User talk:Ilmari Karonen

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

[edit] More pregnancy images to delete

I see you've deleted Image:Illustration fetus.jpg, Image:Illustration embryo.jpg, Image:Illustration fertilized egg.jpg and Image:Conception B sm2.jpg. Could you also please take care of the following:

• Image:Month 9 sm.jpg
• Image:Month 8 sm.jpg
• Image:Month 7 sm.jpg
• Image:Month 6 sm.jpg
• Image:Month 5 sm.jpg
• Image:Month 4 sm.jpg
• Image:Month 3 sm.jpg
• Image:Month 2 sm.jpg
• Image:Month 1 sm.jpg
• Image:Labor steps sm.jpg
• Image:Conception E sm2.jpg
• Image:Conception C sm2.jpg
• Image:Birth Process.jpg
• Image:Pregnancy.gif

They're all from the same page (http://www.4parents.gov/topics/pregnancy.htm) and their copyright is owned by the National Physicians Center for Family Resources. (The last two are derivative works based on the others.) I contacted the copyright owner to request permission to use these images, but they did not want to allow commercial use, which makes these images unfree. I believe I've orphaned them all, save for talk pages and such. —Ilmari Karonen 21:14, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

How do you know the pictures are from physicianscenter.org? (I guess that's what 4parents.gov told you when you asked, but I just want to make sure before deleting.) User:dbenbenn 23:08, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

See [1]. I also requested and received e-mail confirmation of the copyright status from the National Physicians Center. —Ilmari Karonen 00:14, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pregnancy images

Moi Ilmari!

I got an inspiration on [2] and created series of these images in Corel. Please, see Category:Pregnancy, images Image:Month 1.svg to Image:Month 9.svg. Proportions of pregnant bodies are practically copied, the rest was done according to my skills in Corel. Do you think they are still derivative work or could they be considered as own work? Miraceti 16:35, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] sextant

Well done. Thanx. Could you please elaborate on how you fixed the problem? Lycaon 23:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Which one? For the filled-in magnifying glass and parts of the frame, I just split the path and took the difference of the resulting components. I also directly edited the source and removed the "fill-rule" and "clip-rule" style attributed that seemed to be causing some of the compatibility issues. —Ilmari Karonen 23:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. I was feeling badly for not being able to solve an apparently simple problem. After all, it isn't simple at all... Why does this type of incompatibility happen? Has it anything to do with the application used to create the vector graphic? - Alvesgaspar 23:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

It's mostly to do with the fact that different SVG generators and renderers have different bugs and implement different subsets of the full SVG specification. In particular, rsvg, the renderer used on Wikimedia sites, is not quite the most advanced one. (Another common source of incompatibilities is fonts, but I guess you already knew that.) Often the best solution is just to keep fiddling with the parts that don't render right, trying different changes until something works. If the problem is caused by the program that generated the SVG being buggy or too clever for its own good, often opening and resaving in a different program may help. Also, sticking to the most basic features may avoid problems in general. In time, you get to know what works and what doesn't. —Ilmari Karonen 00:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Hi Ilmari, I was tagging some of your cat photos and I just wanted to say thankyou for uploading hi-quality photos of interesting things, and giving them such detailed descriptions. It makes Commons a much richer resource IMO. :) cheers --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 14:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Mass-Spring-Damper.svg

Hi, nice work with the image! I think the problem is that the browser doesn't support the arrow heads. I had the same problem once and I decided to exchange the arrows for simple lines and draw triangles in the ends. nmnogueira 11:45, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Electronics

I left a message for you at Image talk:Möbius resistor.svg but it looks like you haven't seen it yet... (please reply there to keep the discussion centralized). --Thinboy00's Global Sock 05:56, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Sexy_dancer_03.jpg

24.99.192.134 22:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Cc-by-nc-3.0-us

Oh, sorry. Then template and Image:Tetropium fuscum.jpg must be deleted Laisverobotams (talk) 20:56, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:HOAt.gif

Česky | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Español | Suomi | Français | עברית | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Русский | +/−

Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Please keep in mind that images and other files on Commons must be under a free license and should be useful to the Wikimedia projects. To allow others to use your files, some additional information must be given on the description page. Most importantly:

• Describe what it is about in a short sentence. (What does the image show?)
• State the author and the date of creation. If you made it yourself, say so explicitly. If it is from another Wikimedia user, link to the person's local user page. Best to use CommonsHelper.
• If you did not create the file yourself, state the source you got it from.
• Add a copyright tag - images without an appropriate license tag will be deleted.
• Add the image to one or more gallery pages and/or appropriate categories, so it can be found by others. To find out where an image belongs, you can use CommonsSense.

If you copied the file from another wiki, please copy all information given there and say who uploaded it to that wiki. Use CommonsHelper.

It is recommended to use Template:Information to put that information on the description page. Have a look at Template talk:Information for details of the use of this template.

You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file.

Please add as much information as possible. If there is not sufficient information, the file may have to be deleted. For more information, follow the Commons:First steps guide. If you need help or have questions, please ask at the Help desk.

Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Sz-iwbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Sz-iwbot (talk)) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Sz-iwbot (talk) 03:21, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

English | Italiano | +/−

It has been found that Image:Ching ling foo.jpg has a deprecated license tag. Please choose a new free license tag which describes the rights of the image correctly otherwise it will be deleted!Thanks for your consideration. This is an automatic message by Filbot.--Filnik 03:34, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

English | Italiano | +/−

It has been found that Image:Arg-airforce-OF1b.png has a deprecated license tag. Please choose a new free license tag which describes the rights of the image correctly otherwise it will be deleted!Thanks for your consideration. This is an automatic message by Filbot.--Filnik 20:07, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

English | Italiano | +/−

It has been found that Image:Ido.jpg has a deprecated license tag. Please choose a new free license tag which describes the rights of the image correctly otherwise it will be deleted!Thanks for your consideration. This is an automatic message by Filbot.--Filnik 18:31, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Martin Evans Nobel Prize.jpg

I am nto sure what the problem was - it displayed an open properly on my computer. Re-uploaded though as you requested. --Zureks (talk) 08:13, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MIMEStatBot and media types

Just got sent a link to Commons:MIME type statistics -- neat!

I notice it doesn't though distinguish between audio and video Oggs currently. There's a separate media type field in the database which can be used to tell these part, in case you want to add a breakdown.

Running a quick query to get the current stats on commons...

+----------------+----------+
| img_media_type | count(*) |
+----------------+----------+
| AUDIO          |    92123 |
| VIDEO          |     2120 |
| MULTIMEDIA     |       67 |
+----------------+----------+

Not quite sure what the 67 files that aren't video or audio are. ;) --brion (talk) 00:57, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip! I'd looked at that field before, but didn't realize that's what it was for. I'll add it to the next report. Anyway, just ran a test query, and it seems the only MIME types with more than one media type on Commons are "unknown/unknown" (57 UNKNOWN, 4 BITMAP, 1 DRAWING), "application/ogg" (as above), "application/photoshop" (2 UNKNOWN, 9 BITMAP, 1 DRAWING) and "image/x-ms-bmp" (179 UNKNOWN, 1 BITMAP). —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 17:49, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] {{ID-USMil}}

Seems that you know a bit more than I do. May you want to give an example on the template's discussion page :-)
thx for help --D-Kuru (talk) 10:28, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Since the template isn't in use yet, I just made some changes to the template itself. I'm hoping they more or less match what you wanted, but feel free to fix any mistakes I may have made and/or to ask for any more help if you need it. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 23:50, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

The weblink still doesn't work :-/

I like your idea with "{{#if:{{{1|}}}|{{#switch:{{{2|Armed Forces}}}
|Armed Forces|Army|Navy|Air Force={{{category|[[Category:Images by the U.S. {{{2|Armed Forces}}} with known IDs]]}}}". That's exactly what I searched for :-)

--D-Kuru (talk) 13:30, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

You need to put "url=" before the link, like in the example on the template page. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 20:52, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I have some more ideas to upgrade this template. May you can help me again.
Mattes changed the used image. My idea is to change the image for every different authorgroup (for example: the army gets the army emblem, the navy the navy emblem and so on). Do you know of this option is possible and how to do it?
thx for help --D-Kuru (talk) 22:50, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. It's quite straightforward to do with {{#switch:}}. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 02:53, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again for help :-D

--D-Kuru (talk) 12:11, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Technical problem with Image:CodeCmmt002.svg

Hi, please see Image talk:CodeCmmt002.svg. //Knuckles (talk) 12:42, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] COM:VP#More of a Problem...

Hi, as I trust you more than one "salwadordali", I put the "retouched" tag on File:Blossoming Almond Tree.jpg, but without filling in a comment. I admit that such checks are somewhat beyond my technical abilities, and, besides, do not interest me. Besides, I do not know the picture, nor have a first-rate reproduction of it available.

I had rather liked to cleanup and somewhat balance Category:Vincent van Gogh (see talk), where those badly described mega-uploads are quite disturbing, but AGF (on uploaders) I've to handle them somehow. I'm not even sure whether such stuff might be intended as kind-of-"mailbombs", but on the other hand, if 100MB are allowed, a 30MB file is anyways (I'm talking about my COM:VP note, but actually am not willing to waste more time in checking such, my equipment being too poor, and my technical experience obviously either. Could you possibly help? It's about that "Heritage-Torrent". Maybe, even a cu might be appropriate [s. vs. Olpl].) Thanks, [w.] 07:49, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I can certainly help with technical issues like this (though I don't know how often they actually tend to come up). Unfortunately, I'm not much use with the art-historical side of the project: about the only van Gogh works I might just barely recognize are "Starry Night" and "Sunflowers" (and, since yesterday, "Almond Blossoms" :). But if you need help in dealing with large files, or, say, with template syntax or such things, do let me know.

Anyway, I tried to figure out who might've photoshopped the edges of the version at File:Blossoming Almond Tree.jpg. The small version at http://www.obrazy-vangogh.com/obrazy/432kwitnacymigdalowiec94x74.jpg appears to be scaled down from the edited version, so it's possible that whoever runs that website did it. I'd like to know where User:Salwadordali found the large version, though — I couldn't find it on that website, but it was kind of hard for me to browse since I don't understand much Polish at all. Neither could I find anything matching the edited version on Google image search nor on GazoPa. There do seem to be plenty of even more tightly cropped versions on the net, including a few here on Commons.

Of the (seemingly) authentic versions I could find online, the best ready-to-upload one seems to be this one at artchive.com. There's a much higher-quality one at vangoghmuseum.nl, but it's only downloadable in pieces. Not that it should be technically that hard to stitch them together into one big image, but it's really not something you'd want to do by hand. I did also find someone's personal snapshot, which, though of low quality in itself, seems to confirm that the crop on these two versions does match the actual painting. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 05:14, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, that is quite enlightening [I think you had to work on it for a while ?]. I, for myself, am not at all interested to "stitch" material which is provided with a lot of work for offering it to every visitor of owning museum's page, just to "gather" such for WP -- imo it would be just fair to link to such site whilst providing a reasonably low-res version for quick lookup. According to what you provided, that ******* "so-called" vG Blossoming Almond Tree should rather have a DR (and other uploads of same user should be inspected quite closely). How to proceed? [w.] 20:54, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

On downloading all the pieces, you might want to see Help:Zoomable images#Zoomify... we have the tools to mass-download the tiles, and even a script to assemble them in the GIMP. Lupo 21:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Upload headings in viewer's interface language

Hi Ilmari,

re this thread on wikitech-l, to which you also commented: why not use the same mechanisms as are used for {{int:}}? See User:Lupo/xx (your interface language), in Bulgarian, in German, in Suomi...

I don't participate in the mailing lists, but maybe that would merit pointing out there. It appears the mechanisms are in place, it'd just be a matter of generating the wikitext of the image description page using {{int:}} instead of the pre-resolved messages.

Whatever is done, someone should also think about how to migrate already existing image description pages.

Cheers, Lupo 08:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, my proposal on the list was to use a MediaWiki message instead of hardcoded headings. That's the most flexible solution. The Mediawiki message could be set to whatever we want. It could include the old headings, the new headings as proposed by you or could be empty (that's what I prefer). So, if your proposal is meant as an alternative to the Mediawiki solution, I'm all against it. But if your proposal is meant to be used together with the Mediawiki solution, it's at least a solution that can be considered.

The int: solution is of course better than the solution we have at the moment, but I prefer getting rid of the headings on Commons. They don't add anything. The description part will always be either the information template or some other template like painting etc. and the license part will also always be templates. It's easily visible what's the meaning of those templates. The two headings are a relic from old times when there were no templates or any advanced features. In those dark ages it was all plain text that needed some headings to structure it. But those times are gone and the headings are not needed anymore.

Aside note: On User:Lupo/xx you use {{int:summary}}. This won't work. That message is for edit summaries. The correct one would be {{int:filedesc}}. --Slomox (talk) 16:22, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Oops, minor oversight of my part. Fixed. Lupo 16:31, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Besides, the software does use MediaWiki messages. The problem is that these are language-resolved at the time of the upload, and are thus shown in the uploader's interface language, not in the viewer's. I think it's lines 1802 to 1804 in SpecialUpload.php:

$filedesc = $comment == '' ? '' : '== ' . wfMsg ( 'filedesc' ) . " ==\n" . $comment . "\n";
$pageText = $filedesc .
   '== ' . wfMsgForContent ( 'license' ) . " ==\n" . '{{' . $license . '}}' . "\n";

Simply using '== {{int:filedesc}} ==\n' and '== {{int:license}} ==\n' instead of '== ' . wfMsg ( 'filedesc' ) . " ==\n" and '== ' . wfMsgForContent ( 'license' ) . " ==\n" should do the trick, no? Lupo 18:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

But how about replacing the old code

    static function getInitialPageText( $comment, $license, $copyStatus, $source ) {
        global $wgUseCopyrightUpload;
        if ( $wgUseCopyrightUpload ) {
            if ( $license != '' ) {
                $licensetxt = '== ' . wfMsgForContent( 'license' ) . " ==\n" . '{{' . $license . '}}' . "\n";
            }
            $pageText = '== ' . wfMsg ( 'filedesc' ) . " ==\n" . $comment . "\n" .
              '== ' . wfMsgForContent ( 'filestatus' ) . " ==\n" . $copyStatus . "\n" .
              "$licensetxt" .
              '== ' . wfMsgForContent ( 'filesource' ) . " ==\n" . $source ;
        } else {
            if ( $license != '' ) {
                $filedesc = $comment == '' ? '' : '== ' . wfMsg ( 'filedesc' ) . " ==\n" . $comment . "\n";
                 $pageText = $filedesc .
                     '== ' . wfMsgForContent ( 'license' ) . " ==\n" . '{{' . $license . '}}' . "\n";
            } else {
                $pageText = $comment;
            }
        }
        return $pageText;
    }

with the new code

 
    static function getInitialPageText( $comment, $license, $copyStatus, $source ) {
        global $wgUseCopyrightUpload;
        if ( $wgUseCopyrightUpload ) {
            if ( $license != '' ) {
                $licensetxt = wfMsgForContent( 'fileupload-licenseUCU', wfMsgForContent( 'license' ), $license );
            }
            $pageText = "$licensetxt" . wfMsgForContent( 'fileupload-defaultUCU', wfMsgForContent ( 'filedesc' ), wfMsgForContent ( 'filestatus' ), wfMsgForContent ( 'filesource' ), $comment, $copyStatus, $source );
        } else {
            if ( $license != '' ) {
                $filedesc = $comment == '' ? '' : wfMsgForContent( 'fileupload-filedesc', wfMsgForContent( 'filedesc' ), $comment );
                 $pageText = $filedesc . wfMsgForContent( 'fileupload-default', wfMsgForContent ( 'license' ), $filedesc, $license );
            } else {
                $pageText = wfMsgForContent( 'fileupload-simple', $comment );
            }
        }
        return $pageText;
    }

and setting the messages to this:

'fileupload-licenseUCU' => "== $1 ==\n{{$2}}\n",
'fileupload-defaultUCU' => "$1 ==\n$4\n== $2 ==\n$5\n$licensetxt== $3 ==\n$6",
'fileupload-filedesc'   => "== $1 ==\n$2\n",
'fileupload-default'    => "$2== $1 ==\n{{$3}}\n",
'fileupload-simple'     => "$1",

? We have to change the Mediawiki source, so why not go the full way and make it flexible? We could get rid of the heading by changing the Mediawiki messages onwiki (if we want to), or we could change the order (e.g. license first, then description). We would just be flexible. --Slomox (talk) 21:52, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

But doesn't your code still language-resolve the messages at upload time to the uploader's interface language? I think you'll have to use {{int:}} somewhere to get the language resolution to the viewer's interface language at load time. Lupo 07:23, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

But doesn't your code still language-resolve the messages at upload time to the uploader's interface language? Yes. I don't want to change the default behaviour. I guess, it's reasonable to keep the default text in the content language. On Spanish Wikipedia the text should be displayed in Spanish and on the Swedish Wikipedia in Swedish. Localisation is only needed on multilingual wikis. The localisation comes in, when we onwiki change MediaWiki:fileupload-default from "$2== $1 ==\n{{$3}}\n" to "$2== {{int:license}} ==\n{{$3}}\n" and MediaWiki:fileupload-filedesc from "== $1 ==\n$2\n" to "== {{int:filedesc}} ==\n$2\n".

My proposal doesn't change the default, but it makes it possible to customize the results by editing the Mediawiki messages. --Slomox (talk) 16:47, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Individual image review for transfer

Hello. The diagram again. Gun Powder Ma (talk)

[edit] Llaima y alrededores.jpg

Thank you. Sorry, my mistake.--Carrilano (talk) 20:57, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Photographs of identifiable people again

I have made some changes to Commons:Photographs of identifiable people/Proposal in response to a variety of helpful suggestions that users have made on the talk page. You have already commented there; could I ask you to have a look again, and to consider whether you would like to express an opinion in the Poll towards the bottom of the page? Many thanks. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Your information is missing permission

Hi there, Ilmari Karonen. I have nominated your information picture for deletion, a=because you forgot to agree and obtain permission. Hope you deal with it... Flappy (talk) 19:20, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note (even if, from your other edits, it does seem you were here just to vandalize). That image is not actually mine: all I did was reupload it one point after the original version had been lost due to a software bug. I've edited the image description page to correctly attribute the actual authors. (I see Foroa had already corrected the licensing status.) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 17:22, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Ping

You've got e-mail. — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 19:51, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Why on earth...

... aren't you an admin on Commons? I'm baffled :). Patrícia ^msg 20:19, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Patricia.... For some reason I asked too, though I was first! :) — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 20:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I see now you had a "e-mail section" above mine. Well, Ilmari can count with two votes, I guess :P. Patrícia ^msg 20:25, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

(ec) Actually, I'd been thinking of requesting of adminship here, but hadn't worked up the confidence to actually do it yet (and I wasn't sure if just now would be the perfect time, what with the Main Page thing and all :). Mind you, I wasn't really that active here until this year, and I'm only now starting to feel like I actually know how things work around here. If either or both of you would like to nominate me, though, I'd be glad to accept. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 20:34, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Glad to hear. I'll write a nom when I've got some time left. — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 20:49, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Here it is. Please accept, and we're ready to run. Good luck! --— Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 15:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Administrator

Deutsch | Česky | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Русский | Slovenčina | +/−

---

Ilmari Karonen, onnittelut! Sinulla on nyt ylläpitäjän oikeudet Commonsissa. Odota kuitenkin vielä hetkinen ja lue Commons:Administrators, Commons:Administrators' noticeboard ja Commons:Deletion requests.

Voit halutessasi liittyä IRC-kanavalle seuraamme: #wikimedia-commons @ irc.freenode.net. Commonsin ylläpitäjille on myös oma IRC-kanavansa: #wikimedia-commons-admin.

Harkitse myös liittymistä kanavalle #wikimedia-admin, kaikkien Wikimedian ylläpitäjien yhteiselle kanavalle.

Kannattaa lukea myös Commons:Guide to adminship.

Tarkista myös, löydytkö listoilta sivuilla Commons:List of administrators, Commons:List of administrators by language ja Commons:List of administrators by date.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations! I look forward seeing more of you. — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 15:48, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, all of you. :) I have to say I didn't expect the support to be quite so unanimous. I'm deeply moved by the trust placed in me, and I'll try to live up to the expectations in wielding the mop responsibly and not screwing up too often. :) (And now I'm trying to resist the temptation to go out and buy some apple pie...) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 15:58, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations, and thank you for helping :). Patrícia ^msg 18:46, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, congratulations. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:43, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thanks for re-uploading the highest resolution image of this photo and preserving the metadata. Normally, I upload the highest resolution images from flickr but this was not from flickr...and I had forgotten this fact sadly. With kind Regards from Canada, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks again! Can it work in transclusions as well?

Thanks again for enabling making gallery without chess-board backgrounds! One more thing - can it work in transclusions in Wikipedia as well, e.g. for the images in en:File:Tuberculosis symptoms.svg#See also? The images in the file here in commons (File:Tuberculosis symptoms.svg) is class="nochecker" and it works when viewing in commons, but currently not when viewing the same image page in Wikipedia. Mikael Häggström (talk) 19:16, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I've just added the same rule as I added here to en:MediaWiki:Common.css. Assuming nobody reverts me, it should work there too after clearing your cache. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 19:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] re: your stereoscope question

hi;

just cc'ing you a copy of the note i left on your question @ "village pump", in case you weren't checking it for further changing.

NOTE: speaking from an archivist's perspective, it is desirable & useful for WMC to have hi-res scans of the complete & original stereoscope as-is (in original, unrestored, unretouched condition), as well as any modified versions you care to create & submit. as a historical object/document tho, it's the original card that is the most important; everything else is derived from it. it also makes it possible for others to work from the original material (& the original upload file version should not be overwritten by any subsequent editor!). also; a high-quality scan of the reverse side of the card, appropriately labeled to "match-up", would always be of use & interest. Lx 121 (talk) 09:10, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] That torrent

Ilmari, could you pipe up at COM:FPC#File:Pierre-Auguste Renoir 007.jpg? The image is Renoir's The Two Sisters (On the Terrace), and I believe it came from that torrent. People are unsure about whether these are the original colors. The few images from that torrent that I got all have a Kodak Color Card in them that could help establishing whether the reproduction is accurate. Unfortunately, I didn't get this one yet. Lupo 22:08, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I've uploaded a copy in JPEG format with the color card. The TIFF version is too large to upload here (282 MiB), but if you're specifically interested in just that image, most BitTorrent clients these days will let you choose which files to download from a multi-file .torrent. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 09:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I know, did so. Stalled at 98%. :-( Thanks! Lupo 09:38, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh well, give it some time. Those last few bytes always take the longest, especially if there aren't too many seeders. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 09:41, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] POTY editing

I agree with your remark at File talk:Biandintz eta zaldiak - modified2.jpg. What do you think about this other version? Shawnc (talk) 22:52, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Hermitage torrent

Hello,

Do you have a copy of the Hermitage torrent file? I can't get it, but I would like to have a copy of the Derain, Matisse and Kandisky works, which can't be uploaded to Commons, but are public domain in Canada. Thanks for your help, Yann (talk) 19:47, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't the mininova link posted by Diaa abdelmoneim work for you? —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 10:24, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the link is fine, but I can't get the whole torrent: too big, it crashes my PC. I didn't find yet a usable torrent client on Linux. Yann (talk) 14:17, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm using KTorrent myself. Transmission should be fine as well, and there are others too. Most BT clients these days will let you select which files to download. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 14:37, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Mishuga Zaspivaj meni moju pisnu.ogg

Hi! I've kept the file and closed the DR. Could you please add a few words of description in English? Jastrow (Λέγετε) 19:14, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] FP promotion

The image has been promoted to Featured picture The image File:Renoir, Pierre-Auguste - The Two Sisters, On the Terrace.jpg, which was nominated by Yann at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Renoir, Pierre-Auguste - The Two Sisters, On the Terrace.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

Thanks for fixing the cat-a-lot bug. I really appreciate the feature working properly now :) --Sailko (talk) 19:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] CopyVio

[edit] File:Renoir, Pierre-Auguste - The Two Sisters (On the Terrace) (uncorrected).jpg

--4649 06:09, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Speyer Dom BW 1 (edit).jpg

Hello, good work!

[edit] Hello

Hello. this picture is probably a copyright violation. It is a edited version of a commonly used copyrighted image.Take a look at google searches here. --Eldarion (talk) 15:24, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I've tagged the image as {{copyvio}}; if nobody disagrees, it will be deleted shortly. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 15:32, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:Andino12345

Want to block him? Or issue a last "end copyvio" notice, since the deleted uploads were a few months old already? --Eusebius (talk) 20:27, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Done. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 20:32, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] RTL fix

Regarding your ltr/rtl fix for {{GFDL/lang}} (Template_talk:GFDL#RTL_template), I'm planning to add something like that to {{ll}} and probably some other templates but I was wondering if there's a better way to do this. One idea I had was to utilize MediaWiki:Pipe-separator. I also thought of adding ‎/‏ instead of spans. Basically, the goal is to simplify the code, if that's possible. Any ideas? Rocket000 (talk) 21:35, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] CheckUsage

Well, I use for quite some time User:Lupo/testfile.js, which does it all in JS without any need for a toolserver. Only thing that keeps me from publishing this (replacing the old CheckUsage gadget) is that I'd like to use the site matrix instead of hardcoding the list of projects. But the site matrix may contain wikis on which the API is disabled, and then my script will eventually block (if it encounters the tenth such wiki) because the result of an API call with a disabled API is not a JSON error result, not even proper HTML, but simple text. Any idea how to avoid this? Lupo 09:41, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps a simple timeout would work? Just forcefully remove the script tag (or increase the connection limit) and let another connection take its place if the callback hasn't been called in n seconds?

Of course, I'd also suggest an embedded blacklist of wikis that are known not to have the API enabled. You don't want to even try them if they're just going to time out. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 12:37, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, a timeout might work. Though its imprecise. Might be an idea anyway to catch unresponsive projects that normally should return an answer. A black list would still mean to hardcode some projects (though less than with the whitelist). If the site matrix could just give some basic info about the sites (read/write API enabled or not? Maybe even wgScriptPath, wgArticlePath?) one could just request the site matrix from the server and then take it from there. Lupo 12:47, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Public Domain Advertisements

In response to your request, I added an Advertisement section to Commons:Image casebook.

I have more on my talk page. User_talk:Swtpc6800#Most pre-1978 magazine advertisements are likely in the public domain.

-- Swtpc6800 (talk) 03:52, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I took a look at your text and tried to edit it a bit to make it as clear as possible that ads published since March 1989 are still copyrighted. I hope the changes I made constitute an improvement. In any case feel free to improve it further or to correct any mistakes I may have made. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 12:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] All scripts are gone

Hi Ilmari, I dont know how to express this technically correct: All scripts are gone! HotCat, Nominate for deletion and QuickDelete in the toolbox, all extra tabs including log, purge, FlickrReview tabs, DelreqHandler on DR subpages... all. Maybe http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Common.js&action=history? --Martin H. (talk) 15:31, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Have you tried clearing your cache? One of the edits I made had a syntax error; I fixed it within minutes, but your browser might've grabbed a copy just then. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 15:33, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Did. It seems like they are coming back, the Usernotification and AddInformation are back, the extra tabs and QuickDelete buttons are still lost. Maybe it take some time, thanks so far. --Martin H. (talk) 15:46, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, if the problem was a stale copy of Common.js, a single cache refresh should fix it completely. If only some tabs are working, I suspect the problem is something else. Anyway, I can't really test it, since they all seem to work fine for me. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 15:51, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I can see the gadgets in the preferences, FWIW. — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 16:29, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Wired. All Gadgets for the File namespace except MediaWiki:AddInformation.js and also the Gallery tab on Userpages are gone for me in IE (8.0.6001), MediaWiki:UserMessages.js is shown up and it opens an edit window but it not edits or saves. Everything OK in Firefox (3.0.6). I not changed any security settings or installed any software or plugin. Sorry for bothering you with my problems. --Martin H. (talk) 18:47, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

IE (all versions) have problems clearing their cache. A simple Ctrl-reload won't do it. The following procedure usually works for me:

1. If you're not logged in in IE, do so
2. Go to your user page
3. Manually clear the cache (Internet Options→Delete temporary files).
4. Ctrl-reload (may or may not actually refresh the cache, depending on what IE still has in RAM)
5. Exit IE
6. Repeat

In the second round, step 4 really should load the current versions of the scripts. Oh, and I have set up IE to check for new versions of a page upon each access. Lupo 20:36, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

It was something other. I reseted my browser to default settings and now it works again. Maybe I blocked some script or I had a plugin instaled that was incompatible. --Martin H. (talk) 13:21, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I found out it was the compatibility view http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2008/08/27/introducing-compatibility-view.aspx. Klicking this icon makes all scripts, tabs, (+), e.g. disapear, in Special:NewFiles the default gallery size is set to 4 per row. Deactivating it results in some uncomfortable navigation and optic but all scripts work. Uncomfortable is that the cursor, while writing in edit mode, always moves the line im actually writing in to the very bottom of the edit window. Also the edit window shows some strange jumping behaviour if i move the mouse outside and a tooltip (like that on GFDL) is shown up. Also the font size in /lang templates varies while moving the mouse over them. --Martin H. (talk) 12:09, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I tried all that in IE6 and Hot Cat still doesn't work. FireFox does fine. --Foroa (talk) 05:56, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/history/47/diff/prev/192

Hey Ilmari, I was just wondering what's your reason for this change. If you're logging any adding of an image note, then this is totally flooding the Abuse log with more than acceptable edits and without being able to catch other abusefilters, like removing all categories. Thanks for your answer. -The Evil IP address (talk) 15:24, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

The point was to allow people interested in how the ImageAnnotator is being used to look at this list of recent changes. See also the discussion here at the VP.

If it's flooding the abuse log, that's certainly a problem. A possible technical solution might be if a filter could be configured to tag edits but not log them in the abuse log, or if the log could be easily made to exclude certain filters or tags. (Currently, it seems to be possible to limit the log view to only some filters, but there seems to be no way to show, say, edits matching any filters except #47.) Anyway, if it's interfering with legitimate abuse monitoring tasks, I won't object if it gets disabled again — it's always possible to pull out the same info e.g. from the toolserver, even if it won't be quite as conveniently accessible as via the tag. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 07:41, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I've now checked it out again for some days, and it's still flooding. For the moment, I've thus disabled it. If you find a way to not flood the abuse log, feel free to enable the filter again. Cheers, --The Evil IP address (talk) 13:08, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Please see MediaWiki_talk:Gadget-ImageAnnotator.js#Special:AbuseFilter/47. -- User:Docu at 16:07, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Common.js

Re #All scripts are gone above: this has fixed it. Please remember to test changes to global scripts also in older IEs (or in IE8 in compatibility mode).

In all fairness, I have made that same syntax error several times in files I wrote, too, but until now I was lucky enough not to make it in such a widely used file. :-) Lupo 06:42, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Filter configuration

Hi Ilmari, can you configure Special:AbuseFilter/50? I overreach myself, with copy&pasting from other filters I not come to a working result. Adding Template:OTRS (including Template:Otrs) or Template:PermissionOTRS (including Template:OTRSPermission, Template:Разрешение OTRS) should be logged, without any actions. --Martin H. (talk) 15:32, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I tried, but I'm not sure if I got it exactly right since there don't seem to be any recent OTRS-related edits to test against right now. (I know there are some obscure variants of template transclusion that it won't match, but nobody practically ever uses those.) Also, instead of looking at added_lines, it might be better to check if new_wikitext matches the regexp and old_wikitext doesn't: that's less likely to give false positives if someone just happens to make an unrelated change to a line already containing a {{OTRS}} template. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 18:24, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your skillful help, I activated it and will see what happen. Maybe something like that will be helpful for the OTRS team. --Martin H. (talk) 21:01, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks muchly!

Thank you for fixing my formatting. I knew I was missing something. - BanyanTree 16:30, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Please link images

BotMultichillT 15:26, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

• Image:Recplaneoff.JPG was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:KleinBottleAsSquare.svg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Velden Gerardus Wilhelmus van der.jpg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Lieutenant des armes à cheval.png was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:CA Navy OR5.gif was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.

Hi Ilmari hope your having a splendid day this is Peter Hofbauer from Tin Alley I'm writting in regards to the site Tin Alley.

Bergstein who added thoses images mentioned to us to contact you to make you aware that he had permission to use them..

Now About a month ago if I can recal he asked us if he could use the images and we gave full permission for our images to be used under wikipedia for public use so please feel free to use our images..

Hope this helps Ilmari and please feel free to contact me on peter@tinalley.net or info.tinalley.net or if your on myspace your welcome to communicate with us there on www.tinalley.net.

Ps. If you require any more info on us for the wiki page please send us an email and we will give you wahetever info you need on the band cheers..

Kind Regards, Peter Hofbauer

[edit] File:Middelgrunden wind farm 2009-07-01 edit filtered2.jpg

Thanks for asking my opinion. I wonder what the subject would look like to the naked eye. I think that simple adjustments to pictures that could have been done at the time with camera settings and filters should be treated the same way as camera settings and filters - to give the viewer the best (honest) impression of the subject you can. Digital manipulation has (with some justification) a bad reputation, but I don't think you're exactly airbrushing anything. Note how I've carefully avoided actually answering your question. :-) Sorry, I don't know. --Simonxag (talk) 12:22, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] .OGG

Hello. In WIKI I saw file "Gullfoss 1.ogg" which was created by you. I have a ".avi" format video which I want to convert to ".ogg or .ogv". I converted my video by "ffmpeg2theora-0.25.exe" voice is normal, but video is scrambled. Please help.Surprizi (talk) 05:23, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I can't really help you much there. Ffmpeg2theora is the converter I use, and I don't really know of any better alternatives. Assuming that the original video plays fine, either ffmpeg can't decode your video correctly or there's some bug in the Theora encoder in your version. You might want to try downgrading to an earlier version of ffmpeg2theora (e.g. v0.23, which I know I've used with some success) and see if it works better; if it does, you should also definitely report the bug to the ffmpeg2theora maintainers. Actually, you should probably report it anyway.

If you'd like, you could send me the video and I can try to convert it myself, but I doubt I can do much better than you. You could also try pasting the text output from ffmpeg2theora (or at least the first dozen or so lines, if it's long) here so I could look at it and see if I might spot anything possibly useful in it. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 16:15, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Ps. While looking at the ffmpeg2theora web page, I found a list of Theora encoders. You could always try one of the others and see if it works better. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 16:17, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Abuse filter help

Hello Ilmari, I just wanted to ask if you're able to help me with a possible abuse filter script: Currently, we have several files that are indefinitely protected from editing and uploading. However, there's rarely only the need to also protect the description page, and since file protection doesn't yet work, I had the idea to do it with the abuse filter instead. However, for testing, I created the following text: (action = 'upload') & (file_prefixedtext rlike '.{3,}')(only for testing, of course the script won't look like this, but will contain the filenames that should not be reuploaded), but the abusefilter said: "Syntax error detected: Unrecognised variable file_prefixedtext at character 23". Are you able to help here? Thank you. --The Evil IP address (talk) 20:19, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

If I understand you correctly, you want to prevent people from uploading new versions but allow them to edit the description page? It might be easier to do this using the title blacklist (see documentation). Just remember to use the "casesensitive" option (and possibly "autoconfirmed" and "errmsg=") and to escape regexp metacharacters, like this (for File:Cc.logo.circle.svg):

 File:Cc\.logo\.circle\.svg  <casesensitive>

Also note that a lot of the files in the list you linked to are old inappropriate file names salted with {{prohibited name}} which should really just be deleted and protected against recreation. Might be a job for an adminbot.

As for you original question, I just looked at some recent entries in the abuse log and it seems like there's something seriously wrong with the "file_prefixedtext" variable. I may be to blame: the code that sets the variable was broken before and I tried to fix it, but it's possible that my fix broke it further. :( In any case, I'd advise against using the abuse filter for this, at least until such issues are fixed. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 17:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

...and yes, it was my fault. Hopefully I got it right this time, so that it'll be fixed as soon as the AbuseFilter extension is next updated. Although, come to think of it, I can't see how that could cause the error message you reported... hmm. Odd. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 17:23, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Great, with the Titleblacklist this seems to work. I will try to take care of these files within next days. Thanks again. --The Evil IP address (talk) 18:50, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] US 90 map.svg

This should be a surprise. Nearly eleven months ago you posted a message about US 90 map.svg on my talk page. I haven't been on Commons in a while (obviously), but the US 90 article on WP uses the PNG version. Back when I made these maps, SVGs took many moons to render the detailed linework and crashed many browsers, mostly Firefox.

I actually found the original SVG from July of 2006 and it is, indeed, 3.40 MB in size.

Better late than never ;)

Cheers! Stratosphere (talk) 01:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

• Edit: I reuploaded it, and commons now shows the proper filesize. Stratosphere (talk) 01:20, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Pluto_artistimpression.png

Lokal_Profil 16:10, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Ajax translation

Hi Ilmari, can you please enable the ajax translation script as you said you will in MediaWiki talk:Common.js#Ajax translation of templates. thanks, ערן (talk) 16:25, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I've checked it now in IE and it works fine. ערן (talk) 21:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Note

Just a note that patroller and autopatrolled are part of the +sysop package, so they're redundant flags if you're an admin. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:20, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Usernameblacklist and Titleblacklist

Hello, there are currently a lot of username blocks in the titleblacklist. I was just wondering if they could be moved into the usernameblacklist. I'm not sure if the usernameblacklist has som disadvantages compared to the titleblacklist, then of course they should be left there. It would be good to make the titleblacklist a bit shorter, because as ChrisiPK noted, it would take a lot of server load if the titleblacklist would be full of entries due to the file upload protection. --The Evil IP address (talk) 20:43, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

mw:Extension:Username Blacklist says that "This extension is obsolete! It has been replaced by TitleBlacklist." So it might in fact be more appropriate to do the opposite and move all the username regexps into the title blacklist. Note that TitleBlacklist is a fairly low-impact extension: the parsed blacklist is cached so that it only needs to be reparsed when it's edited, and the regexps themselves are only checked on the appropriate actions (page creations / uploads / account creations / edits / etc. depending on the attributes of each rule). Yes, it will be somewhat less efficient than proper protection, but I wouldn't really worry about it, at least unless the length of the blacklist starts growing to thousands of entries. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 22:38, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] License migration script

Hi! If I'm not mistaking it is your script I'm using. Sadly it removes a little to much. Example [3]. I was just told. I used it for several months so chere could be thousands of edits to check. I'm probably not the only one so I hope it is a new error. Will you have a look? --MGA73 (talk) 22:47, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh dear. It should definitely not be doing that. Let me take a look... —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 19:06, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Could you please tell me which browser you're using. The most likely explanation for that bug that I can think of is that your browser doesn't implement a particular feature of the String.split() method correctly. I might be able to work around that by using a global pattern match instead, but it's probably going to be a bit tricky. :( —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 19:15, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

"Good" news. I checked my own edits and it seems that there is not many people helping so there is probably not many errors left. I'm still working with Category:License migration needs review.

When I use Firefox it does not work at all. So I have to use IE8. --MGA73 (talk) 19:17, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

That's funny, it works on Firefox for me. Anyway, I added a quick stopgap fix to the script: instead of corrupting pages, it should now show an error message and abort if String.split() returns something other than it should. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 19:25, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

That is, it used to work on Firefox for me — now it's complaining about MD5 mismatches, apparently because the new wikiEditor code is doing something funny to document.cookie. :( I should really do the MD5 check in a better way anyway. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 19:44, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I get that too. :-/ --MGA73 (talk) 19:48, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

OK, that part should be fixed now and the script is working for me on Firefox again. Still not sure how to best work around the IE but, but at least it shouldn't be causing content loss any more. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 20:15, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Tried one and it worked fine :-D --MGA73 (talk) 22:19, 20 November 2009 (UTC)