User talk:Dcoetzee/Archive 2013-12-31

"medium" display in GAP uploads

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

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 --Fæ (talk) 23:22, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

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

File:Sadness, by Julia Margaret Cameron.jpg

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)

• Thanks!Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:31, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Max Tilke

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

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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:The Blue Room by Suzanne Valadon.jpg

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

Clarification requested

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

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

{{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

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

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

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, [1]. 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

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

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

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!

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

bugzilla:40586

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!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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?

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

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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

Undeletion request

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

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!

	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

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

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 [2] 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

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

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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

A barnstar for you!

	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

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 [3] 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)

•  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: [4]. Just upload it. :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 08:36, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

•  Comment: Here is the image: File:Elizabeth I portrait, Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger c.1595.jpg

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

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

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)

• File:Pectoral of Amenemhat III.jpg

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)

•  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

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

Hi, is the Commons fair use upload bot still working? 17 images marked for transferral were just deleted [5]. --WikedKentaur (talk) 06:37, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

{{PD-old-auto-1996}}

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

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

Hi Derrick, one very small thing, medium template must be {{technique|Oil|poplar}} in place of {{technique|Oil|poplar wood}} [6], 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..?

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

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

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

• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sex intercourse.jpg

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

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

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

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

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?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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. 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!

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

Could need bot help

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 [7]. 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)

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

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!

	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

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

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

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

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

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

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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

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

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 also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

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

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

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 also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

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

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

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 also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

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

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

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 also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

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

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

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

• File:Max Weber - Adoration of the Moon - Google Art Project.jpg

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 --Fæ (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.