since your reply back in July 2009 and somewhere deep in your talk page archive I found that you haven't received anything either. Even if it's wise to let sleeping dogs lie, do you think the legal threat-page could be updated with a note saying that nothing more has happened so far. I'm helping the Vasa Museum with an upcoming exhibition in which they are using a lot of PD material and they where asking about this case. Thanks in advance and BIG thanks for all your uploads and work.
/Axel Pettersson (WMSE) (talk) 09:05, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Axel, added a line linking to the WP article. There have been no developments. Excited to hear that Vasa is taking advantage of PD materials to build cool new works. Dcoetzee (talk) 23:57, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, that helps when talking to them. I hope someday you'll get a letter saying that they are sorry for all this, but that's probably too much to ask for. On the image here you can see a previous example, and I'll update this page with more info in a while. /Axel Pettersson (WMSE) (talk) 09:54, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
See National Portrait Gallery/GLAM-UK blogpost.Cheers --Oursana (talk) 22:37, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Google Art Project Request[edit]

Hi Dcoetzee, could you upload the MuMa - Musée d'art moderne André Malraux and Minneapolis Institute of Arts content from Google Art Project to wiki commons?

I will do so at once. Dcoetzee (talk) 23:58, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Done, see Category:Google Art Project works in Minneapolis Institute of Arts, Category:Google Art Project works in MuMa - Musée d'art moderne André Malraux. Dcoetzee (talk) 04:37, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you a lot!!

File:Georges Braque - Fox - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Georges Braque - Fox - Google Art Project.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Ash_Crow (talk) 12:07, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

File:Lucas Cranach the Elder - A Faun and his Family with a slain Lion - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Hi Dcoetzee, User:Billinghurst made a redirect to this awful file File:Cranach Lucas 1 A Faun and His Family with a Slain Lion.jpg (uploaded by me until then unconscious about pixels and size) instead the other ways duplicate, what I had been asking for. Of course I also asked Billinghurst to revert his redirect. Regards--Oursana (talk) 12:44, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Oursana, these images do seem to be from the same source and essentially identical (except for differences in JPEG encoding and one extra pixel along the edge). However, there was probably some image in the metadata of each that was not redundant, so I'd recommend merging them more carefully. Dcoetzee (talk) 13:44, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Now finally Billinghurst did the correct merging. Thanks--Oursana (talk) 14:24, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

File:Unknown Greek - Female Head Oinochoe - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Unknown Greek - Female Head Oinochoe - Google Art Project.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may find Commons:Copyright rules useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.


Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Malti | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Marcus Cyron (talk) 00:54, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

File:Unknown Nigerian - Prayer Manual - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Unknown Nigerian - Prayer Manual - Google Art Project.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may find Commons:Copyright rules useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.


Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Malti | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Marcus Cyron (talk) 01:09, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

File:Luis Fernández - Course de taureaux (Bullfight) - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Luis Fernández - Course de taureaux (Bullfight) - Google Art Project.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may find Commons:Copyright rules useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.


Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Malti | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

(talk) 15:32, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

File:Luis Fernández - Tête de taureau mort (Head of Dead Bull) - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Luis Fernández - Tête de taureau mort (Head of Dead Bull) - Google Art Project.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may find Commons:Copyright rules useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.


Afrikaans | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Malti | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

(talk) 15:35, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

File:Harriet Backer - Christening in Tanum Church - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Sorry, but I have no idea what happen. This file was returned by this CatScan2 query, together with those files. I marked them all with {{no license}} tag after verifying on couple of them that they indeed did not have licenses. I have no idea why your file tripped the test for lack of {{License template tag}} template, since it is clearly present in the list of templates used on this page. I (irregularly) used this work flow, to tag new uploads with no licenses that do not get caught by other means, for about 1/2 year now and this is the first false positive. :( --Jarekt (talk) 16:13, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry, I'm sure it's just a rare minor issue that can be fixed. I have a lot of similar uploads that didn't trigger it so I'm not exactly sure what's different about this one, but let me know if I can help. Maybe there was a glitch in the database that gave it a blank description or something. Dcoetzee (talk) 17:00, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
It might be a database timing issue of cascading template record updates. We need 9 transclusions: {{PD-Art-two-auto}} -> {{PD-Art-two}} -> {{PD-Art-two/en}} -> {{PD-Art-two/layout}} -> {{PD-old-80}} -> {{PD-old-80/en}} -> {{PD-old-80/layout}} -> {{PD-Layout}} -> {{License template tag}}, to get from {{PD-Art-two-auto}} to {{License template tag}}. Some database records related to each of those templates have to be updated. Unfortunately I never studied this database schema to know more precisely what is going on there, so to paraphrase Car Talk guys, my opinion is unencumbered by facts. --Jarekt (talk) 18:32, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

File:Max Weber - Adoration of the Moon - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Hi, as with previous files, your bot is not working out the disambiguation for Max Weber. I suggest you take a proper look at this problem, if necessary deferring uploading "disambiguations needed" until a human has worked out how to correctly filter them. Spotted this example but not tagged it, I'm sure you can check through the relevant uploads to do this housekeeping without having lots of unfriendly notices. Cheers -- (talk) 14:59, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't expect so many artists to have identical names. I'll work it out. Dcoetzee (talk) 15:10, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you one more time.

Once again I want to thank you for a great job you are doing for all of us. We like chicks sit and wait each of its worm from you. There's a lot of new museums. Good luck to you in the work for a common cause. Eugene A.

User:Commons fair use upload bot[edit]

Is this bot still operational on Toolserver? Is it making the migration to Tools? It is still a desired tool to have available.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:15, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

I need to migrate it. Toolserver is still up but it looks like my cron got blanked, and additionally it's encountering an error. I'll try to do at least get it running on Toolserver again for now. Dcoetzee (talk) 09:07, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Sorted this out - there were two issues. One was a bug in mwclient which only materialized when upload.wikimedia.org was moved to a different IP from commons.wikimedia.org. The other was that English Wikipedia forbid creating the page File:MNL.jpg because of Titleblacklist-custom-imagename. This is fixed and it should be running again normally now, on Toolserver for the moment. Dcoetzee (talk) 09:47, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
I appreciate your efforts. Good luck with the migration to Tools. I keep hiding from my account there, though I need to break my virginity, just shudder at the results of letting me and my stupidity loose there. ;-)  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:34, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Is the bot still running? I have some File:The Merchant Illusteration.jpg and two other files sitting there with {{PD-US-1923-abroad-delete}} and no action. They are recovered files, and recovered with template still intact, does it look for a fresh usage of the template, or does it just trawl the use of the template as a cronjob (I am presuming the second). Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:48, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

File:African women icon.svg[edit]

Perhaps you'd like to share your views on the DR page, too, because I doubt that the closing admin will take the Village Pump discussion into consideration when making their decision. odder (talk) 10:27, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I didn't comment in the discussion because while I was interested in the idea that offensive media should be permitted for various purposes, I had no particular interest in the more pertinent scope issue, on which basis it was ultimately deleted. Dcoetzee (talk) 09:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Ramaksoud2000 (talk) 01:05, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy Holidays[edit]

Christmas Belles at Crown - 11366677816.jpg Happy Holidays!
G'day, just a quick greeting wishing you and your family happy holidays and all the best for 2014. And of course, a big thank you for putting a leg up by doing what you do on Commons, and helping to make it the fantastic project that it is. Greetings from a warm west coast of Aussie. russavia (talk) 01:31, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! Sorry for the delayed response. Hope you enjoyed your holiday season too. Dcoetzee (talk) 09:52, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Feliz navidad retrasada[edit]

Feliz navidad cc aded 2013.jpg Feliz Navidad
Joyeux Noël frère. J'espère que cette fois vous pouvez l'utiliser comme je l'ai effectivement fait récemment (à venir rendre visite à ma grand-mère), avec la famille et les amis. C'est un moment idéal pour partager et faire un peu de charité pour le prochain. Laissant de côté les différences que nous avons parfois à ces gens que nous aimons. De même, je vous souhaite une bonne fin d'année partie. Un câlinWilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 00:26, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Merci and gracias! I hope you had a great holiday season too. :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 09:54, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Best wishes![edit]

Hi there Dcoetzee! I want to wish you very happy new year! What you've done, uploading google art project is a piece of work! Perhaps you could upload this beautiful portrait, beacause i don't see it in commons. Thanks in advice.

http://www.google.com/culturalinstitute/asset-viewer/portrait-of-the-landscape-painter-frederik-s%C3%B8dring/3wHcvpxYjVz0Xw?projectId=art-project

I have a big backlog of stuff to upload - are you planning to use this one in an article or other WMF project? Let me know, thanks! Dcoetzee (talk) 09:56, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Spam in commonsarchive[edit]

Good morning Dcoetzee, Today I visited commonsarchive after a long time. Now I've noticed a big quantity of spam pages created like userpages. I think how a good idea add some spam extension for mediawiki. thanks --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 12:39, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up - I already have several spam extensions but it's a difficult balance to find something that works without blocking too many legitimate users. I'll look into it. Thanks! Dcoetzee (talk) 09:55, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Unsupported Template:I18n/objects values due to Template:Google Art Project[edit]

Hi Dcoetzee,
I am User:Marsupium, originally from German Wikipedia. I have just begun to empty Category:Unsupported object for the upcoming work of d:Wikidata:WikiProject Visual arts which is my main working space ATM. There are many transclusions of {{Google Art Project}} that fill the object type parameter of {{Artwork}} with values unsupported by {{I18n/objects}}. They appear in Category:Unsupported object. I am mapping the supported values to Wikidata items (and AAT records) at d:Wikidata:WikiProject Visual arts/AAT Objects Facet Mapping. The unsupported values are a problem for the planned import of the data in the {{Artwork}} templates. Would you perhaps be interested in helping me to remove the {{Google Art Project}} transclusions from Category:Unsupported object? I'd be very grateful. I'll anyway have to take a look at {{Google Art Project}} … Thanks in advance, --Marsupium (talk) 12:19, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

That's my fault, it misuses some templates. It should be possible to avoid the messages by modifying the template suitably, but I'm not quite sure what the details are right now - most likely the templates will have to be replaced by similar alternatives that don't use the categories, or the templates will need a new parameter not to use the unsupported object category. Dcoetzee (talk) 09:57, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Best wishes for 2014[edit]

Wikipedia Happy New Year.png

) Feliz año nuevo --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 00:27, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Thank you! I hope you have a wonderful 2014 too! Keep up the great work! Dcoetzee (talk) 09:57, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Dealing with the URAA[edit]

Hi, I see from your posts at Commons talk:URAA-restored copyrights that you are interested in tackling the problems that the URAA causes us here on Commons. I've started a new policy that might help, at Commons:Hosting of content released to the public domain globally. Could you have a look, and also add your thoughts to the talk page? I hope you will support it! --MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:45, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

I'll comment. Dcoetzee (talk) 09:58, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Category:Google_Art_Project_works_by_Vincent_Van_Gogh[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Google_Art_Project_works_by_Vincent_Van_Gogh has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

Jennie Matthews 97 (talk) 22:52, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

CommonsArchive in wikiArS case studies[edit]

Hi Dcoetzee; the use of CommonsArchive.org is reported in this wikiArS case study: Animations using freely available 3D models. Have a happy new year! --Dvdgmz (talk) 11:54, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I better take care of it to make sure it remains available. :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 10:10, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Was that painted using a microscope?[edit]

Hi, on File:Albert Dubois-Pillet - Little Circus Camp - Google Art Project.jpg, your bot used the dimensions in inches for the height and width parameters which call for mm, resulting in the painting being listed as 0.42 x 0.64 inches rather than 10.75 x 16.13. That was a year ago, so hopefully the bot is no longer doing this. I fixed this one today, but I imagine there are a lot of erroneous dimensions on other files still around. XARAdNAM • MAИbAЯAX 01:22, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

This was a bot error, sorry. I may be able to run a bot job to repair them, but if you change them manually this will make it difficult. Please use the "commons_dimensions" field to repair dimensions. Dcoetzee (talk) 10:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Google Art Project Gigapixel Image Request[edit]

Hi there Dcoetzee, could you add this gigapixel image from GAP?

http://www.google.com/culturalinstitute/asset-viewer/portrait-of-the-landscape-painter-frederik-s%C3%B8dring/3wHcvpxYjVz0Xw?projectId=art-project

Hi, I have a backlog of GAP images to upload. Are you looking to use this image on a WMF project? If so just let me know where and I'll see if I can prioritize it. Thanks! Dcoetzee (talk) 10:13, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it is the first time i hear about such project. How may I help?

Okay can you just explain what you're planning to use the image for? I will get all the gigapixel images eventually but they are a lot of work. Thanks. Dcoetzee (talk) 21:52, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Van Gogh's Sunflowers[edit]

Hi there, sorry to bother you. Do you think you can add those two hi-res paintings to wikimedia commons? http://research.ng-london.org.uk/projects/exhibitions/the-sunflowers/images/N-3863-00-000053

That is excellent resolution and I know how to get data from The National Gallery, but first, do you plan to use these images on a WMF project? Can you tell me where? If so I'll see if I can prioritize this work. Thanks! Dcoetzee (talk) 10:14, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

File:William Henry Fox Talbot (British - Carriages Before a Paris Residence. - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:William Henry Fox Talbot (British - Carriages Before a Paris Residence. - Google Art Project.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Tangopaso (talk) 08:11, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

User:Commons fair use upload bot to ro.wp[edit]

Hi. What kind of help would you need porting the robot to the Romanian Wikipedia? Cheers.--Strainu (talk) 09:36, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't have much time to work on it right now - I'll let you know if I do have more time. Sorry about that! Dcoetzee (talk) 09:51, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Template:Not-free-US-FOP[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Template:Not-free-US-FOP has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this template, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

(talk) 16:30, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Google Art Project[edit]

Hi,

Sorry to bother you, but it seems that this painting does not correspond to its description (see link to the museum site). The mistake seems to come from GoogleArt. Any idea on what to do about it? --Coyau (talk) 18:50, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Please feel free to edit the "commons_" prefixed fields in the description to correct the data as you see fit. Google Art Project does contain quite a lot of errors. Dcoetzee (talk) 09:49, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

File:A Consultation prior to the Aerial Voyage to Weilburgh, 1836 by John Hollins.jpg and File:Thomas_Monck_Mason.jpg and File:Charles Green Balloonist.jpg[edit]

Hi: According to the book Falling Upwards by Richard Holmes, the seated figure to the right in A Consultation... is actually Charles Green, while the standing figure to the right is Monck Mason. Thus the two extracted portraits should be reversed, so to speak. Also, the mouseover captions in Green's article should be fixed. Unfortunately, I don't know how to do this. Maybe you could take care of it? Thanks, --Marjaliisa (talk) 03:21, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't have time to look at this right now but any experienced user should be able to handle these edits. Please ask at Commons:Help desk. Thank you! Dcoetzee (talk) 09:52, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Cranach[edit]

Hello! Huge request If possible, download, please, Wikimedia, these three images at the highest resolution. Thanks in advance--IgorSokol (talk) 18:07, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Portrait of King Ferdinand I, 1548 http://www.lucascranach.org/object.php?&obj=DE_SMS_G2486_FR345A&uid=892&page=4&fol=01_Overall&img=DE_SMS_G2486_FR345A_2013-07_Overall.tif

Emperor Charles V 1550 http://www.lucascranach.org/object.php?&obj=DE_WSE_M0074_FR-none&uid=860&page=2&fol=01_Overall&img=DE_WSE_M0074_FR-none_2013-02_Overall.tif

Portrait of Philipp von Hessen http://www.lucascranach.org/object.php?&obj=DE_WSE_M0076_FR-none&uid=862&page=3&fol=01_Overall&img=DE_WSE_M0076_FR-none_2013-02_Overall.tif

Picasa upload[edit]

Hey mate, are you still working on, or planning on working on, a Picasa upload bot? Cheers, russavia (talk) 15:30, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm afraid not. The reason I created/suggested creating it is complicated but no longer applies, so I don't intend to pursue it further. Dcoetzee (talk) 08:53, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Louise Elisabeth Vigée-Lebrun - Marie-Antoinette de Lorraine-Habsbourg, reine de France et ses enfants - Google Art Project.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Louise Elisabeth Vigée-Lebrun - Marie-Antoinette de Lorraine-Habsbourg, reine de France et ses enfants - Google Art Project.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

Bot de-flagging notification[edit]

Hi Dcoetzee, I'm writing to you because your bot Picasa Review Bot (talk · contributions · Number of edits · recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) is about to be de-flagged as a result of inactivity for a period longer than two years. If you'd like to keep that account flagged as a bot, please speak up at Commons:Bots/Requests/de-flag 2#Discussion; otherwise, I'll remove the bot flag from that account in a month from now (). Thanks for your understanding, odder (talk) 13:36, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

No problem. I no longer have time or my original motivation to maintain this bot, in light of the changes to Flickr's free account policies. Dcoetzee (talk) 08:52, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

URAA: John Jon-And[edit]

In Category:John Jon-And there are many images that seem to be affected by URAA. John Jon-And died 1941 and thus the images were still copyrighted in Sweden 1996.

Most of the images seem to be from a book posthumously published 1941 (some or all could have been published earlier) and at least two of the three paintings seem to be published after 1922. I suppose all these have to go. Could you copy them to Wikilivres? Author information has to be corrected, as the uploader marked them as "own work" (with correct information in the description).

Of the paintings Kanalmotiv has 1923 as date. Should it be undeleted 2018? Mariza - Jon And.jpg has 1941 as date but is claimed to be published before 1923, which seems bogus. Skepp Ljus Och Stjärnor - John Jon-And.jpg lacks date. What counts as "publishing" for paintings? I'd naïvely assume these were on display soon after having been painted.

There is also at least one image (Gösta Chatham.JPG) that is OK, it was unpublished and thus PD (?) in 2012.

--LPfi (talk) 08:48, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Session time[edit]

Dear Dcoetzee, When I am uploading a file to commonsarchive show Sorry! We could not process your edit due to a loss of session data. Please try again. If it still does not work, try logging out and logging back in.. A 200 MB file in my country fast connection takes about two hours to upload. Please, Could you increase session time?. Thanks --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 10:53, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

For the moment problem was solved, I compressed the RAW files in 7zip Ultra rate compresion. I uploaded Miranda_en_la_Carraca.7z. Thanks --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 02:13, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Apologies, it appears that I most likely need to increase the file size upload limit, or there might be another problem. I'll investigate when I can. I'm glad you found a workaround. Dcoetzee (talk) 08:48, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

File:Goddess Bhadrakali Worshipped by the Gods- from a tantric Devi series - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

The FP status was granted to the edited version. Would be ok to upload the original separately? --Redtigerxyz (talk) 17:40, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Is it possible instead to upload the modified version under a new filename and move the FP tags to that? I guess that might not be allowed. In any case I'll just leave it alone for now, the original version is in the file history. Dcoetzee (talk) 08:44, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Small request[edit]

Dear Dcoetzee! Could you help remove this picture http://www.bigano.com/index.php/en/alta-risoluzione/49-pisanello--alta-risoluzione/123-pisanello-san-giorgio-che-parte-per-liberare-la-donzella-dal-drago-1429-alta-risoluzione.html. This rare photo featuring the famous frescoe by Pisanello, one of the best gothic artists of the 15th century. It is a very important stage in the history of European painting. Many thanks for all that you do for the readers of Wikipedia. Eugene a

It does seem like an important image but I'm afraid I don't have time. Please consider requesting help at Commons:Village pump. Dcoetzee (talk) 01:06, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Report on the Riots in Kowloon and Tsuen Wan cover chi.jpg[edit]

Please transfer the affected file to Canadian Wikilivres, to be undeleted here in 2052. Thanks.--Jusjih (talk) 06:23, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Bot and works at MFAH from Nov 2013[edit]

Hi, Derrick! Your bot uploaded some artwork from the Museum of Fine Arts, Houston in November 2013 without Institute templates, accession numbers, or links to the works' pages at the museum site. Is this something you can fix with the bot, or will they have to be edited manually? I found two just looking casually, haven't searched to see how many might be involved. The two are File:Circle of Antoine Pesne - Portrait of Two Girls - Google Art Project.jpg and File:Juan Pantoja de la Cruz - Margaret of Austria, Queen of Spain - Google Art Project.jpg.

Also back in November I notified you about another file with corrupted information. I copy/paste from above for your convenience:

I found an image with a big error: File:Canaletto (Giovanni Antonio Canal) - The Bucintoro at the Molo on Ascension Day - Google Art Project.jpg is not the image indicated by the title, but in fact a copy of File:Lely, Sir Peter - Portrait of a Lady with a Blue Drape - Google Art Project.jpg. The description of the former appears go with the latter except that (1) the accession number matches the file name, and (2) the "object history" field contains different information.

Can the bot fix this, or does it have to be done manually? I would have fixed it a long time ago but I wanted to notify you to be sure that if the bot was making errors, you could correct the bot before it made other errors, and/or find similarly corrupted metadata. If you don't want such notifications as these, let me know and I won't bother you with them. Thanks for your time, and I hope you're having a great summer! Laura1822 (talk) 21:54, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

With the old Template:Google Art Project, you could map Google Art Project institution names on to institution templates at Template:Google Art Project institution. They will automatically be rendered correctly on file description pages if this is done. The new files use Template:Google Cultural Institute which doesn't implement this yet. I generally include the accession number if it's available from Google, but for these files it's not. Their link to "See on institution's site: MFAH" also does not work. So I'd have to scrape MFAH if I wanted to provide that data, which would be a totally separate/new task.
Sorry for not responding to the earlier request - I don't really know what happened with that file. The weird thing is that in the original upload the source link did link to the correct image on Google's site but it uploaded the wrong file apparently. I don't know if there was a bug in the bot or an error in Google's metadata which has since been fixed. I don't know how widespread the issue is either. It may require more investigation. Dcoetzee (talk) 01:02, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
No problem, I didn't log in for a few weeks either. Regarding the MFAH, it turns out that they don't have their collection database available online, so they can't be scraped and the info is unavailable. Regarding the institution template, when the Google Cultural Institute template is updated to map the institution names, will that make all the existing files render the institution templates automatically, or will it only work for future files? In other words, do the institution templates need to be added to each file manually? (Sorry, I don't understand the details of how these things work.) Thanks for looking into the file anomaly, and for your time! Laura1822 (talk) 17:01, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Jazzañosveinte.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Jazzañosveinte.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Gunnex (talk) 08:56, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

File:Alexander Heubel - Moses, Aaron and Hur - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Alexander Heubel - Moses, Aaron and Hur - Google Art Project.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

JuTa 10:23, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Featured Picture Nomination

FPCandiateicon.svg

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that the image Mary, Queen of Scots after Nicholas Hilliard.jpg, which was created or uploaded by you, has been nominated for featured picture status; have a look at the nomination page. Thank you and good luck!

File:George Stubbs - A Comparative Anatomical Exposition of the Structure of the Human Body with that of a Tiger and a Co... - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:George Stubbs - A Comparative Anatomical Exposition of the Structure of the Human Body with that of a Tiger and a Co... - Google Art Project.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Kopiersperre (talk) 01:59, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

De-adminship warning[edit]

This talk page in other languages:

Deutsch | English | español | français | italiano | 한국어 | മലയാളം | português | português do Brasil | +/−

Dear Dcoetzee, I am writing to inform you that you are in danger of losing your adminship on Commons because of inactivity.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section/Aug-Sep 2014 within 30 days of today's date, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose administrator rights.

You can read the de-admin policy at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship.

Thank you, odder (talk) 20:00, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Bol, Cornelis - The Thames from Somerset House - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Bol, Cornelis - The Thames from Somerset House - Google Art Project.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Richard Avery (talk) 15:12, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Template:Attribution metadata from licensed image[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Template:Attribution metadata from licensed image has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this template, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Jee 03:04, 16 September 2014 (UTC)