User talk:Jarekt/2014

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.


Use of #property data planned?[edit]

Gday Jarekt. Do you have information on when Commons is going to start to inhale Wikidata #property information into our templates? Having to populate Commons, and Wikidata equally is a nuisance, and I would much prefer to populate WD and have those details flow through to {{Creator}} templates, and then add any missed/additional data. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:14, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

First, I think we need to wait for wikidata properties to be accessible on pages that do not have interwiki links to that specific wikidata page. As I understand it that is what we need to get it to work, I might be wrong. Also wikidata is not much on the radar since me and most other active template developers are learning lua, which is much more sane way of writing templates. I just started to look on modules that call wikidata from lua, but I was not thinking about rewriting Creator template yet and I did not hear about anybody else thinking about it. But I agree that it would be nice to have that capability. --Jarekt (talk) 03:45, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) bugzilla:58856 have to be fixed for this to work. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 05:59, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks I was trying to find this bug report number. --Jarekt (talk) 03:00, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Guys there is still a debate here on how the links wikidata<->commons should be done.
I am not sure we should invest too much in wikidata now (I say that, but I modified {{VN}} to access wikidata ;-))
You should also look at bug 47930 that involves commons template to be able to access multiple wikidata items (category and article for the same species, for exemple)
Cheers and Happy new year Liné1 (talk) 09:17, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Window, Chester Cathedral detail of east window Heaton Butler & Bayne.JPG[edit]

I have no idea what the problem with license or copyright is with this file. The uploader gave it a particular license. I maintained the same license when I adjusted the tone of the image. It seems fine to me. Can you advise me what the problem is? The window itself is over 100 years old and on public display. Amandajm (talk) 06:22, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

The license looks fine to me. The file was missing one at some point but you added it. --Jarekt (talk) 12:42, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Emergency Request...sort of[edit]

Dear Admin Jarekt,

A user named Nevertime constantly uploads images from flickr without ordering a {{flickrreview}}

Almost all of this person's have not been reviewed like these:

Someone needs to order a bot to review All this user's uploads from flickr Which have not been marked. Jcb suggests you. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 22:24, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

  • File:Patella (lampada).jpg could be his oldest unmarked image...from May 2012. Someone needs to order a bot to order a {{flickrreview}} on this uploader's images sadly.
  • Wrong. He has an unmarked image here from April 2012 here: File:Victoria Arduino - Athena Leva.jpg His pre-April 2012 images were marked by the flickrbot or by Admins/reviewers it seems. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:17, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: I was wrong again!
  • File:Acciughe salate in scatola.jpg dates to October 2011...and has never been marked either. Perhaps it is best if you can ask your bot to go through all of Nevertime's images and place a {{flickrreview}} on those which have never been marked--until the time he started uploading images from flickr please. I think this will turn up perhaps 100 images I have now notified the uploader.

Admin Jcb said to ask you on his talkpage. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 22:46, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: Please instruct your bot order flickrreviews to Nevertime's images which have not been marked by the flickrbot or Admins/reviews as Jcb suggested you. I can only order a few to his many many images. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:19, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Update: I ordered 25 flickrreviews to Nevertime's images....but he has perhaps 100+ more and only a bot (like the one you operate) can mark place a {{flickrreview}} to his remaining unmarked images sadly. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:11, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done I added {{flickrreview}} to over 200 flickr images uploaded by Nevertime that were lacking the review. --Jarekt (talk) 14:07, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for all your help. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:41, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Zdjęcie z odsłonięcia pomnika Fryderyka Chopina w Warszawie (1926)[edit]

Witaj, wszystkiego najlepszego w Nowym Roku:) Wgrałem wczoraj skan odezwy ŻOB, i umieściłem w trzech artykułach. Dla pewności dodałem obydwie licencje, nie udało mi się bowiem ustalić, kto ją napisał - chociaż Bernard Mark wspomina, że mógł być to Samsonowicz z Bundu - i czy przeżył powstanie. Nie ustaję w wyszukiwaniu wartościowych materiałów, które mogłyby wzbogacić Wiki, no i mam znów pytanie do Ciebie. Europeana ma w domenie publicznej zdjęcie z odsłonięcia pomnika Fryderyka Chopina 14 listopada 1926. Łamię sobie głowę, czy i jaką amerykańską licencję można byłoby dobrać dla tej fotografii. Jeżeli w opisie dam Marked PD by Europeana to nie wystarczy, prawda? Z góry serdeczne dzięki za pomoc. Boston9 (talk) 00:11, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Ja myślę o wrzuceniu reszty zdjęć z Raportu Stroopa czy powstania w Getcie Warszawskim. Co fotografii z Europeana to spróbował bym licencji {{Anonymous-EU}} z Amerykańską {{PD-1996}}. Przeczytaj tu dlaczego (w 1996 Polska używała 50-cio letniej wersji {{Anonymous-EU}}). Takze bym dodał w rubryce "Permission" Marked PD by Europeana. --Jarekt (talk) 04:45, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Dzięki! Boston9 (talk) 07:19, 3 January 2014 (UTC) PS. Stroop – absolutnie tak!

Azimuth parameter in location template / Irritating direction of the north arrow[edit]

I wrote User:Ebraminio and he refered to you. What do you think on User_talk:Ebraminio#Azimuth_parameter_in_location_template_.2F_Irritating_direction_of_the_north_arrow? IMHO the direction of the arrow is wrong and should be according to the heading paramter of EXIF an/or Location template. Thanks for the reply. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:55, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for alerting me about this discussion. I will answer at the VillagePump. --Jarekt (talk) 13:00, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Changes to Template:Rotate/layout[edit]

Please also adjust the template-text which is wrong now: If the thumbnail on the right side is in the correct orientation, please just purge this image (maybe refresh your browser cache) and remove this template. And make sure to note that in older browsers the magic you inserted won't go to happen, except we add something to our Common.css for IE 6-8. See Template talk:Rotate#A new class?. Also I wonder why {{Transform-rotate}} is not used. -- Rillke(q?) 21:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

I will answer about changes to {{Rotate}}, where I probably should should have discussed it beforehand anyway. About {{Transform-rotate}} vs. {{RotateStyle}} they are almost identical and should be merged. I will do it and keep the older one. I was only aware of {{RotateStyle}}. --Jarekt (talk) 17:39, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
In the second thought all the changes needed to already translated text would create quite a mess, but I still think it would be more clear. By the way I did not know that our rotation magic does not work for all browsers. {{RotateStyle}} is used to show north direction in the {{Location}} templates with a header, Nobody ever complained that it does not work for IE, but I just tested with mine and it does not work. --Jarekt (talk) 17:53, 7 January 2014 (UTC)


As to the File:Praça Rui Barbosa em Tapes 003.JPG, was a failure in time to change the layout. Note that in the exif of my photos, the license is usually clear, Cc-by-sa-3.0. Just upload photos of my own. Thanks for the warning.--Paulo RS Menezes (talk) 21:05, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Absence de licence Blasons[edit]

Bonsoir Jarekt, L’assistant d'importation ne fonctionne pas bien chez moi (les miniatures s'affichent rarement) mais surtout il me refuse les blasons, tous les blasons échiquetés sable et argent. J'utilise donc l'ancien formulaire. Il semble que ce soit cet ancien formulaire qui ne ne prends pas en compte le paramètre |Source= ("Own work / Travail personnel / Obra personal"). Est-il possible d'automatiser cette tache (ajout de la licence) pour tous ces blasons échiquetés. Merci d'avance. Etxeko (talk) 23:31, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Bonjour, Jarekt a indiqué qu'il avait des problemes pour comprendre cette question, je pense qu'il faudrait la poser sur le bistro ou des francophone devraient etre capable de te repondre, je l'ai donc transferee vers : commons:bistro#Absence de licence Blasons. Cqui (talk) 08:16, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello Jarekt, I would add a translation on your page but we should direct him to the bistro as it is general use of upload wizard issue. --Cqui (talk) 08:16, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks --Jarekt (talk) 13:01, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Joan Saura Martí picture[edit]

Jarekt, I obtained permission from the author of this picture to upload it at Wikicommons. He wrote a Wikimedia statement and sent it to me by e-mail (De: Frederic Navarro Cifani [1] Enviado el: martes, 10 de diciembre de 2013 19:15 Para: Margarida Ullate Estanyol Asunto: Autorització). I resent it to '' the following day. Wrong procedure? Thanks.

For permission you should have send it to OTRS, see Commons:OTRS/ca. As for Joan Saura Martí picture, it did not have a license template, but someone fixed it for you. --Jarekt (talk) 17:53, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Logo, eøs-midlene. Property rights[edit]

Reference is made to your comment on my uploaded logo lacking source. Sorry for that, but i did not find the right way of labelling it. I work for the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. We have the ownership of this logo, and it is free to use for everyone. It can be downloaded from this address:

What would be the right way of labelling it? Best, chr

Yes check.svg Resolved

--Jarekt (talk) 04:35, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Senator Ellen Corbett Picture[edit]

Jarekt, Please take a look at the File:Senator Ellen M Corbett CA10.jpg. I added {{PD-self}} but I am not sure if I did it correctly. I have never edited anything in Wikipedia. The picture was given to me by the Senator's Office and I have provided that email as Ticket: ticket:2013121910019854. Please advise is something more needs to be done. Thanks for you help!

All ✓ Done--Jarekt (talk) 04:33, 10 January 2014 (UTC)


Hi Jarket!

What kind of license is the good for this image? I have found this image on the internet (the source is added), I have drawn and I put this license SlovakCityCOA on the upload. What else do you need? Unfortunately I don't know the licenses I like just drawing. If you can help me I will happy. Thanks!

Bye, Madboy74 (talk) 20:45, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

File:ASSIST student exchange class 2013-14.jpg[edit]

Cześć Jarekt, thanks for your notice. I contacted the copyright owner of the image to email the license release and it might still take them a few days to send it. Dziękuję for your patience, --Gnom (talk) 21:51, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

What is wrong with license with this files?[edit]

You mentioned this files as wrong licensed. Explain me, please, what license is ok here? I have sent this art works to OTRS and nobody says that it is smth wrong.

Svetit 16:29, 15 January 2014 (UTC+3)

Untitled #2[edit]

Hola, Jarekt, gracias por su información. Respecto al archive de fotografía de Agustín Garcia, es una fotografía que la familia de dicho doctor me ha proporcionado, no tiene derechos reservados e impedimento en el uso. Quiero ponerlo en su página de Wikipedia en su biografía. Con respecto a la fotografía de Luz Argentina Chiriboga, ya ponder en el Archivo y tiene la misma finalidad, para su página biográfíca. Gracias Ecalvachi08

Hola Ecalvachi08. Para la que la imagen sea admitida en Wikimedia Commons los titulares de los derechos (en este caso la familia) deberán enviar un email siguiendo las instrucciones de COM:OTRS. Esto se debe a que es la única forma de verificar de forma fehaciente su validez. Para cualquier asunto no dudes en contactar conmigo en User talk:Alan. Un saludo. --Alan (talk) 09:02, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Please pay attention[edit]

Jarekt, I understand that is easy to miss some things when doing mass editing, but in this case you ignored four messages telling you that the image in question is already marked for speedy deletion: [2], [3], [4], [5]. --ELEKHHT 22:10, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

I was trying to be very clear that if there are any issues to let me know on my talk page, since after trying for a while I concluded that I was not able to monitor so many userpages. As for {{duplicate}} template I did not consider it a deletion template but I can easily add it to a long list of templates which would allow them to temporarily not have a license. --Jarekt (talk) 04:23, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

No license or bad license on my JPG (of Lake Léman, 31/12/2013 - & others)[edit]

Thank you Jarekt for warning me kindly about my blunder. Since I'm afraid I shan't be able to do it properly by myself (being an old dunce in computerizing), could you add the correct license authorizing everyone to use those JPG in Wikipedia without restriction. Of course this goes too for all the images I formerly deposited on WP Commons & happened to mis-license or not license : since I gave them, they are for everybody to use in WP. Thanks a lot for your work, & best wishes for 2014 (I understand you are a cleaner & maintainer, so Anima ! as they say in spanish). Thanks, Znadrovié, & t;y; Arapaima (talk) 07:17, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Seen you fixed it OK . Thanks so much, & take care ! T;y. Arapaima (talk) 07:36, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Wappen der Familie Racovitza.png[edit]

Hello! Mr. Mihai Panzaru from “Lumina” and the owner of the coat of arms Mr. Cristian-Alexandru Racovitza allowed me, to publish this photo. I must only fill in, that the “Parohia romana” took it initially. Certainly, I've made a mistake during the licensing. Perhaps you can help me. If not, than please deleate the picture. I’ll be next month in Bucharest and will than make my own photo of this coat of arms. Thank you! -- Sacha47 (talk) 13:15, 21 January 2014 (CET)

No required license template for File:Mirecourt - Balzac.djvu[edit]

I set the license to {{PD-old}}, as it is a book in the public domain. Is it OK ? I thought that because I was using the "book" model, and the date being 1856, it implied that the book was in public domain. --Jim Bey (talk) 00:05, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

You still need a license. I changed it to {{PD-old-100-1923}} which is a better fit. --Jarekt (talk) 02:37, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Angelika Kaufmann[edit]

Angelika Kauffmann [[6]] died in 1807. She created the original painting. My preant copied it, I inherited this painting. By mistake I missed one letter "f" and am not able to manage it. So what? -- Wefo (talk) 00:49, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

I fixed the "f", but I can not fix the licenses. The original painting is {{PD-old-100}} The reproduction's license can be {{PD-old-70}} If your pre-aunt died more than 70 years ago or you can release it under {{PD-heir}}. Also you as the photographer should pick your own license, like {{CC-by-sa-4.0}} or {{PD-user}}. But you need to state those 2 licenses, by adding them to the image or by stating them here. --Jarekt (talk) 04:00, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
I must ask my mother tomorrow, when my preant died. She painted my grand pa and ma when they were just married. -- Wefo (talk) 04:09, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
You can also use {{PD-heir}} if her heirs give it to PD. How about the photographers license? As the photographer you can choose. --Jarekt (talk) 04:18, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Many thanks for your help. I added a link to a very interesting artikel in German, which helpt me without asking my mother. Greetings -- Wefo (talk) 12:10, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Use of logo file[edit]

Hello Jarekt,

I've uploaded a logo for a page on a Dutch website. The logo is free for use as explanatory logo for this page, which doesn't mean anyone can use it. I've checked how (f.i.) the [Philips logo] page did that and tried to emulate that. I doesn't think having the Philips logo on that site means anyone can freely use the Philips logo. So, I've probably used the wrong tags (newbie here), maybe you can help me out with that? mototaal

I assume you are talking about File:Nieuwsmotor-Logo.png file. It might be simple enough to be a {{PD-TextLogo}}, but I do not know. If it is not PD than it will have to be deleted. You can ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright for other opinions. --Jarekt (talk) 13:25, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Tresorit Logo.png[edit]

Hello, can you please delete this file as I did not found the right license to publish it on Commons and I don't know how to delete it. Thanks.--Thepat (talk) 13:09, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 13:12, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Delete map[edit]

All my lombardy's maps come form this one (File:Provinces_and_municipalities_in_Lombardy.svg): I have modified them using inkscape. (Also File:Lombardia_Wikivoyage.svg have some copyright problems?) Thanks --Lkcl it (talk) 17:03, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

It does not. I was only indicating that at that moment you file did not have a license. In this case you could use the license of the original file, but that is usually uploader's task. I fixed those 2 files (since they also had other issues), but you should know that we delete quite a lot of files every day because of no license and no time to investigate the copyright status of each one of them. --Jarekt (talk) 17:20, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. --Lkcl it (talk) 17:32, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Timur-i-jego-druzyna-ark 15298.jpg[edit]

Yesterday afternoon I received a permission to use this image as I wish, so it will be placed in PD. I received this via email. I don't know, how to use the OTRS system, but I can forward this message to you, as I suppose, you can read in Polish, on email-address, which you indicate. Flamenco108 (talk) 10:34, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

You should send it to OTRS the email is for Polish language emails. By the way the image was deleted in the mean time, I can undeleate it if the email is sufficient. --Jarekt (talk) 16:05, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Copyright for File:Planet4D.gif[edit]

Hi Jarekt, The maker gave me the full rights for this animation, and to put in in Wiki How can i proove it ? Please help me. Thx

Read COM:OTRS and forward the exchange you had with the maker to the address they provided. --Jarekt (talk) 18:40, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Zdjęcia Borysa Tarasiuka[edit]

Cześć, mam do Ciebie krótkie pytanie: 2 spośród 620 zdjęć z Senatu (pierwszy taki przypadek), zostały dzisiaj oznaczone nota o ochronie wizerunku [7], [8]. Trudno mi jest pojąć, dlaczego, przecież Borys Tarasiuk jako działacz polityczny jest w 100% osobą publiczną w rozumieniu polskiego prawa (do którego odwołuje się szablon), miał oficjalne spotkania w Sejmie i Senacie, odpowiadał na pytania dziennikarzy etc. Czemu w takim razie ma służyć ten szablon, i dlaczego akurat Borys Tarasiuk? Czy powinienem coś z tym zrobić? Dzięki za odpowiedź:) Boston9 (talk) 09:41, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Tu się nic nie dzieje, {{Personality rights}} nie jest szablonem dodawanym kiedy jest jakiś problem, jest to jedynie przypomnienie ze fakt ze to zdjęcie jest udostępnione na prawach otwartej licencji, to nie znaczy ze może być użyte do czegokolwiek ponieważ wiele jurysdykcji ma prawa ochrony wizerunku. Większość zdjęć osób, zwłaszcza wewnątrz budynków, powinno mieć takie szablony. Polska wersja tego szablonu różni się od angielskiej: angielska wersja mówi "pamiętaj sprawdzić prawa ochrony wizerunku" w twojej jurysdykcji a polska wersja daje detale Polskiego prawa. --Jarekt (talk) 13:57, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Dzięki serdeczne! Boston9 (talk) 14:19, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status[edit]

Hallo Jarekt. i dont really understand about the Copyright status thingy but for every file that i upload for the Club Kit is my own work. But the problem is that i dont know how to put the Copyright status under my name. Hope that you could help me with it. Tq. Meeneunos10 (talk) 03:19, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Meeneunos10, those 2 files were missing the license template. I copied "{{self|cc-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}}" from one of you other numerous uploads. You must have miss a step during upload, but it is all fixed now. Thanks for contributing. --Jarekt (talk) 13:33, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Nice. thanks brother. Meeneunos10 (talk) 08:15, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Pahelwans in Hyderabad, c 1870.jpg[edit]

Hi, as per policy the image comes under free to use, as it is 143 years old. and certainly I had included the sourced website (this and this) in the file. Regards :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 15:01, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

I agree, but if so than {{PD-old-70}} or similar template needs to be added, since we are not mind readers. I fixed this image, but we have such a large influx of images to commons that it is usually uploder's task to research copyright status before the upload and use proper licenses indicating that status. By the way, it is a very interesting image. Thanks for contributing. --Jarekt (talk) 15:34, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jerekt, Thanks for correcting the image licensing issue its so nice of you. And thanks for your complement. Regards :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 12:49, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Zdjęcia Willema van de Polla[edit]

O, Holender (nomen-omen:)) Zerknij na licencję. Mógłbyś się przyjrzeć tej sprawie? Czy widzisz jakiekolwiek szanse na wgranie całej tej kolekcji na Commons? Qrcze, bardzo by nam to wzbogaciło artykuły związane z Warszawą. Boston9 (talk) 09:45, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Patrze na podpisy, np. "Fot. Willem van de Poll/Kolekcja Narodowego Archiwum Królestwa Niderlandów, Haga., Sygn.190-0032, licencja CC-BY-SA" i każde zdjęcie ma CC-BY-SA, wiec użył bym {{CC-BY-SA-4.0}}. --Jarekt (talk) 03:01, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Wielka Zbrojownia w Gdansku.jpg[edit]

Dzięki, uzupełniłem licencję. Pozdrawiam, tsca (talk) 15:13, 3 February 2014 (UTC)


Thanks! Relating that file, I found it in [9]. There is also written: "La scheda che stai visualizzando è visibile GRATUITAMENTE." (the tab you are viewing is visible free). Is that valid for Commons rules? If yes, what template I have to use?. Bye--Anthostav (talk) 15:45, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Anthostav, If you are not the author of the image than you need to figure out the license situation before the upload. As far as I can see there is no reason why this file would not be copyrighted. The author signed its work in the bottom left corner (so {{Anonymous-EU}} would not work) and as far as I know he might have been alive for long time afterwards, (so {{PD-old-70}} would not work). So Unless you can show that author died before 1943, I think this file will have to go. --Jarekt (talk) 16:02, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Ok, it is right. May yor clear out the file? This other origin,, says here, , that is free, needs license CC BY-SA 3. Thankyou--Anthostav (talk) 17:28, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
I doubt knows anything more about this graphics than we do or does, since they do not even mention the author. Unless or secured the copyrights from the author, they can not release the images under CC or any other license. I assume that's CC license relates to the content provided by them. --Jarekt (talk) 17:57, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Ok. Please delete all if you mean right.--Anthostav (talk) 18:15, 3 February 2014 (UTC)


Hello Jarekt, it's the same old same old all over again. Longer protection with edit requests would help. Penyulap 06:17, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Image annotations[edit]

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

Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/− 11:43, 5 February 2014 (UTC)


Jestem wikipedystą od nie dawna i to dość sędziwym. Fotografią wojskową i nie tylko, zajmuję się od ponad 50 lat. Pomaga mi syn na wikipedii, ale mamy problem z prawidłowym załadowaniem zdjęć, opisaniem, licencja, źródła itd. Te które pokazałem do tego artykułu, są bardzo ważne i charakterystyczne dla tegoż artykułu. Dlatego tak bardzo mi zależy, aby ukazały się wszystkie. W internecie nie widziałem ich, większość jest moich, sam je wykonałem i mam je w swoim rodzinnym albumie. Kilka, to zdjęcia, gdzie minęło już ponad 70 lat od daty wykonania zdjęcia i zostały pozyskane przeze mnie jako odbitki i jestem ich właścicielem. Odbitki są z muzeum, archiwum itd. Byłbym uradowany jakbyś nam pomógł odnośnie korekt i zachowania tych zdjęć w tym artykule, który jest na razie w brudnopisie. Mam nadzieję, że będzie mi dane odwdzięczyć się Tobie za pomoc. Podaję wykaz tych zdjęć do ewentualnej poprawki:

--Rynio55 4 luty 2014

    • Witam. 4 lutego 2014 ukazał się wpis cyt.: |Panie Ryszardzie, Poprawie te zdjęcia. Jak będą jakieś pytania czy problemy w przyszłości to chętnie pomogę|--Jarekt (talk) 16:04, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Powyżej podałem zdjęcia, które mają prawdopodobnie jakieś niewłaściwe opisy. Z wpisu wynika, że te zdjęcia poprawisz. Byłbym bardzo wdzięczny za ten gest dobroczynny. Bardzo mi na tych zdjęciach zależy. Okazuje się, że są jakieś błędy w temacie tych fotografii. Powyżej napisałem, że większość są moimi zdjęciami, niektóre odbitkami, ale źródła podałem. Syn usiłuje coś poprawić, ale nie wiem czy robi dobrze? Jeżeli coś jest nie tak to serdecznie proszę o pomoc. Z góry dzięki i bardzo proszę o odpis jak ma się moja sprawa. --Rynio55 5 luty 2014

Wygląda na to ze najwięcej kłopotów masz z połapaniem się w wymaganiach licencji. Com:lic i Commons:Copyright tags są dosyć ogromne ale w skrócie: zdjęcia dzielimy na te które ty zrobiłeś i na te które ktoś inny zrobił. Jeśli robisz zdjęcie albo skanujesz czyjeś inne zdjęcie to twoje odbitki się nie liczą - jak mówimy o "zdjęciu" to mamy na myśli oryginał. Te zdjęcia które ty zrobiłeś masz prawo udostępnić pod jakakolwiek licencją np. {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}. Większość zdjęć których nie jesteś autorem nie można wrzucać na Commons (ani używać na Wikipedii) chyba ze są te zdjęcie w domenie publicznej albo udostępnione na zasadach wolnej licencji przez przez autorów lub osoby czy instytucje które maja prawa autorskie. Jest tu parę możliwości:
  • {{PD-Polish}} Zdjęcia zeskanowane z publikacji polskich wydanych przed 1994 rokiem
  • {{Anonymous-EU}} zdjęcia opublikowane więcej niż 70 lat temu bez podania imienia autora.
  • {{PD-old-70}} (lub {{PD-old}}) Zdjęcia autorów którzy nie żyją od ponad 70-ciu lat. Chyba nie masz takich zdjęć.
  • {{PD-heir}} możesz wrzucić zdjęcia które odziedziczyłeś, w zasadzie których odziedziczyłeś prawa autorskie
  • {{PD-author}} jeśli znajdziesz autora zdjęć i on je udostępni jako domena publiczna
Jedynie zdjęcia które są w jednej z tych kategorii są trzymane na Commons.
Stworzyłem dzisiaj User:Rynio55/gallery gdzie zgrupowałem zdjęcia które "wykonałeś osobiście", "odbitki, ponad 70 lat" i których "jesteś jedynym właścicielem tego zdjęcia":
  • "wykonałeś osobiście": poprawiłem opisy tych zdjęć. Jedynie zdjęcie z wystawy w muzeum i Czasokres są problematyczne ponieważ zawierają zdjęcia których nie jesteś autorem. Moze były one gdzieś wydane w PRL i moglibyśmy użyć {{PD-Polish}}?
  • "odbitki, ponad 70 lat" i "jesteś jedynym właścicielem tego zdjęcia" nie mogą zostać w wersji teraźniejszej. Możemy użyć {{PD-Polish}} jeśli podasz publikacje, albo któraś z powyższych licencji. Ale jak nic nie znajdziemy to niestety trzeba będzie usunąć. --Jarekt (talk) 21:25, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Witam. Zgadza się, bo faktycznie mam dalej problem z prawidłowym oznakowaniem co do wymagań licencji. Dlatego wcześniej, podając te zdjęcia, źle je opisałem, bo zaznaczając jestem jedynym właścicielem tego zdjęcia, miałem na myśli - wykonałem je osobiście. Faktycznie te zdjęcia również zrobiłem sam oznaczając źle jako jedyny właściciel i dałem je do albumu rodzinnego. Ale zaczynam coraz bardziej pojmować te zasady. Teraz tylko należałoby je odpowiednio pogrupować User:Rynio55/gallery, ale tego jeszcze nie umiem wykonać. Natomiast zdjęcia oznaczone jako - odbitka, ponad 70 lat - należałoby przypisać jako - {{Anonymous-EU}} i też je właściwie pogrupować User:Rynio55/gallery. Jeżeli chodzi o zdjęcia zdjęcie z wystawy w muzeum i Czasokres to także je wykonałem osobiście, pierwsze wykonałem osobiście na wystawie w muzeum, zaś drugie, to jest to moja grafika, schemat - i także, po wykonaniu grafiki, wykonałem je osobiście! Jestem bardzo wdzięczny Tobie za okazałą pomoc i proszę o dalszą współpracę, by zakończyć ten temat. Bardzo mi na tym zależy. Ja osobiście próbuję dokonać korekt, ale nie wiem tak do końca czy dobrze to robię. Pozdrawiam i proszę o odpis. --Rynio55 6 luty 2014

Test images from User:Selenium_user[edit]


About the images such as , I was told that adding Category:Test images was the proper thing to do in order to make sure that these images do not affect the normal operations of Commons. Please let me know if that is not true.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Selenium user (talk • contribs)

I have never heard of Category:Test images and as far as I know all images on commons are required to have a license. In your case {{PD-ineligible}} will probably apply. All images without a license are beeing detected by a database query and added to Category:Media without a license: needs history check, where they have to be manually processed by volunteers, so files without license "affect the normal operations of Commons". By the way I am curious, what is the purpose of those images and what are you testing? --Jarekt (talk) 16:03, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
We are monitoring the status of the upload API. From time to time something goes wrong with the ability to upload images to Commons, and we want a reliable way to be sure that uploads continue to function. You can see the result of the monitoring here: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Selenium user (talk • contribs)

Fixed for File:Test-image-rosa-mx-15x15.png, feel free to delete the ones with numeric names, they are not needed anymore once they have been successfully uploaded. (They will also have a license tag in the future.) Unfortunately the test script cannot clean up after itself without an admin bit. --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 23:16, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I will just live them be and in a week they will be deleted automatically with all the other files without a license. --Jarekt (talk) 18:12, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Licensing information[edit]

Hello, I'm not sure why these maps were tagged for deletion:

File:West Virginia Congressional Districts, 113th Congress.tif (this is original work of the United States Government, as cited on the photo's page).

File:AL1984.jpg, File:AR1996.jpg, File:AR2000.jpg

The the three directly above I received permission on my wiki talk page from Inqvisitor to crop his original maps. I posted these as my work as I deleted and modified quite a bit from their original. This perhaps was not the best thing to do. What can I do to rectify this issue? Thank you for your clearly hard work. --7partparadigm talk 03:11, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I think those are all fixed although you probably should give credit to Inqvisitor and list his files (deleted or not) that you based your work on. --Jarekt (talk) 18:22, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Is this actor Stephen Tompkinson ?[edit]

arab saying : " You always ride a horse who gallops"

Tompkin upload.png

Hello Jarekt ! Hope you are OK & well. I have lately been entranced by british TV series “DCI Banks” , & I'd like to add main actor's Stephen Tompkinson mugshot to the Wikipedia article about him. Do you think this is him ? He looks a lot older in the TV series, but he impersonates there a senior investigating officer worn out by overwork & the world's villainy. I'd like to be sure before blundering (once more) on WP...Hope you can verify (or tell me how to do it). Thanks a lot beforehand & best regards, t.y. Arapaima (talk) 09:14, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

The only way I can think of to check his identity would be to do a Google image search and see how other photographs of his compare. I would say that he looks quite similar to other photos of him with a beard and smiling. --Jarekt (talk) 13:12, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks a lot Jarekt, take care, t.y. Arapaima (talk) 05:32, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Uriarte photos[edit]

Hi! I received your message on the photos from Uriarte Talavera. They are in OTRS and there is a tag to that effect. The company owns all rights to the photos and is releasing them under a CC-by-SA 3.0. I think only one may be PD-old (the one from 1918, but Mexico requires that the author be dead 100 years for this license so best to have Uriarte release it. 15:27, 12 February 2014 (UTC) (forgot to sign in ) Thelmadatter (talk) 15:28, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

That is great, but could you add {{CC-BY-SA-3.0}} to those images and remove {{no license}}. OTRS volunteers often do not notice missing licenses and all images need them. --Jarekt (talk) 15:39, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
No problemThelmadatter (talk) 16:16, 12 February 2014 (UTC)


Thanks for your message, I made mistakes with commonist and licenses weren't imported, this should be correct now. Symac (talk) 15:33, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Hadsund Butikscenter[edit]

Hej Jarekt. Jeg kan forstå at der er problemer med File:Oversigtsplan Hadsund Butikscenter.png. Jeg lægger altså ikke en fil op hvis jeg ikke har fået tilladelse til det. Tilladelsen er givet af Jan Vestergaard, Service- og aktivitetsansvarlig i Hadsund Butikscenter. E-mail: Hvis der mangler en skabelon/er sat en forkert på, vil du så ikke være flink at sætte den rigtige på? :) Venlig hilsen --Søren1997 (talk // contributions) 16:22, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

@Søren1997: The problem is that [you removed] the CC license but did not replaced it with any other license. You say that the license is granted by Jan Vestergaard (Google translate) but what license? Please see COM:LIC and check with Jan Vestergaard which license needs to be used. Greetings --Jarekt (talk) 16:32, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Okay, det problem med CC er nu ordnet. Oversigtskortet kan ses på deres hjemmeside og inde og uden for centeret i Hadsund. Planen er i praksis lavet af Hadsund Folkeblad og Nordjyske, med bestilling af Jan Vstergaard. Jan fortæller at det er ham der råder over oversigtskortet, og det må gerne bruges på Wikimedia og Wikipedia. Vh --Søren1997 (talk // contributions) 18:59, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

User license template[edit]

Hi, About this edit, are you sure that the wording of the title is sufficient to allow us to interpret the intentions of the user and add the version 2.5 when the text of the template explicitly specifies the other versions? -- Asclepias (talk) 18:46, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

@Asclepias:, If 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 are allowed than it is crazy to have them in a separate large boxes, instead of a single box. I do not think 2.5 has any special provisions not found in 2.0 or 3.0, since 3.0 was mostly clarifying the language of previous licenses and working on compatibility with other SA licenses[10]. and unfortunately we do not have {{Cc-by-sa-3.0,2.0,1.0}}. But if you think that this might be overstepping the line I am OK with reversing it, just keep {{cc}} to {{cc-non-compliant}} change. --Jarekt (talk) 19:06, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Template:City of Boston Archives photograph/sandbox[edit]

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

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

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

The Haz talk 19:59, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Anunciación Greco-Sigüenza.JPG[edit]

Hecho! --MarisaLR (talk) 22:50, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

File:John Gossweiler04.jpg[edit]

Notes on file: "Map in public domain in Angola and not protected by copyright in US" "see Angola not a signatory to Berne Convention" The reason I didn't add any appropriate templates to this file is that I don't know where to find them. The URL I quote makes it quite clear that the work is in public domain in Angola, and that Angola was not a signatory to the Berne Convention. Consequently it has no copyright protection in the US. cheers Paul venter (talk) 16:43, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

@Paul venter: You should not upload without locating proper license template, since all files are required to have one. If we do not have a proper license template that means that nobody tried to use the reasoning for PD you claim. We can always create a new license template but it takes a lot of work and needs to verifiable. That said I think {{PD-Angola}} might be the template you are looking for. The US copyrights might be harder since according to en:Wikipedia:Non-U.S._copyrights#Dates_of_restoration_and_terms_of_protection the Angola's works are copyrighted in the US if they were still copyrighted in Angola in 1996, So {{PD-1996}} should not be used. --Jarekt (talk) 17:04, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
I suppose non-free content under a fair use rationale would be another option.Paul venter (talk) 09:39, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
That option is only available on EN-WP. --Jarekt (talk) 12:21, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
I know.....Paul venter (talk) 12:53, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Translation request[edit]

Hello. Could you do me a huge favor and have a chat with the user on my talk page who is trying to communicate with me in Polish? I'm afraid he isn't understanding, or can't communicate. I'd like to undelete the images if he really is the author. The problem is that I found them on various different websites.

If you're not able, please let me know and I will contact someone else. Thanks. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:45, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Monument Kindertransporte 1938 and 1939 Westbahnhof Vienna Austria.jpeg[edit]

Thank you for your effort and your assistance. Idon't really know what where and when how to use, even I'm not sure if the communcation path is correct which I'm just trying to use just now. Regarding the subject picture - my intention is to give it to the public domain, and I have taken this picture by myself. I have made a correction to this entry, please tell me, if everything is correct now, or if you need me to do anything else. Thanks and rgds Herbert

It seems fine now, except I do not know the legal status of the sculpture itself. Is the sculpture in Public domain? --Jarekt (talk) 15:16, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

I have sent an eMail to Flor Kent, the Artist of this sculpture, for permission. This artwork is positioned at a prominent public place, and it is being shown by pictures on wikimedia several times already - if this makes any difference. thks. Herbert_r

Herbert, I do not know much about copyrights of indoor statues in Austria. But in most cases with sculptures you need 2 licenses: one for sculpture and one for the photograph. You can ask on Commons:Village pump/Copyright, or you might not do anything but the chances are that sooner or later someone who is familiar with copyrights in Austria will review the image and either correct it or delete it. --Jarekt (talk) 12:50, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Scipione Riva Rocci[edit]

Dear Jarekt, I substituted the wrong license at the File:Scipione-riva-rocci-4.jpg to PD-Art|PD-old-70. The photograph is probably made between 1890 and 1900, so PD-old-70 is on the safe side. Vysotsky (talk) 20:49, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement[edit]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open![edit]

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on . Click here to learn more and vote »

the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

From EEIM[edit]

This image File:Sonthofen (Ansicht von Gruenten).JPG is transferred from ru.wikipedia to Commons by me,but i forgot copy and paste this -self|cc-by-sa-3.0-,next time see original author and we'll save this -no license|month=February|day=21|year=2014- or let me know on my talk.--EEIM (talk) 03:17, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Methodist Church of St John Halifax 1880.jpg[edit]

Hi. Thank you for kindly giving me the heads up on this one. There was a typo in the licence template, which I have now corrected. --Storye book (talk) 15:21, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Przeniesienie tłumaczenie[edit]

Hej Jarek, czy to tylko u mnie, czy też dwa przetłumaczone akapity [11] się nie przeniosły na stronkę i są dalej po angielsku? Boston9 (talk) 08:47, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

✓ Gotowe wersja angielska została zmieniona, i system zakładał ze nowa wersja nie została przetłumaczona, dlatego pokazywał wersje nie przetłumaczoną. --Jarekt (talk) 18:08, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Hej, dzięki! Przepraszam, bo to w takim razie ja nabroiłem – zacząłem poprawiać wersję angielską przy tłumaczeniu. Czy mógłbym mieć jeszcze do Ciebie jeszcze dwa pytania-prośby: czy dałbyś radę wymienić 3 zdjęcia w szablonie? Chodzi mi o to pierwsze (Sala Sejmowa jednak jednoznacznie kojarzy się z Sejmem, a nie Senatem, może także dać tutaj na honorowym miejscu na Marszałka Borusewicza?), + te dwa pod 14. Dalajlamą (są bardzo słabo widoczne, może także dać większe zbliżenia ludzi np. prezydenta Portugalii i/lub Siergieja Ławrowa? Czy jest jeszcze mała możliwość wprowadzenia kilku poprawek redakcyjnych w wersji polskiej? Czy jak kliknę 'Ta strona to przetłumaczona wersja... to mogę jeszcze trochę wygładzić ten tekst (tylko polski), czy też strasznie wtedy namieszam? Boston9 (talk) 18:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Nie martw się o brojenie, zmieniaj co chcesz, i jak coś nie tak to daj mi (albo innym administratorom - tłumaczom znać to poprawimy. Ale jako ze to nowy system to się wszyscy trochę uczymy. Np. Nie wiem dlaczego polska i angielska wersja ma inne fotografie. Poczekam parę dni i jeśli się nie poprawia to spróbuje coś innego. --Jarekt (talk) 05:04, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Hej, skończyłem, ale znów coś mamy po angielsku w polskiej:( Ale za to zdjęcia są w obu wersjach takie same! W międzyczasie na ten tekst po polsku zerknęła Kancelaria Senatu, powiedzieli, że wszystko jest OK i przedstawia stan faktyczny. Czy mogę zapytać kolegów, czy by się nie podjęli tłumaczenia na FR, DE i RUS, i ew. mogę dać Ci znać? Boston9 (talk) 18:44, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Chyba wszystko gotowe na dalsze tłumaczenia. Niestety Extension:Translate zakłada ze językiem oryginalnym jest angielski a nie polski, wiec było by łatwiej jeśli ci koledzy także czytają angielski. --Jarekt (talk) 19:12, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Ach ta lingua franca:). Qrcze, zdaje się, że nie wszyscy. Czy jest jakiś sposób na obejście tego? Np. przetłumaczyć w brudnopisie, a potem przekleić? Hmmm, przyszła mi jeszcze jedna rzecz do głowy: czy istnieje możliwość dodania w polskiej wersji jeszcze jednej sekcji (której nie byłoby wersjach w innych jezykach), że jeżeli ktoś chce pójść w ślady Senatu, albo po prostu przesłać jakieś dobre zdjęcia do artykułu o swojej instytucji, to zapraszamy? Zainspirował mnie case Grodziska Mazowieckiego, które najpierw zapytał, a potem przesłał nam dwa zdjęcia np. zerknij na to, które wstawiłem do artykułu o ich mieście. Może byliby następcy? Z drugiej strony czy jako admin widzisz, jaka jest oglądalność tej stronki (tj. Commons:Senate of Poland)? Warto? Boston9 (talk) 22:14, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Zawsze można wydrukować stronę z wersją polską i angielską, a potem pójść do strony gdzie się tłumaczy z angielskiego na inne języki i używać wydruku jako ściągawki. Niestety program który został zaprojektowany bu uprościć tłumaczenia w tym wypadku je dość skomplikował zwłaszcza dla tych co pierwszy raz go używają. Nie ma problemu z dodaniem dodatkowych sekcji, ale dodajmy do wszystkich języków. Moze powinniśmy stworzyć polska wersje Commons:GLAM/Getting Started i stworzyć szablon który byśmy dodali do Commons:Archiwum Główne Akt Dawnych, Commons:LabPstryk 2011, Commons:Senate of Poland i Commons:Józef Piłsudski Institute of America który mial by jedno czy dwa zdania i link to Commons:GLAM/....... --Jarekt (talk) 02:25, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
OK. W takim razie zaczynam pytać:) Będę Cię prosił ustawienie tego narzędzia dla kolejnych języków, jak koledzy zadeklarują pomoc linwistyczną. Zaczynam od niemieckiego:) Jesteśmy w kontakcie! Boston9 (talk) 10:18, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Ja chyba nie muszę nic ustawiać. Oni muszą nacisnąć "Translate" , wybrać język, i kliknąć na cześć którą chcą przetłumaczyć. --Jarekt (talk) 13:05, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Reply re: File:UM SSW.png.[edit]

Hi Jaretkt,

Thanks for your e-mail regarding File:UM SSW.png. I got the image from the UM School of Social Work Office (the license owners of the photo), as I'm a student there making a page for a class project. How do I indicate that I have express permission to post this copywrited picture, please? I've gotten back in touch with the person who sent it to me originally, to see if there's a specific code or something...

Thanks so much for your help -- I'm new to this! Best, Lcalex

You fixed it. That is all I need. --Jarekt (talk) 04:09, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Okay, thank you so much for your help with this. I'll try to fix the other one within the next 48 hours. Thank you again! -- Lcalex

GLAM: case of Poland[edit]

Hej Jarek, rozmawiałem właśnie z Julią (Lantuszką), której wielką pasją jest GLAM w Polsce (i nie tylko w Polsce), i Julia chciałaby pomóc w tym, o czym pisałeś powyżej. Znamy się z Julią z comiesięcznych spotkań wikipedystów w Warszawie. Absolutnie nie ma lepszej Kandydatki do zaopiekowania się tymi sprawami na Commons:) Czy mógłbym mieć do Ciebie prośbę, gdybyś napisał Julii, co konkretnie trzeba zrobić? Bardzo serdeczne dzięki! Boston9 (talk) 12:43, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, Odpisze tutaj i zaproszę Julie do dyskusji. Boston9, po tym jak zaproponowałeś żeby dodać sekcje ze "jeżeli ktoś chce pójść w ślady Senatu, albo po prostu przesłać jakieś dobre zdjęcia do artykułu o swojej instytucji, to zapraszamy", pomyślałem ze lepiej by było stworzyć stronę (np. Commons:GLAM/Pierwsze kroki) która mówi ze jeśli są jakieś osoby związane z polskimi instytucjami kulturalnymi i jeśli chciały by zacząć współprace, to tu są instrukcje jak to zrobić. Jak narazie mamy 4 projekty związane z GLAM i Polską: Commons:Archiwum Główne Akt Dawnych, Commons:LabPstryk 2011, Commons:Senate of Poland i Commons:Józef Piłsudski Institute of America które mogą służyć jako przykłady. Powinniśmy przetłumaczyć wszystkie 4 strony na polski. Także moglibyśmy dodać link do Commons:GLAM/Pierwsze kroki z powyższych czterech stron współpracy.
Większym problemem jest fakt ze brak jest na polskiej Wikipedii stron typu en:Wikipedia:GLAM. Także wiele stron na outreach:GLAM można by było przetłumaczyć na polski. Pisałem ostatnio z user:Polimerkiem na ten temat. Współpraca z instytucjami kulturalnymi może mieć wiele form, a przesyłanie zdjęć na Commons jest tylko jedną z nich, dlatego główna strona wikiprojektu typu GLAM powinna być na polskiej Wikipedii. Commons:GLAM/Pierwsze kroki powinna być tylko na temat przesyłki zdjęć i odesłać czytelników do PL-WP i outreach:GLAM by znaleźć resztę informacji.
--Jarekt (talk) 14:25, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Brooklyn Museum image[edit]

Hi Jarekt. I am working to migrate the Brooklyn Museum's images from Flickr to Wikimedia Commons so they can be accessible to a much wider audience. We developed the 'no known restrictions' template for this purpose. Please reference this discussion Commons:Deletion_requests/Template:Brooklyn_Museum-no_known_restrictions that followed a similar deletion request. The vast majority of votes amongst the Wikimedia community were 'Keep'. We hope you allow this image to remain part of Wikimedia Commons.

I am fine with {{Brooklyn_Museum-no_known_restrictions}} I was only alerting you that in some cases this template was missing. --Jarekt (talk) 04:45, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
@Gianaricci: These images are acceptable, but they need a license. This template alone is not sufficient. For all US images dated before 1923, you can use {{PD-US}}. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Sierakowscy i Waplewo Wielkie[edit]

Patrz dyskusja tam / see discussion here [12] 09:28, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Old Pictures[edit]

Hi Jarek, I am thinking, Photos from 1887 or 2021 are ok - you criticized them (My English is rather poor). Greetings--MoSchle (talk) 18:16, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

You still need to add a license template like {{Anonymous-EU}}, {{PD-old-100-1923}}, {{PD-Germany-§134-KUG}}, etc. See Commons:Lizenzvorlagen. (Google translate: Sie müssen noch hinzufügen, eine Lizenz-Vorlage wie {{Anonymous-EU}}, {{PD-old-100-1923}}, {{PD-Germany-§134-KUG}}, usw. Siehe Commons:Lizenzvorlagen.) --Jarekt (talk) 18:31, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks--MoSchle (talk) 20:56, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Bernardino Poccetti, La conquista di Bona, Firenze, Palazzo Pitti, Sala di Bona.jpgHo[edit]

Ciao grazie per il tuo aiuto. Ho provveduto a cambiare il tag di copyrigth, come indicato nel template, che mi hai inviato. Scusa.Io non sono molto esperto. Ancora grazie e buona giornata.

Hello thanks for your help. I proceeded to change the tag copyrigth, as indicated in the template, which you sent me. Again, thank you and good day.Excuse. I'm not very experienced.--Roberto.Amerighi (talk) 09:58, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Strange bot edit[edit]

Hi Jarekt. Can you remember what your bot your trying to do there? There might be other such cases in the same maintenance category. --Leyo 21:36, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

That is strange, but you are right it is 5 years ago and I had no idea about what I was trying to do. The headers is something I occasionally try to fix while doing other things but {{de}} -> {{Unknown}} makes no sense. I did a lot of Author=unknown → Author={{unknown}} on that day but I did not see any other {{de}} -> {{Unknown}}. --Jarekt (talk) 04:02, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Doubts on licence and my deleted pic[edit]

Hi, Jarekt, I saw you deleted the pic of Alessandro Cipriani I posted. Maybe I was wrong in selecting the kind of license... I re-tried now with a slightly different pic, named File:Alessandro Cipriani - Electronic Music.jpg

and indicated this type of licence Creative Commons CC0 Waiver (release all rights, like public domain: legal code) so maybe this time will be correct? I also indicated that I owen the waiver of the subject of the photo, that is Alessandro Cipriani.Is there anything else I should do? I forgot to copy the link to this new photo Alessandro Cipriani - Electronic Music.jpg Where can I find the link again?

Thanks in advance for your help and patience, I'm new to Commons... Giovanni Terraboni

Giovanni, Thanks for contributing your photographs and yes license of File:Alessandro Cipriani - Electronic Music.jpg looks fine. The previous file was deleted because it did not have any license. We give the uploaders a chance to fix it for a week or so and than the file is deleted. Sorry for the rough welcome to the Commons and hope to see more of your photographs. --Jarekt (talk) 02:56, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

regarding photograph[edit]

Hello! I am new to Commons. I have added 2 photographs it was taken from free leaflets given out by the community as a memorobilia and diplayed on internet. There is no author given on the memorobilia and there is no copyright mentioned either. I didnt know how to licence it. Can you help me out? Araz5152 (talk) 22:48, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

File:David Hinde Bridlington Town Crier -The World's Loudest Recorded Town Crier 114.8 decibels Cirrus Research.jpg[edit]

Jarekt - I posted clarification of the permission by the taker of the Photograph Steve Hey of Image Creation you questioned on the talk page and that he has licensed it for release under

Original Message -----

From: Steve Hey To: 'David Hinde' Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2014 4:24 PM Subject: License to Use My Image.

Hi David,

You are license to use my image I have released this under the:-

This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 UK: England & Wales license.

Any problems please do not hesitate to contact us.

Speak soon

Steve Hey

Senior Development Manager


Telephone: 01723 890922 Mobile: 07943 654 559


E-mail: Hello Jarekt, I animated schema from page I want to make it available to the user RYJ ( It was difficult for me to upload that file, there was any problem and I use some old version for uploading. I don't know how to do it better. Please, can you correct it somehow? Link to original source is Animation is my own work and it is on the Thank you BtesBates

E-mail: Hello, I do not know what you consider a "license", but if you need my name is Barbora Tesařová (more only by e-mail). English is not my forte, and about wikicommons I do not know much (I think, that nothing). I just wanted to meet the pleading to made the animation ​​available. If you could do so, to make it publicly available, it will be good, if it is probem, let it be.

Thank you BtesBates

Nick or -> full name?[edit]

Cześć, mam do Ciebie pytanie: zauważyłem, że wielu wikipedystów ładując zdjęcia na Commons, w polu, gdzie uwalnia się prawa, wpisuje nie swój nick, ale pełne imię i nazwisko. Co sądzisz o tej praktyce? Czy można/lepiej/warto mieć w polu „Autor” pełne imię i nazwisko zamiast „Boston9”? No i po weekendowej lekturze książki Pundita – czy wolisz/powinienem pisać tutaj do Ciebie po angielsku, w ramach transparentności naszej komunikacji dla niepolskojęzycznych użytkowników projektu, czy możemy dalej komunikować się po polsku? Oczywiście, po polsku jest mi szybciej, ale naruszam tym normy Commons, to daj mi proszę znać, i będę pisał po angielsku. Nie byłem tego świadom. Dzięki:) Boston9 (talk) 14:54, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

To zależny od tego jakie chcesz imię w sekcji "uznanie autorstwa" (attribution). Jeśli chcesz by osoby używające twoje zdjęcia poza Wikipedia podpisywały je jako autorstwa "Boston9" to powinieneś używać swój nick, a jak wolisz by zdjęcia były autorstwa Adriana Grycuka to dajesz swoje pełne imię. Pełne imię powinno mieć link do userpage, by inni by było jasne ze fotografia była przesyłana przez autora. Co do języka to nie znam książki Pundita ale o ile ja rozumiem to możesz pisać do kogokolwiek w jakimkolwiek chcesz języku. Nasza komunikacja jest transparentna (chyba pierwszy raz używam to słowo po polsku) dla każdego kto umie używać Google Translate. Pisz (do mnie i do innych) w jakim języku najłatwiej jest ci się komunikować z dana osoba. Commons jest projektem międzynarodowym i nie słyszałem o żadnych normach na ten temat. Dla mnie szybciej jest po angielsku, zwłaszcza na tematy techniczne, ale to zawsze dobra praktyka. --Jarekt (talk) 16:02, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Dzięki serdeczne! Chyba zacznę dawać swoje pełne imię, bo łatwiej będzie interweniować kiedy w polskim necie mnożą się zdjęcia podpisane „Źródło: Wikipedia” (chociaż i tak jest naprawdę coraz lepiej:) Hurra, Ziel mi właśnie napisała, że przetłumaczyła nasz tekst senacki na francuski. Tylko dlaczego system pokazuje, że jest skończone w 78%? Zamierzam teraz poprosić Encego o wersję rosyjską. Boston9 (talk) 19:46, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Licence de fichier (File:Lanfranco Elie nourri par le corbeau.jpg) et File:Girodet-Trioson - Portrait de Giuseppe Fravrega.jpg[edit]

Désolé mais je ne parle pas anglais. Il est évident que je suis l'auteur des photos car j'ai mis dans source Own work et que les caractéristiques de mes photos (ouverture, vitesse etc.) sont indiquées. Les peintres des tableaux sont morts depuis plus de 100 ans et il ne devrait y avoir aucun problème. J'ai ajouté des corrections : si cela ne vous convient pas, merci de corriger vous même et de me dire comment il faut faire. Jusqu'à présent je n'ai eu aucun problème pour les photos de tableaux anciens que j'avais prises. Je ne comprends donc guère vos remarques. Merci de vos renseignements.Robert Valette (talk) 20:14, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, all fixed now. (Google translate: Merci à tous fixe maintenant.) --Jarekt (talk) 20:28, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Help in relation to photographs[edit]

Welcome Jarekt. I am rewriting in the context of your help: quot.: Mr Ryszard, for Improvement these photographs. If there are some questions or problems in the future willingly I will help | Above I passed photographs which probably have some wrong descriptions. It appears from the entry that you will mend these photographs. I would be very grateful for this charity gesture. Very much I care about these photographs. It turns out that there are some mistakes in the subject of the ones of photograph. Above I wrote, that majority are my photographs, some with copies, but I gave sources. Is the son trying to mend something, but I don't know whether he is doing well? If something's wrong warmly I am calling for help. From above thanks and very much I ask for the write-off how my matter is. --Rynio55 5 luty 2014

Zdjęcie Kamila Szeptyckiego[edit]

Cześć, powalczyłbym o artykuł o tym chłopaku z sympatii dla książki, zdjęcie jest też technicznie ciekawe. Jednak od jego strony prawnej jest tak samo źle, jak z tekstem. Co z tym począć? W opisie fotografii mamy Paweł Jakubek, jako autor podana agencja aktorska. Ogromy znak wodny. Jak znam życie pewnie zgody OTRS brak. Co z tym począć? Napisać do nich? Boston9 (talk) 14:17, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Zlikwidowałem znak wodny i napisałem do User talk:RolePlay. --Jarekt (talk) 03:01, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Dzięki, napisałem też jeszcze do nich maila rano. Niestety, zobacz, że w przypadku ich drugiego zdjęcia jest tak samo – autorką jest z kolei Monika Stolarska. Szkoda mi tych zdjęć (jak wszystkich dobrych zdjęć). Mam nadzieję, ze przyślą OTRS. Film od jutra w kinach. Jak pewnie wiesz, jeszcze przed premierą wzbudził w Polsce wiele kontrowersji ze względu na przedstawienie historii i relacji między bohaterami. Zamierzam go obejrzeć. Boston9 (talk) 11:33, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Nazwa kategorii na Commons: Władysław Lizoń czy Wladyslaw Lizon?[edit]

Rety, znów pojawił się nowy dla mnie problem:( Wstawiam zdjęcia z ostatniej partii Senatu, gdzie przy okazji często muszę też tworzyć kategorie i poprawić różne rzeczy w Wikidata. No i na tym zdjęciu jest Władysław Lizoń, który jako poseł w Kanadzie nie ma w imieniu i nazwisku polskich znaków diakrytycznych. To jest pierwsze jego zdjęcie na Commons. Jak powinienem nazwać folder dla niego? Dodam, że przed chwilą stworzyłem kategorię dla Józefa Kwiatkowskiego, kiedy na litewskiej Wikipedii jest jako Juzef Kvetkovskij... Opis osób od kolegów z Senatu jest oczywiście po polsku. Z góry dzięki za pomoc! Boston9 (talk) 12:01, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Ja zazwyczaj próbuje użyć wersji imienia (czy miejsca) która jest najczęściej spotykana w krajach angielskojęzycznych. Jeśli mamy artykuł w EN-WP to próbuje użyć ta wersje. Inna metoda to liczenie stron w Google: np. "Wladysław Lizon" dal mi 18,9k stron a "Władysław Lizoń" 13,6k. Dlatego Category:Wladyslaw Lizon było by lepsze. Przeczytaj także ta dyskusje. --Jarekt (talk) 13:15, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Ok, tak zrobię. Będę się trzymał angielskiego. Dzięki! Boston9 (talk) 13:18, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Alexander Goldstein image[edit] "No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please contact me on my talk page."

I do not know which templates would be appropriate, or how to add them. As I said in the image info, permission is granted by the copyright holder to use the image so long as a link back to their site is provided. What should I do to prevent the image being deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lexipenia (talk • contribs)

Lexipenia, in general the photographer is the only copyright holder and the only person who can grant the permission to use the image one way or the other. And since in this case the photographer is unknown than I am not sure who did you get permission from. As I see it the image probably does not meet the requirements of Commons. Also in cases when the images was found on the internet then we usually either require a link to a page that clearly states the copyright requirements of the image in question or request an OTRS email from the copyright holder. You can read more about it at Com:OTRS. --Jarekt (talk) 20:56, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
It is clearly stated on the page that the copyright belongs to the host website, not the photographer. The host website then unambiguously grants permission to reproduce the image so long as a link to their site is provided. (I can translate the Russian text if you want.) It seems to me clear that reproducing the image with a link is perfectly acceptable. Whilst they do not state which exact license is given (presumably because they don't know about the intricacies of copyright law, and want people to be allowed to use the image if they wish), it seems that in this case the copyright holder (ie. the host website) is willing to grant permission to reproduce the image. Is it really necessary to email them via OTRS to obtain approval, when their page explicitly states that no particular approval is necessary, so long as a link to the site is required?(talk)01:20:56, 7 March 2014 (GMT+1)

Goldstein image[edit]

It does not appear you got noticed my reply. I don't want this image to be deleted! Here is what I wrote above: -- It is clearly stated on the page that the copyright belongs to the host website, not the photographer. The host website then unambiguously grants permission to reproduce the image so long as a link to their site is provided. (I can translate the Russian text if you want.) It seems to me clear that reproducing the image with a link is perfectly acceptable. Whilst they do not state which exact license is given (presumably because they don't know about the intricacies of copyright law, and want people to be allowed to use the image if they wish), it seems that in this case the copyright holder (ie. the host website) is willing to grant permission to reproduce the image. Is it really necessary to email them via OTRS to obtain approval, when their page explicitly states that no particular approval is necessary, so long as a link to the site is required? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lexipenia (talk • contribs)

Lexipenia, Sorry I did read it. I decided to reply latter and forgot about it. I wrote what I had to say and did not feel like repeating. So lets do this: I will nominate the file for deletion, and explain my point of view then you can copy and paste your reply. This way an independent 3rd voice (or more) will review it. Either way the file still does not have an license template. I think that If you were right the closest template would be {{Attribution}}. --Jarekt (talk) 03:26, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
OK, thank you for replying. Please appreciate that I am new to this and do not know how to add license templates, etc. I can see about adding that one. I don't know what it is that I could be "wrong" about though: the website claims that they have copyright of the image, and they grant permission to use it. Do you mean that the website itself must be wrong, and the copyright remains with the unknown photographer, in which case we cannot use the image? Because all the information I have provided is correct and is clearly visible on the page.--Lexipenia (talk) 10:29, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
I realized you are new and I am sorry that I am not very good as a welcome committee. When I say an attribution license template I mean you add "{{Attribution | }}" to the file description below {{Information}} template. I trust that the website says everything you say it says, but you are correct I do not trust that they can releases under any license the content which they did not create. Especially if they do not even know who created it. --Jarekt (talk) 03:35, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

File Grethe Weiser etc...[edit]

Hi Jarekt, Thank you for trying to help me for example with German signs to Licensing and ',Gallery-Hinweis',. I accept, unknowing I made failures and I cannot heal them immediatly. For example: I don't find ancesters of Grethe Weiser or the Grethe-Weiser-Archiv and the Publishing House of the Grethe-Weiser-Book reject to help. By the way I am nearly 76 years old and it. is a little more than I can good handle. I know now, i have to know the date of death of the photographers and then by German Right 70 years minimum. Greetings --MoSchle (talk) 16:23, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

MoSchle, thanks for contributing and I am sorry to be the messenger bringing the bad news that about your new uploads. I upload a lot of historical images and figuring out the copyright status is always a challenge and some percentage will always be deleted; however spending some time before the upload to figure out the proper licenses usually saves you time in the long run, because you do not waste time working on the files which are then deleted. Until you get more familiar with the process I would stick to the simple cases: uploading images you took or images of the known photographers who died before 1944. Also if you need to ask for help try Commons:Forum. Regards --Jarekt (talk) 17:32, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Kłodzko, Armii Krajowej 5 9.jpg[edit]

O co chodzi z tym plikiem ? Jacek Halicki (talk) 16:38, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Brak licencji: np. File:Kanał Młynówka i mury miejskie w Kłodzku.JPG ma {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}} a ten plik nie ma żadnej. --Jarekt (talk) 11:50, 11 March 2014 (UTC)


I have attempted to obtain permission for this file via the OTRS system. I forwarded a message from the copyright holder to on 7th March, subject 'Fw: Woodford Website enquiry'. After the copyright holder had given informal consent, I sent him an email specifying details of the licence, and he returned that email to indicate his consent. I added what I understood to be the correct licensing tag on the file page. Paravane (talk) 16:57, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Paravane , I was mostly looking for {{CC-by-sa-3.0}}, but I approved and closed your OTRS ticket as well. Thanks for contributing. --Jarekt (talk) 12:11, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I did not realise at first what the problem was - I had not twigged that the licence had to be specified independently of the OTRS ticket. Paravane (talk) 15:02, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Irani Chai.jpeg[edit]

Dear sir, I have taken the image of my own, and uploaded it. In fact I know less about the uploading method. If you kindly correct it on my behalf, I will be thankful. అహ్మద్ నిసార్ (talk) 20:18, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

అహ్మద్ నిసార్, I fixed what I could, but the main issue is that you are missing a license template also known as copyright tag. I can not add it for you. For example if you would like to donate the image to Public Domain you could add {{PD-user}} at the end of your file. Other popular option is {{cc-by-sa-4.0}}. Thanks for contributing. --Jarekt (talk) 12:21, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

your edits in Template:PermissionOTRS[edit]

It seems that your recent edits in the template has changed something unexpectedly: now, when I use gadget and enter ticket number to it as usual, template is shown incorrectly => link rubin16 (talk) 05:21, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

The changes were made over a year ago. No the issue was with copy and paste, I started marking the ticket numbers which were outside of valid range. In you case you lost the last digit. --Jarekt (talk) 12:39, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, I though that 2013 is still going, not 2014 :) that's why I thought that the reason of mistake are recent (from my point of view) edits in template, not anything else. Sorry for disturbance rubin16 (talk) 12:46, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Not a problem. --Jarekt (talk) 12:48, 11 March 2014 (UTC)


Dear Jarekt, to remind you that this matter already discussed and closed personally by you November 2013. See below, Quote; Dear Jarekt, I tag it, as per your suggestion. Probably the wording “file page doesn't contain enough information about the license” is standart, but this is not a case. Author of this engraving, from Historical museum of Athens, was died latest 1880 (some 130 years ago). The engraving itself published in 4-5 dozens of historical editions, including school books, mean file is in public domain for 100 years plus. Furthemore this is not a photo, this is low resolution scanning from one of this editions (I use edition dated 1971 – mean 42 years old) but there are more old editions, with same image.There are no persons, at least in this world, entitled with rights for this historical image. Best Regards Macedon-40 (talk) 20:01, 22 November 2013 (UTC) I agree the standard {{no license}} wording does not work well for PD works. I will see if I can change it. I corrected the license of File:TOMBAZIS.-1825.jpeg. --Jarekt (talk) 20:20, 22 November 2013 (UTC)


Regards Macedon-40 (talk) 14:09, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

I am confused I recently wrote you about lack of license in the File:DORIS-1919.jpg not File:TOMBAZIS.-1825.jpeg. But it seems like both files are corrected now. --Jarekt (talk) 14:21, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Licencja Cc-by-sa-3.0-pl[edit]

Witaj, mam małe pytanie: tak jak Senat chciałbym dla swoich zdjęć stosować na Commons tę licencję, zamiast domyślnej Cc-by-sa-3.0. Czy to jest Twoim zdaniem dobry pomysł? Czy robią tak wikipedyści z innych krajów? Czy ma to jakieś praktyczne konsekwencje dla użytkowników zdjęć? Jak zawsze serdeczne dzięki za odpowiedź! PS. Czy mógłbyś zerknąć na to francuskie tłumaczenie? Wydaje mi się, że jest skończone, ale system pokazuje 89%? Dzięki! Boston9 (talk) 08:28, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

O ile rozumiem to różnica miedzy {{Cc-by-sa-3.0-pl}} a {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} to to ze tekst licencji jest napisany w oparciu o prawo polskie i używając terminologie rozpoznawalną dla prawników polskich. Nie ma chyba żadnych praktycznych konsekwencji dla użytkowników zdjęć. Co do Commons:Senate_of_Poland/fr to nie wiem dlaczego jest to na 89%. Może potrzebuje by ktoś inny zrobił "proof-read"? --Jarekt (talk) 12:29, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Dzieki, jak zawsze (przepraszam za brak polskich znakow, ale jestem teraz sluzbowo w Irlandii) to w takim razie bede stosowal te licencje z polska flaga:) Z tego co wiem to tlumaczenie zostalo sprawdzone przez rodowitego Francuza, cos jeszcze trzeba zrobic? Boston9 (talk) 19:41, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

About license of my logos[edit]

Hi Sir. You requested more license templates for my two wikipedia logos. I thought mention {{Wikimedia trademark}} is enough, but if you emphasize for another license templates, I add {{FAL}}. Is it sufficient? Julian-kamal (talk) 11:24, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Julian-kamal, {{Wikimedia trademark}} is not a license but {{CopyrightByWikimedia}} is (those 2 are easily confused). Since both files are based on File:Wikipedia-logo-v2.svg, I added {{CopyrightByWikimedia}} as well. --Jarekt (talk) 12:07, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you Jarekt. I am a climber like you.(but please don't tell sysops ;) ) Julian-kamal (talk) 17:22, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Category:Climbing in Iran has some good photographs, I always liked desert sandstone. --Jarekt (talk) 17:23, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Request for feedback on my GSoC'14 proposal[edit]

Hi Jarekt,

I am planning to work on the project titled "Tools for mass migration of legacy translated wiki content" this summer under Google Summer of Code. I have drafted a proposal for the same over the past few weeks. This project is going to help the translation adminstrators like you in a great way, as it would completely automate the tedious manual task of preparing a page for translation and then importing the translations into the Translate extension. You can check the proposal page for detailed information on how I plan to accomplish this.

As you would be an end user of this tool, it would be great if you could go through the proposal and provide feedback/suggestions. Your feedback would definitely help me improve the proposal as well help in creating an even better tool. You can do the same on the discussion page of the proposal or reply here, whichever is convenient for you. I look forward to hearing from you! Thank you!

P.S: I need to submit the proposal to Google by March 19, 2014.

BPositive (talk) 13:47, 13 March 2014 (UTC)


Hello Jarekt :-). I have recently added a new picture of a coin [13]. It is the first time I've uploaded a picture from this site, but i have seen many other uploaded pictures from this site, so i guess it doesn't violate any copyrights? --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:36, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Coins are tricky, so you should read Commons:Currency. The issue is that some of them can be treated as 2D objects and can use {{PD-scan}} or {{PD-Art}} instead of photographer's license, and some are definitely 3D. I would not invest my time in those images since there is a good chance they will be deleted without photographer's license. --Jarekt (talk) 03:44, 15 March 2014 (UTC)


Witaj, czy z grafiką dodawaną przez tego użytkownika, jak na przykład ten, jest wszystko prawnie w porządku? Mam dylemat na plWiki z zatwierdzeniem edycji w artykule o Stefanie Wyszyńskim. Jak zawsze serdeczne dzięki za pomoc! Boston9 (talk) 17:45, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Tego typu grafiki są zawsze kłopotliwe. Jako ze nie znam za bardzo terminologii polskiej to przerzucę się na angielski. Copyrights might have several components and possibly multiple "authors":
  1. First there is the basic design, which is more of a concept which could have many interpretations. Think of how many different Polish eagles over the years. Most coats of arms are {{PD-old-100}}
  2. Then there is the specific interpretation of the basic design. If creator of commons file created the graphics based directly on some old design than he is the author. However if he created a perfect and identical copy of someone else's graphics than it is a derivative work and it should also address the copyrights of original author. Zakładam ze User:Balcerowiczjestok jest jedynym autorem tej grafiki, jako ze inne interpretacje tego herbu są dosyć rożne: np na polskich znaczkach czy tu. --Jarekt (talk) 14:22, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Glip galli.tif[edit]

Hello Jarekt,

when I uploaded the file, I couldn't find a copyright template exactly matching "GNU Free Documentation License 1.3" (GNU FDL; under this license, the image has been published on the web page I obtained it from). However, I thought (and still think), this License should be sufficient for publication on, as it allows copying and distribution for commercial and noncommercial purposes (see sect.2 of the license text). If this license is insufficient, the image has to be deleted; similarly the other 9 images in the (newly created) Category:Greeble have to be deleted. They are used only on en:Greeble (psychology).

I had already specified (in the "Licensing" section of the file description pages) where I found the files and under which license they were published by their creator. So the only question is if the GNU FDL license is sufficient, and if not, why not.

Best regards, - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 18:53, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Please use {{GFDL-1.3 |migration=not-eligible}}. --Jarekt (talk) 19:18, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the information! - I included that template, and removed your ((no license)) template, in all 10 images. - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 09:24, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks --Jarekt (talk) 12:08, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:DenkmalJohannEberhardJungblut.JPG[edit]

Hi, I have added a license, sry that I forgot it in the first place. Who will remove the template? Manuela (Diskussion) 07:35, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 12:07, 18 March 2014 (UTC)


Cześć. Mam na plwiki bota na AWB i chciałem nauczyć się Pywikibota. Coś tam zacząłem i mam pytanie: czy jest coś takiego jak "CSV Loader", gdzie w zewnętrznym pliku txt mam dane dla poszczególnych stron, które chcę edytować razem ze zmianami, które dotyczą poszczególnych stron. Znalazłem tylko użycie zewnętrznego pliku jako listy stron do edycji, ale zmiana jest ta sama dla wszystkich stron. Ale nie mogę znaleźć przykładu skryptu, który potrafi zaimportować dane z pliku txt dot. poszczególnych stron, np.

Nazwa strony 1,Tekst 1, Inny tekst 1, Coś tam jeszcze 1
Nazwa strony 2,Tekst 2, Inny tekst 2, Coś tam jeszcze 2
Nazwa strony 3,Tekst 3, Inny tekst 3, Coś tam jeszcze 3

Można oczywiście rozpisać każdą stronę osobno z wszystkimi poleceniami, ale nie o to chodzi. Z plikiem txt było by łatwiej. Mam nadzieję, że rozumiesz o co mi chodzi. Dopiero zaczynam z Pywikibotem. Masz jakiś pomysł, przykład takiego skryptu? Pozdrawiam, Blackfish (talk) 10:14, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Nie mam kodu który działa tak jak "CSV Loader" ale napisałem parę skryptów które podobnie działają. Zobacz User:JarektBot/Replace PD-Art, dosyc niewiele by trzeba by było tam zmienić by działał jak "CSV Loader". Pozdrowienia --Jarekt (talk) 12:20, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Dzięki. Będzie co wieczorem poanalizować :) Blackfish (talk) 13:19, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Eee... jednak nie jest to wszystko takie proste. Postudiowałem skrypty, zainstalowałem Pythona, potem wgrałem foldery "core" i "compat", utworzyłem, zalogowałem się (tak przynajmniej wygląda, jakbym się zalogował), potem niby uruchomiłem skrypt (początkowo pojawiały się jakieś błędy, ale je wyeliminowałem) i... teraz nic się nie dzieje kiedy uruchamiam skrypt, tzn. artykuły nie są edytowane :(

Czy z tego co piszę można wywnioskować co robię źle i czy mógłbyś wytłumaczyć jak uruchomić pywikibota. Wydaje mi się, że czegoś nie rozumiem, że pomijam jakiś istotny krok w tych wszystkich ustawieniach. Bo o ile w AWB było jakieś okno dialogowe, gdzie to wszystko się ustawiało i lepiej było widać co robi program, o tyle tutaj rozumiem, że wszystko ustawiamy w plikach .py i uruchamiamy z linii komend.

Po prostu nie bardzo rozumiem, jak ten program łączy się np. z wikipedią, żeby coś zmienić... no nie czuję o co chodzi...

Jakbyś miał chwilę, nic zobowiązującego. Pozdrawiam, Blackfish (talk) 20:52, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status:[edit]

Thanks for your notification . I believe that I have now corrected the issue, so can you please confirm.(JockeyColours (talk) 11:53, 19 March 2014 (UTC))

Yes, all but File:ChampionHurdle123 2011r1.svg have licenses. Could you also add descriptions by filling {{Information}} templates and add categories (some sibcategory of Category:Horse racing?). --Jarekt (talk) 12:04, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Louveciennes, hauteurs de Marly, Sisley.jpeg[edit]

Thanks for your notification. I have corrected the missing information. I actually intended initially to upload this upon File:Louveciennes, hauteurs de Marly, Sisley.jpg, but did not realised the difference of extension. (jpeg/jpg). --Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 12:15, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Ryho2[edit]

Please could you check the uploads of User:Ryho2. I tagged two of his uploads with "no permission" tag, but he has removed the tags. He appears to say in Polish that he is the author of the photos and given that apparently the Polish translation of the "no permission since" template omits the sentence: This also applies if you are the author, he thinks that an OTRS permission is unnecessary for his uploads. Jespinos (talk) 17:34, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

✓OK I will try to talk with him. Although I think he is the photographer. --Jarekt (talk) 03:56, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Kulczyk Foundation[edit]

Hej, zerknij proszę w wolnej chwili na trzy zdjęcia i logo wgrane przez tego użytkownika to, wstawione do tego artykułu na pl-Wiki. Dzięki! PS. Martwi mnie te wyświetlane 89% w wersji francuskiej i polskiej. Zatwierdziłem wszystko, pokazało się "gotowe", ale wciąż jest Ta strona to przetłumaczona wersja strony Commons:Senate of Poland, a tłumaczenie jest ukończone lub aktualne w 89%.. Może to wymaga interwencji administratorskiej? Jak to usunąć? Boston9 (talk) 00:55, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Wymieniliśmy maile, ktoś z KF powinien niedługo przysłać zgodę OTRS na te trzy zdjęcia. Dziękuję,. Boston9 (talk) 15:59, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Your opinion about creator ns and wikidata[edit]

What is your opinion about which link should be added in the Commons field at WD? If we have a {{creator}} in place, or should do you prefer category or main ns (I will prejudice the conversation with the fact that I don't do main ns galleries. My issue is that I feel that the creator: ns pages are missed at WD, and they are usually the place where we want to collect and utilise live data (and I end up with lots of dead data pushes).  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:53, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

I think that the only way wikidata will stay useful if it is uniform and predictable. As a result, until better solution presents itself I support Gallery<->article and Category<->Category links only. I assume that at some point we will be able to call wikidata properties to fill creator pages. I would like for all or most of Creator template content to be moved to wikidata and even removed from commons. At some point creator namespace might become almost obsolete, when the only info there is homecat from which a lua code can figure out where the properties are and can fill the template based on that. I was thinking about writing some python code to copy most of creator data to wikidata, but never got around to do it. --Jarekt (talk) 03:50, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the copyright status of File:Natalia Poklonskaya fan-art by Itachi Kanade.jpg[edit]

We are waiting on an OTRS ticket to be processed, the person who should be sending the OTRS request to the volunteer team should be User:Starship.paint. -- 李博杰  Talk contribs 03:11, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

According to commons:OTRS, the current backlog for OTRS is more than 30 days, so the expected waiting time might be around that. -- 李博杰  Talk contribs 03:15, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 李博杰 , I was only looking for the license, which you still need even if your are also filing OTRS ticket. Thanks for fixing it. --Jarekt (talk) 12:01, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Elisabeth Florin[edit]

Hi Jarekt, thanks for the information. It is my own work and I added for lizenz: "own work, CC-BY-3.0". What do I have to do now? Where do I have to add an information? Thanks --Animagus (talk) 05:32, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

I added {{CC-BY-3.0}} to your file. --Jarekt (talk) 12:30, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. --Animagus (talk) 05:18, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

They have the copyright tag, just incompetently added[edit]

My incompetence with the keyboard should not be tagged as has been done with (Missing a valid copyright tag (/license). Using VisualFileChange.js.). It is inappropriate for a borked typing of a tag to be generating a "planned for deletion notice" IMNSHO. Just fixing them would seem the more beneficial means to a resolution, or a prod to someone's errors, so I can go and fix.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:03, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Billinghurst, We have about 100-150 files a week that do not have a license. I do fix a lot of them, but I concentrate more on old files that "lost" license somehow and tag new uploads with {{no license}} using VisualFileChange.js. I also do a lot of "just fixing them", after adding {{no license}}, but I want uploaders to be aware that that is an issue, otherwise we had people that that make the same mistake over and over again. This process of triage by a human and {{no license}} added by a human that can be talked to seemed as a nicer alternative to fully bot process originally proposed here. If you have ideas of how it can be tweaked to be more clear or friendly, please let me know, but this is the best compromise we come up so far. --Jarekt (talk) 13:00, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
What about having a bot like this one on en.wikipedia that checks if a file page is added to any maintenance category by an edit such as in this example? --Leyo 21:53, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
I d not know how that bot does it, but we have a very easy system to differentiate files with and without licenses: files transcluding {{License template tag}} have licenses and files without it does not. So we can track it and YiFeiBot is working just fine adding weekly files with no license to Category:Media without a license: needs history check. The problem is what to do with them than and the process I described is how I and others deal with them now. --Jarekt (talk) 03:24, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
I wasn't expecting you to fix it, I know it was my snafu. While I am robust enough to know to fix things, and not (overly) bite all the fingers on hands when hit with a blunt stick. Just to get that deletion warning for a typo issue is harsh, and for a newbie, it seems overly harsh. So we have an issues 1) the template applied to a user page, and to a file could be more conciliatory. At the moment it says Copyright status and This media may be deleted. For a typo, that seems overkill. I haven't used so cannot comment on its functioning and whether it has the required flexibility.

As I mentioned to @Leyo: at English Wikisource, we utilise s:en:Template:header which throws its own warnings when mandatory components are removed. We also have an abuse filter that detects if this template is missing in works of the main namespace; though that is not so easy as Information is not a prescribed template, though we could check for the presence of the template before and after an edit, and get a confirmation process. Would it not be possible that we check a file: ns submit for a valid copyright template? If not present, the filter sends back a warning, and if they save without, it is flagged. Responsibility at the time of edit.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:50, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

I had the same idea about the abuse filter but it seems that we can search for a string but not template transclusion. We could also try to detect disappearance of some invisible HTML tag. However that is not possible with current abuse filter rules. I guess we could request expansion of abuse filter. I would love to block edits like this--Jarekt (talk) 13:01, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Really? s:en:Special:AbuseFilter/1 notifies someone when the header is not present, even when it was previously present. Try removing the header template from s:en:Foreign Trade and the Money Market and click save, and you should get a warning that the template is not present, and display the template in a empty form. Unless I am misunderstanding what you are saying.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:53, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
which in short the filter is based on having an "id" component set in the template.

What about moving this thread to COM:VP or another appropriate place, where other users may contribute? --Leyo 08:21, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

OK Good idea. I will move it. --Jarekt (talk) 14:18, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Public picture of a famous person?[edit]

Hello, Jarekt.

You warned me about "no required license templates" here. I have read somewhere that one can insert a picture of a famous person in a public place. How should I add this information for the license of the file?

Moreover, the owner of the picture has put the picture on his public web site, without any copyright protection.

With regards, Alikhezeli (talk) 08:20, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Alikhezeli, Unfortunately we only allow images which were explicitly licensed under a free license, see Commons:Licensing. Which means:
  1. images which were taken by you and released under free license
  2. images which are in Public domain due to age or local laws
  3. images found on the internet which were clearly marked as released under free license
  4. images whose authors send permission to OTRS
All other images are not permitted and the general assumption is that everything found on the internet is copyrighted unless specifically stated that it is not. I think that at this point your best option is to read com:OTRS and contact with a request that they either state some free license (like {{cc-by-sa-4.0}} on their website or write an email to OTRS stating that it is OK to use their photograph and stating the license to be used. --Jarekt (talk) 13:20, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Stocznia Gdańska - Erazm Ciołek - 1980-08.jpg, File:Gdańsk Stocznia 08.1980. 21XTAK Robotnicy 1-8.jpg, File:Stocznia Gdańska - Erazm Ciołek - 1980-08-14.jpg[edit]

Hi Jarekt, are you aware of these speedy requests? --Túrelio (talk) 15:44, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

No I was not notified. Thanks. --Jarekt (talk) 16:00, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-13[edit]

18:56, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement[edit]

Picture of the Year 2013 Results[edit]

The 2013 Picture of the Year. View all results »

Dear Jarekt,

The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).

  • In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
  • In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:

  1. 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
  2. In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
  3. In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.

Click here to view the top images »

We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.

the Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:00, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Tornandburnt.jpg deletion[edit]

Hello, Jarekt, I'm sorry but I don't really understand what's the problem with the image. I obtained permission from the owners (i.e. Obsidian Kingdom the band author of the album from which this image is a cover art) to upload any media on wikimedia commons, as specified (or so I thought) by the ticket {{PermissionOTRS|id=2014012110018119}}. I was told to paste that code every time I uploaded an Obsidian Kingdom images. Aelegria (talk) 13:18, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

That is correct, however your file was still missing a license template (aka copyright tag) which is required for all the files. OTRS is only a link to allow few users to verify that license is correct. OTRS email exchange was not very clear on the license but I copied it from other files used by this OTRS ticket. --Jarekt (talk) 13:43, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
But I see it has a license template now. Did you put it? If that's the case thank you! Is the image safe of deletion now? (sorry for asking so many questions, wikimedia is still complicated for a newcomer like me).Aelegria (talk) 11:42, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Yes the file is OK now. I added the license template, which I got from other files used by the same OTRS ticket. I also removed {{no license}}. You can see all the changes to the file history if you click history tab. And I been here for years and wikimedia is still quite complicated, but I am happy to share some of the things I learned. --Jarekt (talk) 12:24, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Cromer Lifeboat 1998.jpg[edit]

The licence for these images are on the flickr page [21] that they were downloaded from which are share license, but with attributation to be included which is in the links on these images. Please remove your incorrect tags. Cheeseladder (talk) 17:19, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Cheeseladder, File:Cromer Lifeboat 1998.jpg is fine, but at the moment File:Cromer Lifeboat 1998.jpg is missing a license. To fix it add {{Cc-by-2.0}}{{LicenseReview}} to the bottom of your file. In the future I would recommend using Special:UploadWizard with the "flickr" option, as it does many of those steps automatically. --Jarekt (talk) 17:35, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
You are mistaken. The Cromer Lifeboat file's both have a creative commons license which I placed on the file as I am the author of the photographsCheeseladder (talk) 17:41, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
You are correct, that's why I said that "File:Cromer Lifeboat 1998.jpg is fine". The message on your talk page is from December and it is alerting you about earlier upload under the same name that did not have a license and was eventually deleted. --Jarekt (talk) 17:47, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-14[edit]

09:20, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

typos in protected templates[edit]

Hi Jarekt, there seems to be a systematic typo in some templates, see search results, {[Deletion template tag}} should read {{Deletion template tag}}. regards --Herzi Pinki (talk) 06:54, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I checked all my edits and indeed found the typo in Template:Speedydelete. All other templates seem to be fine. --Jarekt (talk) 11:46, 1 April 2014 (UTC)


Dzięki serdeczne za pomoc! Po 2 latach postanowiłem zmienić, bo po prostu łatwiej jest mi interweniować pod własnym imieniem i nazwiskiem, kiedy dziennikarze i internauci nie podpisują poprawnie zdjęć z Commons. „Bostona9” nie zawsze brali poważnie:) A wciąż są z tym problemy, nie tylko w Polsce np. tutaj. PS. Zdjęcie Okrągłego Stołu na razie się broni. Boston9 (talk) 13:45, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Wygląda na to ze rodzina Erazma Ciołka próbuje skasować wszystkie jego zdjęcia z Wikipedii. Zobacz: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stocznia Gdańska - Erazm Ciołek - 1980-08.jpg. A szkoda bo dużo miał dobrych zdjęć. --Jarekt (talk) 14:01, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Widziałem:(( Ale w tej książce: Erazm Ciołek, Polska: sierpień 1980–sierpień 1989/August 1980–August 1989, Editions Spotkania, Warszawa 1990 nie ma żadnej noty copyrightowej. Ja i Julia bardzo dokładnie to sprawdzaliśmy. Masz też wgląd do skanów w polskim OTRS, które wczoraj wysłałem. Jeżeli agencja, która przejęła prawa, nie przedstawi wcześniejszego z zastrzeżeniem, liczę, że ta podstawowa publikacja uratuje przynajmniej te zdjęcia p. Edwarda zdjęcia wykonane bliżej roku 1989. A przy okazji, czy mogę Cie podpytać? Chciałbym wgrać na Commons dwa dokumenty: 1. To świadectwo śmierci Jana Bytnara (pod przybranym nazwiskiem Jana Domańskiego] oraz 2. Akt powołania Tadeusza Mazowieckiego na premiera z 1989 - dokument podpisany po głosowaniu w Sejmie przez Marszałka Sejmu Mikołaja Kozakiewicza. Czy możesz mi powiedzieć, jakich ew. licencji mógłbym użyć na te dwa druki? Z góry dzięki:)) Boston9 (talk) 14:29, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-15[edit]

08:00, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Category:Illustrations from "Historia Polski 1914-1939"[edit]

Ten obecny system powiadomień o wpisach w dyskusji jest do bani, dopiero teraz zobaczyłem, że pisałeś do mnie w lutym.

Jeśli wiesz, że coś źle zakwalifikowałem - to popraw oczywiście, nie ma sprawy.

Pozdrawiam Julo (talk) 10:55, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Steinfurt, railway station.JPG[edit]

Hello, thanks for your message. I made this picture with the same camera I'm always using. The file should give that away. So how is that possibly not my picture? Do I have to scan the receipt? By the way, I have already chosen a pic where a person is at the railway station. Does anybody have a picture with the same person? Or do you imply I copied the person into the picture? (Taking my own photograph takes actually less time, BECAUSE MY CURRENT FLAT IS ONLY THREE MINUTES AWAY !!!!) So would be so nice to explain? NordhornerII (talk)NordhornerII (talk) 18:16, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-16[edit]

07:18, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Giovanni del Biondo - Vergine dell'Apocalisse - Musei Vaticani.jpg[edit]

Thank you for the advice. There was an error; now Y fixed it. Hope now it's OK.

Bye --YukioSanjo (talk) 06:59, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks--Jarekt (talk) 12:12, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Kettleman City Protest.jpg[edit]

Hello, thanks for reviewing my image upload. The image was originally found here The owner gave me written permission in the form of an email to use his images on the wikipedia article. Is there anyway to indicate this to the wikimedia commons?

Yes, you should forward the email to OTRS. The email should discuss most of the elements found in the example email here, including the license type. You should add that a template related to that license to the file. --Jarekt (talk) 12:20, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
I have now sent the email.

Lists of artists in the WGA[edit]

Unknown painter, listed in WGA as ROMANESQUE PAINTER, German (active around 1180), and now categorized in a date cat and German cat, but lost the "Romanesque" style qualification

Hi I noticed that some WGA metadata is missing from files by unknown artists (esepecially frescoes!). Could you add this to the creator field (or put it in a "unattributed" category that corresponds to the style)? I wanted to draw your attention to the fact that I am busy creating lists of artists on the English Wikipedia, and the past few weeks I have been working on the WGA database: en:List of sculptors in the Web Gallery of Art. I added the commons category but I see there is no way to navigate the WGA artists on Commons. I would like to see something like "Category:Paintings in the WGA", ""Category:Engravings in the WGA", "Category:Frescoes in the WGA", "Category:Sculptures in the WGA", and "Category:Coins in the WGA". This would be useful (and I could link the artist creator page from the Wikipedia list). I would like to hear your thoughts. Jane023 (talk) 07:44, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Jane, I am glad someone is working with this dataset. When uploading I was trying to make sure that I do not throw away any of the metadata, so my guess is that WGA improved the metadata in last 3 years since my upload. It would be quite hard to update the descriptions since many are being manually modified on Commons. Category:Web Gallery of Art maintenance might have some categories you are looking for: Category:WGA form: painting would be your "Category:Paintings in the WGA", etc. I also have templates like {{WGA tag|painting|religious|German|1151-1200}} at the moment this template is only holding unused information, but we can change the template to create temporary categories intersecting those 4 fields. With some bot work, I can provide you with the list of all WGA artists (creator templates or artist categories) if it is useful to you. We might be also able to find EN-WP articles. --Jarekt (talk) 12:42, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
You're right about their metadata improvement - I didn't think of that, but I have also noticed that some of their info has changed from my first download of their db last year. I would definitely be interested in your list of categories, and I can send you an excel sheet with my Wikipedia matches (with Q numbers whenever I find them). The above list I linked is sculptors who are poorly documented on Commons as yet. Here are the painters: en:List of painters in the Web Gallery of Art, and soon I will publish en:List of graphic artists in the Web Gallery of Art. Jane023 (talk) 12:49, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, and now I have noticed that their metadata is a bit weak, for example this category Category:Luisa Vitelli seems to be named after their name for the artist, but I just created an article for her on Wikipedia based on what I could find in the rkd and other places here en:Teresa Berenice Vitelli. No one mentions the name Luisa anywhere that I could see, but the gouache is definitely by the same person. In my lists I now link to the WGA, but where possible I would prefer linking to the Commons file you uploaded, as that would be the most accurate over time, I think. Jane023 (talk) 10:05, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi I hope you get this, though it's buried deep in your 2014 archive by now. I just wanted to reply here to keep the conversation together. Magnus has uploaded my list of painters to his Mix-n-Match Wikidata tool on WMFlabs and now over 3,000 WGA artists are matched to their Q numbers, and soon these should be visible from the Commons categories (I hope). Jane023 (talk) 10:16, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
That is great, that almost double the number of matches I gave you. Yes I do hope that wikidata will be accessible to Commons at some point. Any way I can get a list of Creator-Q code matches. Than I could update the creator templates by bot.--Jarekt (talk) 16:12, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay, but I updated the list you gave me here (en:User:Jane023/WGA Creators) with three columns giving the WGA link + name, the commonscat name, and the WikiData item numbers, so you can see the changes that have taken place in the list you gave me. I wasn't able to match the whole list you gave me, but I got pretty far. I also asked Magnus to create a download link, because the Wikidata games have merged lots of item numbers and I was losing track. You can download the set of matches from the catalog page of Mix-n-Match - it's the D link at the very right. Jane023 (talk) 15:37, 27 June 2014 (UTC)


Hi, I noticed you have set up User:MiszaBot to archive your talk page. Unfortunately, the bot has stopped working, and given how its operator is inactive, it is unclear when/if this will fixed. For the time being, I have volunteered to operate a MiszaBot clone (running the exact same code). With that said, your input would be appreciated at Commons:Bots/Requests/ArchiveBot 1. Regards, FASTILY 07:38, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-17[edit]

08:34, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Navruz Kyrgyzstan-2010 (6).JPG[edit]

Это мой собственный фото какой лицензия вы спращивают.--Mirzoulug'bek 18:21, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

All files on commons are required to have a license, see Commons:Лицензирование. For example for my files I use {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} by adding "{{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}}" to file descriptions, see for example this file of mine. If you specify the license I will undelete your image. Regards. --Jarekt (talk) 18:35, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Кинофильм Туфельки постер.jpg.[edit]

Hello! My name Egor Odintsov. I'm pr-director of russian director Costa Fam (russian: Константин Фам) and movie "Shoes". We are the right holders on the movie poster and all photos Kosntantina Fama that were made on our order. Attached is my business card, and a link to the site of the project, supporting my participation in the project.

Egor, in such a case please read COM:OTRS and send an OTRS email. You should also read com:lic and choose a license template required by all the files on Commons. Let me know if you have any more questions. Regards --Jarekt (talk) 13:07, 23 April 2014 (UTC)


Hello Jarekt,

I have uploaded this file as a new version of an existing file (File:Generalized factorial functions.svg) using the "upload new version"-button. Please do not delete it, since I need it for a Wikibook I write. Furthermore, I don't know how to properly link to the author and would appreciate help. --Mathmensch (talk) 13:02, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

All fixed. --Jarekt (talk) 13:18, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Jeju City location map.png[edit]

You have asked me on my talk page to provide license templates for the image I uploaded.

When I uploaded it, I filled in every field on the Special:upload form - to my surprise, there were only three fields, there used to be about eight. In one of these, I explained that the image is derived from another image already present on Commons. I do not know why my explanation does not appear on the page for the uploaded image.

Uploading images to Commons used to be unnecessarily difficult. Now it has, it seems, become even worse. I'm out of here. Maproom (talk) 13:27, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Jarekt. You have new messages at Ellin Beltz's talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Asturianu | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | हिन्दी | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | +/−

Copyright status: File:Gare-Saint-Denis-Martel-intérieur-1900.jpg[edit]

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 12:03, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Correction faite il manquait un crochet sur le modèle de la license. Cordialement --Quoique (talk) 18:36, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Jarekt. You have new messages at Ellin Beltz's talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Asturianu | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | हिन्दी | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | +/−

Copyright status: File:Symbol of Hamada Shimane chapter.svg and others[edit]

Hello Jarekt

Thanks for notifying about the license issues. I don't know what the intention of the user removing the license template is, but this is what happened:

I contacted the editor on his/her talk page, we'll see what he/she has to say... Wgn (talk) 19:56, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Wgn, Sorry to be alerting you about it, it should not be your job to police it. However I was working on the Category:Media without a license: needs history check backlog and the usual approach is batch tag the new images with {{no license}} and concentrate the on investigating the history of the file in case where image had license during the last (weekly) check and "lost" it somehow since. --Jarekt (talk) 20:04, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

License status[edit]

I must tell, that last time some difficulties appeared when uploading pictures: when set the type of license, after uploading it's changes for unknown reason. I repaired File:Split-Image.jpg status, but what don't you like in File:F2 eV corrector.jpg licensing status? Runner1616 (talk) 07:23, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

GLAMwiki toolset[edit]

Hi Jarekt,

Congratulations on becoming a user of the GLAMwiki Toolset. You can find some frequently asked questions and helpful links for using the tool at GLAMwiki Toolset. As your first step, please add yourself to the list of users at GWToolset users and follow the good practice of creating pages explaining your new projects, as these can help create a focus for our wider community of volunteers. A standard place to set up a project page is at Batch uploading, though long term GLAM programmes may fall under GLAM. To discuss the tool with fellow users, please join the email list GLAMtools or try chatting at #wikimedia-commons webchat. SteinsplitterBot (talk) 11:24, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-18[edit]

07:22, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

A bit hasty?[edit]

Just noticed you deleted a bunch of files I uploaded recently. I gather (though I can't tell) that by uploading them through Commonist, I forgot to include the licence template. Was it really necessary to delete them so quickly though? Now I need to re-upload them all, rewrite all the descriptions (unless you are able to recover them), and re-add the images to all the Wikipedia articles. What a pain. Stevage (talk) 01:34, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Stevage, I am sorry your files were deleted. I did not delete them but I tagged them with a {{no license}} template and notified you about the problem. After 9 days of waiting some other admin deleted them. Everything was done "by the book", but I can see how frustrating that can be. Unfortunately we are dealing with so many files per day that do not have a license or is an obvious copyright violation that all the notifications and deletions become more like assembly line. If you let me know which license you meant to use I can undelete them and add the license. --Jarekt (talk) 01:48, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
That would be great. Any licence is fine - CC-BY 3.0, or whatever is recommended these days. I'll update my notification settings so I get emailed next time. (Though in this case it probably wouldn't have helped as I was on holidays.) Stevage (talk) 07:09, 29 April 2014 (UTC)


It looks like something went wrong with your revamped i18n of the manufacturer template used in Template:LSH_artwork and Template:Walters Art Museum artwork. For some reason {{I18n/manufacturer}} transcludes the translate tags along with the text and additionally does not translate the text. I've reverted the changes for now but agree that I18n/manufacturer would be a better home for the translation (or even better sticking all of them into one page which is translatable). /Lokal_Profil 21:51, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing it for me. I should have tested it better. This approach might be harder than I thought --Jarekt (talk) 01:04, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Fotografie ze zbiorów rodzinnych[edit]

I znów muszę Ci pozwracać głowę:) Dodane właśnie do artykułu na pl-Wiki z opisem Dodałem fotografię ze zbiorów rodzinnych jako cc-by-sa-3.0. Da się uratować, jeżeli nie wiemy, czy było wcześniej gdzieś publikowane? Boston9 (talk) 21:27, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Zdjęcia rodzinne zawsze można dać jako {{PD-heir}} jeśli jest dobra szansa ze ktoś z rodziny zrobił te zdjęcie i ze osoba przesyłająca jest spadkobiercą. Inna możliwość to {{Anonymous-EU}} Także wedle Polskiego Kalkulatora praw autorskich nieopublikowana anonimowe prace sa w domenie publicznej 70 lat po utworzeniu. --Jarekt (talk) 02:10, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
Napisałem do niego, jak zawsze bardzo dziękuję za pomoc. Boston9 (talk) 09:58, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

New Video Template for metadata[edit]

Hi Jarekt,

I am currently working at a large audio-visual archive. We will soon upload another batch of videos to Wikimedia Commons using the GW toolset. However we would like our meta-data to land into a different template than the current information template. There already is a template:video but we are looking more at something like the template:artwork. I have come up with these metadata-fields that would suit our needs:

|place of creation  
|accession number  

Do you have any suggestions on how to move forward with creating this template, or would you be willing to help out? I can do basic templates, but looking at the artwork template I realize that this is a little bit harder ;). Thanks for your advice! 85jesse (talk) 07:10, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

85jesse, I will be happy to help. If you have large batch of images with the same type of metadata coming from the same institution, than I would propose to create a customized infobox template for this specific institution. Many of the Com:Partnership projects use one. Those templates are created by picking one of the major infobox templates and altering it. If we identify a common set of parameters used by most videos we can also create brand new generic infobox template for videos. --Jarekt (talk) 13:21, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Jarekt. The reason why I think a video template could be helpful is because the GWtoolset only supports a selection of meta-data templates. I'll check with Dan though whether he can easily add templates for individual batch-uploads. I'll get back to you if I need any help. 85jesse (talk) 13:32, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
Another possibility is to alter one of existing major infobox templates. If some fields are likely to be useful to many other users. --Jarekt (talk) 13:39, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
So I have checked and we can move forward with creating a customized infobox for the uploads that we will be doing from the Open Beelden platform. I suppose we could call it template:OBvideo or something like that? I think the template that comes closest is the template:artwork, so maybe that could serve as a starting point. Would you be willing to create this template for us? That would be fantastic. If you're in no position to do this, is there anyone you could suggest who could help me out? Again, thanks for your assistance! 85jesse (talk) 07:43, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done I added language, creator and contributor to the {{Artwork}}. Other fields are present. I think "attribution" info can go into "credit line" field. --Jarekt (talk) 17:15, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Jan Paweł II portret Z. Kotyłło.jpg[edit]

Hello, thank you for your helping post on deletion request page. I would like to draw your attention that the uploader of File:Jan Paweł II portret Z. Kotyłło.jpg was User:Zkoty1953, not User:Zkoty1958. Could you correct it? --Rlevente (talk) 19:36, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

✓ Done Smiley.svg Thank you --Jarekt (talk) 19:40, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Bug side.jpg[edit]


I have moved this file with commonshelper2 from the English Wikipedia, where it is originally uploaded as en:File:Bug side.JPG. This file is in the public domain ({{PD-self|date=March 2009}}).

I do not know why the information about the license has not correctly been transferred.

Please advise what I have to do.

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 19:41, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Adding template to entire category[edit]

Hi Jarekt, another question, I have created a template for the photo's that come from our Beeld en Geluid Wiki, these are in the category Media from Beeld en Geluid Wiki. Now I'm stuck because I don't know how to add this template to an entire category. Is there any documentation on how to do this? I'm always keen to learn! Or is this something you or one of the other volunteers would be willing to do for me? Thanks for your help. 85jesse (talk) 07:31, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

✓ Done You can do it yourself with Help:VisualFileChange.js tool but it is tricky, so the easiest way is to ask someone with a bot. Let me know if you need any other help. --Jarekt (talk) 15:00, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
thanks a million! Very helpful 85jesse (talk) 09:38, 1 May 2014 (UTC)


Hi. I think you may have broken Template:Inline_coordinates with edit... for example, the NARA files show errors now: (example), but I don't understand enough about templates to know for sure or to fix it myself. You may want to check. :) --Junkyardsparkle (talk) 08:44, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

I think I fixed it. --Jarekt (talk) 12:34, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Lyudmila Ulitskaya[edit]

Hi Jarekt, thank you for your message, is this [104] o.k. now? Thanks, -- C.Koltzenburg (talk) 19:43, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

It is fine. Thanks. --Jarekt (talk) 19:47, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Lizenzstatus: File:Jokili im Brunnen.jpeg[edit]

Hi Jarekt,

sorry but I really don't know where to change the licence for the photo. It is my own work and I thought I selected it when I loaded it up. Could you help me? Thanks and best regards Saskia

Saskia, if you let me know which license you want I will add it. See COM:LIC. {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} is the default for most. --Jarekt (talk) 03:43, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-19[edit]

07:29, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Zdjęcie Okrągłego Stołu[edit]

Na pewno widziałeś. Ponieśliśmy jako Polska wielką stratę. Od kilku dni świat wie o nas znacznie mniej, to zdjęcie było na dziesiątkach, jeżeli nie setkach stron. Zupełnie nie jestem przekonany, że tak musiało się stać. Czy nie powinno się najpierw spotkać z tą agencją, i obejrzeć odbitkę. A jeżeli tak, to co na niej powinno być? Czy bez podpisu u daty zastrzeżenie jest ważne? Boston9 (talk) 11:51, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Niestety, chyba w tym wypadku nie jesteśmy nic w stanie zrobić. Erazm Ciołek napisał większość artykułu na swój temat, i wysłał email do OTRS na temat tekstu tego artykułu, ale nigdy nie przesłał żadnego ze swoich zdjęć. Teraz prawnicy reprezentujący jego córkę skontaktowali się z WP-PL "prosząc" o usuniecie jego zdjęć. Jest dosyć jasne ze ani on ani jego spadkobiercy nie są zainteresowani darowizną jego pracy na potrzeby Wikipedii. Jeśli autorzy nie chcą się dzielić swoim dorobkiem to nie powinniśmy ich do tego zmuszać. Także nie jestem pewien czy warto by było testować naszą interpretacje polskiego prawa autorskiego dzięki któremu mamy {{PD-Polish}}. Popatrz ze nie ma odpowiednika {{PD-Polish}} na Poland - Public Domain Calculator. Dlatego skasowalem [[Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stocznia Gdańska - Erazm Ciołek - 1980-08.jpg resztę zdjęć] Erazma Ciołka które ja przesłałem, mimo ze spędziłem dużo czasu by je znaleźć. --Jarekt (talk) 12:46, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Jarek, dzięki. Jednak takie podejście napawa mnie głębokim smutkiem jako Polaka. Gdybym ja tam był w 1989 z aparatem – tam, czyli na balkonie Sali Balowej Pałacu Prezydenckiego, skąd zostało zrobione te zdjęcie – nigdy bym tak nie postąpił, bo Okrągły Stół był dobrem nas wszystkich. Ale nie każdy mógł tam być z aparatem. Ale trudno, zaciskam zęby. Tacy są niektórzy ludzie. Trzeba walczyć dalej na innych frontach. Dzięki! Boston9 (talk) 13:09, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

File:Fiestas de Mayo 02.jpg[edit]

Sorry! --Koppchen (talk) 19:38, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

No problem --Jarekt (talk) 12:53, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

File:Lamium purpureum 001.jpg[edit]


I have removed the label {{No license since|month=May|day=5|year=2014}} because the file had already a "Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported licence" ({{self|cc-by-3.0}}).

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 07:25, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Smiley.svg Thank you --Jarekt (talk) 12:52, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:DenkmalJohannEberhardJungblut.JPG[edit]


I have licensed this file under GFDL and Attribution + Noncommercial + NoDerivatives (by-nc-nd) as I did with some of my other files, so that anyone can choose the license they want. As far as I understand GFDL is a valid license for wikimedia, am I wrong? Regards, --Manuela (Diskussion) 12:45, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

After you added the license your file is fine. --Jarekt (talk) 12:52, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
I should have looked at the date of the entry, sry, --Manuela (Diskussion) 12:56, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Special Barnstar Hires.png The Special Barnstar
The Special Barnstar is awarded to a user as a gesture of appreciation when there is no other barnstar which would be appropriate.

Thank you for the work you have done in the last years. :) -- Steinsplitter (talk) 20:07, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Smiley.svg Thank you--Jarekt (talk) 02:25, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

"No required license templates..." in your 07 May 14 message to me.[edit]

What was wrong with the "PD-USGov-NRO" and "PD-USGov-USGS" entries that I included on Wikipedia's form accompanying that uploaded image? Those agencies provided the online sources which I combined and annotated to create that uploaded image. I have a letter from NRO approving use of their material, and USGS map information is certainly in the public domain. A few days earlier, I had uploaded two similar items using the same "tags" (if that's the official term?)and have received no similar response about them. And they didn't even have the reference to where to find the USGov originals that was in the 07 May one. I don't know whether this applies here, but I'll end with the four-tilde "signature" I've seen used elsewhere. Don't want to miss any bets.Oldteched (talk) 03:11, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Those templates were fine but due to incorrect syntax of wikitext they were not visible. I fix the syntax. --Jarekt (talk) 03:18, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

....Correction: The upload in question used only the "PD-USGov-NRO" tag. Only the other two also used the PD-USGov-USGS one. Probably you caught that. Thanks, anyway. 11:03, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

No required License[edit]

I messed up the link to the image. Is it possible if you could delete the image so I can start the upload process over again? The image would be better added using Flickr. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 22:26, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Never mind, fixed the license error. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 01:19, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-20[edit]

06:00, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Fotografie broni[edit]

Chcę wstawić zdjęcia pistoletu produkcji Arsenal Firearms na commons, napisałem w związku z tym maila do nich, z prośbą o fotki oraz pomocą z ustawieniem licencji, bo o to się rozchodzi. Napisał do mnie sam dyrektor Arsenal Firearms, Nicola Bandini, że cieszy się z maila i udzielił pozwolenia na publikację. Napisał też:„For Copyrights, please use ©Arsenal Firearms.” i wydaje mi się, że jemu się wydawało, że ja nie potrafiłem tego znaczka (c) skombinować. I teraz co ja mam tam zrobić, na jakiej licencji to puścić, jak to wstawić, aby zdjęcia nie zostały usunięte. Proszę podać mi jakieś konkretne wskazówki, bo nie mam zielonego pojęcia o tych skomplikowanych mechanizmach na commons. Z góry dziękuje. Pozdrawiam!Batorry (talk) 13:43, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

To jest trochę bardziej skomplikowane. Najpierw przeczytaj Commons:Pozwolenia potem poproś o przesłanie standardowego emaila (do OTRS) który miedzy innymi powie jaka używać licencje. Dopiero wtedy prześlij plik używając omówioną licencje. Jeśli coś nie jest jasne po przeczytaniu Commons:Pozwolenia to chętnie pomogę. --Jarekt (talk) 13:53, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

No właśnie mało co jest jasne. Mam wysłać do AF maila z podaniem o pozwolenie? Napisze tego maila do OTRS, zobaczymy co powiedzą, a ten mechanizm z pozwoleniami powinien być jakoś uproszczony. Chociaż wytłumaczenie jego winno być prostsze.Batorry (talk) 16:02, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Zdjęcia z filmu "Kamienie na szaniec"[edit]

Jarek, dzięki za oznaczenia. Wciąż są szanse, że w ciągu tych kilku dni, jakie nam zostały, uda się otrzymać właściwą zgodę lub pełnomocnictwo do dysponowania majątkowymi prawami autorskimi od Zarządu Monolith Films, i będziemy mogli wykorzystać te piękne zdjęcia w naszych artykułach. Jeżeli nie, przynajmniej będziemy mieli świadomość, że zrobiliśmy wszystko. Gdybyś miał okazję w US, obejrzyj ten film, bo jest ciekawy. PS. Czy w pierwotnej zgodzie nie było "Cc-by-sa-3.0-pl"? Boston9 (talk) 17:59, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Nie jestem pewien w czym jest problem. Przesłane zdjęcia nie są kadrami z filmu, tylko fotografiami zrobionymi podczas produkcji filmu. Autorem jest chyba tylko fotograf (i/lub jego pracodawca). Przesłane OTRS wygląda poprawnie. Tak przy okazji to mimo {{OTRSPending}} powinieneś także dodać licencje podczas przesyłania zdjęć. Wszystkie pliki na commons maja mieć licencje, i jest to prostsze w UploadWizard niż później. Pozdrowienia--Jarekt (talk) 18:25, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Masz rację. Będę dodawał przy wgrywaniu, a do tych 17 dodam ręcznie. Boston9 (talk) 18:54, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Licencje była "Creative Commons: uznanie autorstwa, na tych samych warunkach, wersja 3.0 Polska ( ).". Text mowi Cc-by-sa-3.0-pl ale link jest do Cc-by-sa-3.0. Ale chyba idźmy z tekstem. --Jarekt (talk) 19:08, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-21[edit]

07:18, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Joshua Tree National Park - Joshua Tree - 14.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Joshua Tree National Park - Joshua Tree - 14.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

File:Dactylorhiza majalis RHu 02.JPG and File:Dactylorhiza majalis RHu 03.JPG[edit]

Dear Jarekt,

Apparently something wrong happened when I uploaded these two files. Despite, as in File:Dactylorhiza majalis RHu 01.JPG, there is {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-3.0,2.5,2.0,1.0}} when I am editing its content, no licensing is appearing on the file. Despite there is [[Category:Dactylorhiza majalis - flowers]] no category is appearing in the category bar.

Please correct it, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 12:41, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

All Pictogram voting keep.svg Fixed. That was an strange error, I have never seen license disappearing when there was some minor markup error. --Jarekt (talk) 12:50, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Adirondacks - Snapping Turtle - 1.JPG
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Adirondacks - Snapping Turtle - 1.JPG, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

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

Protected edit requests for two PD-old templates[edit]

Jarekt, I'd appreciate it if you could process my edit requests for the two protected templates {{PD-old-50-1996}} and {{PD-old-X-1923}}. Thanks. —RP88 20:13, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Somewhat relatedly, regarding your recent "category added by Template:PD-old-X-1996 " fixes, you missed PD-old-75-1996. —RP88 20:44, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

File:Renata SSDC10080.jpg[edit]

Google translate only has the description as "girl without a rose." I'm somewhat worried that could be a poorly translated vulgar sexual reference, and should be deleted. Please confirm or deny. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:56, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

No it is just "girl without a rose". No idea what it is all about. Looks a bit out of scope in the current form. --Jarekt (talk) 02:39, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:46, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-22[edit]

08:29, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

File:Upload Wizard authorship choices.png[edit]

Hi Jarek, you flagged this file, and I'm hoping you can provide some advice. I am certain this image is freely licensed, but I am unsure of the best way to report that on the page. The software was produced by the Wikimedia Foundation under a grant from the Ford Foundation; the software is freely licensed as part of MediaWiki (GPL), and the Wikimedia Foundation publishes non-software under a free license (CC BY-SA). In this case, I'm not even sure if the threshold of originality has been exceeded, so I wonder if it's publishable as public domain. What do you see as the problem -- and what do you think would be the correct way to tag this file? Or do you believe it is actually protected by non-free copyright, and if so, who is the rights holder? -Pete F (talk) 16:18, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Pete, The image was semi-automatically tagged solely because it was lacking any license tags, since {{free screenshot}} by itself is not a license. As for which license to use, I am no expert on Wikimedia Foundation licenses but since I was recently uploading some screenshots I noticed {{wikimedia project screenshot|logo=no|project=commons}} template. Other possibility would be {{PD-text}}. Greetings. --Jarekt (talk) 03:45, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Got it. Thanks! -Pete F (talk) 22:41, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

No required license templates[edit]

Hi Jarekt, is ok now?


The license is fine, but there is still an issue with the author. The author listed is "Vincenzo Mazzarella" and the uploader is user:Ypsos81. From the documentation it is unclear if the file was uploaded by the photographer. If it was not than it should be followed by OTRS email from the photographer or copyright holder. Please read com:OTRS for more details. Regards --Jarekt (talk) 12:48, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, i'm the autor of the photo, i'm Vincenzo Mazzarella

Thank you, everything is fine then. --Jarekt (talk) 13:13, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Base page not found for autotranslate[edit]

My talk page looks even worse than normal. It's full of "Base page not found for autotranslate" warnings (you have one on this page too). I suspect this might have caused it. Could you please fix this? Thank you, Multichill (talk) 20:24, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately I do not have time to look at this at the moment so I will just revert. I guess I will need to add more testcases to figure out what happen. --Jarekt (talk) 20:32, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

2 images without licence[edit]

Dear Jarekt, I forgot again to include {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}} to my photos File:JPaul-Löbichau.jpg and File:Kirche-Benndorf.jpg. How can I add this information? Thank you! I would prefer the possibility to have the presetting {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}} when I upload pictures. Is this possible?

Yours sincerely, Tnemtsoni

I restored those files. What tool do you use to upload? if the default special:UploadWizard than you can set default license at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-uploads.--Jarekt (talk) 14:06, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for the hint, I will try it next time. Yours sincerely, Tnemtsoni

Missing license for "Madonna - Wembley Arena 120806 (16).jpg"[edit]

Hi Jarekt! You left a message on my talk page concerning the file "Madonna - Wembley Arena 120806 (16).jpg" in which you said that the file had no license and thus it could be deleted. I checked the file's page and the CC BY-SA 2.0 license is indeed mentioned in its description page in the "Permission" line. Amzer (talk) 13:51, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

My apologies, that was my mistake and I removed the template from the file. It was File:Madonna - Live to Tell at Wembley 6.jpeg that did not have license, but since it was a duplicated of File:Madonna - Wembley Arena 120806 (16).jpg I removed it. --Jarekt (talk) 13:57, 29 May 2014 (UTC)


Hi! Please re-check your last changes of Module:Fallback. Template {{Assessments}} (based on {{Autotranslate}}) now incorrectly worked in the Russian interface language (and many others). See example in File:Angyalvar036.jpg:

  • code - {{Assessments|huwiki=1}}
  • Assessment box, first string:
    • uselang=en, uselang=hu (correct links into huwiki)
    • uselang=ru (incorrect links into ruwiki; incorrect name of Wikipedia edition)
    • uselang=pl (incorrect links into plwiki; incorrect name of Wikipedia edition)
    • etc. (for all another languages)

No another recent changes in related templates and modules.--Kaganer (talk) 15:46, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

I will look into it. --Jarekt (talk) 15:48, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Ok, I see the problem. In the past {{Autotranslate}} only passed numbered parameters to the language specific templates, and now it also passes "lang" parameter that was originally passed to {{Autotranslate}}. Also with direct call to the module named parameters can be passed. In {{Assessments/commons}} there are calls to {{Autotranslate}} that send both "1" (wikipedia language) and "lang" (display language) parameters. In the past only "1" was passed to the language subtemplates, now both reach it. In the language subtemplates you have so the display language is substituted for wikipedia language. this edit to Template:Assessments/translate/pl fixed the problem. I propose to do similar changes to other language templates (I can do them). --Jarekt (talk) 16:33, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Okay, thanks! Please do it for all these language subtemplates.--Kaganer (talk) 20:48, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi Jarekt, please urgently fix all the related templates because what is now happening is very confusing. See example. Thanks. --ELEKHHT 05:41, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting keep.svg Fixed--Jarekt (talk) 12:35, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Your Module:Fallback changes[edit]

Hi, Base page not found for autotranslate is written on pages, for example User_talk:Bernie44. --Steinsplitter (talk) 07:33, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Looks like a purge to that page fixed it. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 11:22, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Yes, Thank you. But autotranslate on a lot of pages broken (reported onwiki, on irc). I have reverted Jarekt changes now. I hope he can fix the bug later :) --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:57, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
The bug was fixed we were only waiting for the purges to catch up with it. Reverting to any earlier versions will just break pages that rely on the new version and will not make the purges any faster. Can you revert? --Jarekt (talk) 15:06, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Unless of course there are any pages that still have a problem (after purge). --Jarekt (talk) 15:08, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Since your changes a _lot_ of reports. For example autotranslate in Commons:Upload_help was broken becouse fullurls don't work with your new version. --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:10, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
You are right one of the {{autotranslate}}s does not work on Commons:Upload_help. It is a case of usage for purposes the template was not designed for, since {{autotranslate}} documentation states that it was intended for use in Template namespace only. But if it is how some people use it, I guess I will have to switch back parts of the code to more computationally expensive version we used before. --Jarekt (talk) 15:31, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

File:Winter Storm Zephyr in May 2014.jpg[edit]

So why was this image deleted? I had taken this picture, given away the license as per Wikimedia commons license policy, categorized the image and added a link of it to valid Wikipedia article? In return, you come and delete it. THANKS for YOUR contribution!!!! --Wikigringo (talk) 02:23, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikigringo, The image did not have any license templates. I alerted you about it, but we can not host images without licenses, so after 9 days some other admin deleted it. I will be happy to undelete it if you tell me what license template you meant it to have. --Jarekt (talk) 03:38, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! Please undelete. You can use Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 license which the most common. I also certify that I am the one who took the picture and release the license. --20:44, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 03:01, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! --Wikigringo (talk) 02:02, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-23[edit]

08:07, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:The first crew ever to sail from Australia to England via the NW Passage just arrived in Falmouth, September 22, 2008.jpg[edit]

Dear Jarekt, the request for a license for image in subject was sent by me on behalf of the author, David Whitworth, to Wikipedia Commons yesterday (late evening by Eastern European time). I hope it will be processed soon. I am sorry, I am a very new user, what is the possible time interval between uploading and getting the license?

The uploader is usually asked to choose the license template at the time of upload, but I see that you had a verbal description of the license, so I added matching template. So everything is OK for a moment, and we just have to wait for OTRS to process the email. Greetings --Jarekt (talk) 13:08, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much for clarification! Next time I'll try to be more attentive during uploading.
I have one more question: how to edit the comment in the table "File history"? While uploading I made a typo in the file description (Alex Withworth instead of Whitworth), so the reference went to non-existing page. I have corrected it in the description but it is still wrong in the File history table. Thank you in advance! -- Ethylene_en (talk) 14:58, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
That one unfortunately can not be edited. If it really bothers you you can reupload the image under a new name and I will delete the old one. --Jarekt (talk) 15:02, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Thank you! I think I can live with it so far. But I have questions related to another image uploaded by me File:Alex Whitworth at Falmouth with coffee.jpg. OTRS ticket is issued but the page still contains the tag "The license agreement will be forwarded to OTRS shortly." as well as "This media file is uncategorized." How do I manage this? I would appreciate any help either from you or forwarding my question appropriate person.Ethylene en (talk) 19:03, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
I think I fixed it. --Jarekt (talk) 02:57, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Thank you! -- Ethylene en (talk) 10:28, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
A stupid question: the photo didn't get licence yet, should I start worrying? Another photo I've uploaded a weekend before had got it in an hour. This one and another one File:Berrimilla arrives back in Sydney after her first circumnavigation, December 21, 2005.jpg are still suspended after a week. How long does it take to get a number from OTRS? Could I use them for wiki entries as they are? Thank you in advance. Ethylene en (talk) 09:14, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Ethylene, OTRS can take a while to process your ticket, since we often have a big backlog. But since I am one of the people handling it, I processed your ticket. I did not see any tickets related to File:Berrimilla arrives back in Sydney after her first circumnavigation, December 21, 2005.jpg. --Jarekt (talk) 16:30, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Thank you so much for processing a ticket out of turn! I would like to apologize for my impatience. I only wanted to know whether I could use the suspended images for wiki entries. Concerning the second photo I didn't want to show author's email here, I sent you you a reply to Wikipedia Commons -- Ethylene en (talk) 17:26, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Lizenzstatus: File:Logo der German UPA.png[edit]

Hi Jarekt, Thanks for the note! I hope everything is ok now?

License wise everything it fine, but you are using {{User:Mschroeder_1/credits}} template which does not exist. May be you can fix? --Jarekt (talk) 02:47, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


Thanks for picking up that this file I contributed to the commons did not have a license statement attached. I selected the license on the upload form, and I don't know why it did not stick. I am the author of the image, and I embedded my intended license info in the metadata (which is displayed on the commons page). I need some explicit instructions how to fix this problem. Cheers, Peter Marquis-Kyle.

Peter, I took a liberty of copying a license from one of your earlier uploads. Please verify that it is OK. --Jarekt (talk) 03:41, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Thank you Jarekt, that's fine.PeterMarquisKyle (talk) 04:35, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


It's marked {{otrs-pending}}, and it's only been 24 hours. Aren't you jumping the gun a bit? EEng (talk) 02:14, 3 June 2014 (UTC) (P.S. Your message on my Talk said to reply here, but your edit notice here says to reply there.)

{{otrs-pending}} is not a substitute for a license, which has to be known before the upload. See 3rd bulllet of that template. And all files need a license template at the time of the upload. PS. Thanks for the tip about my notice, I will make sure they are in synch. --Jarekt (talk) 02:40, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Missing license information[edit]

Is it everything ok now, Jarekt? [187] Yours sincerely.--Asqueladd (talk) 07:20, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Seems fine to me. Thanks --Jarekt (talk) 11:56, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Südtiroler Pfadfinderschaft.svg[edit]

You left a message on my talk page regarding the copyrights of File:Südtiroler Pfadfinderschaft.svg and I looked for correcting them, but because I am new here at Wikimedia I did not find the correct license to put on this file. This file shows the logo of the Südtiroler Pfadfinderschaft (South Tyrolean Scout Association) and I made this version (SVG) of it; the original I took from the association's homepage ( (page in German)), to be correct from the Impressum of it. As a member of this Scout Association I wanted to improve their Wikipedia pages (in german, italian and english) by first correcting the logo to the new one (since 2011/2012) and now, in a second step, changing it with one in SVG.

I hope you can tell me, what licenses I have to use to provide my file from deletion.

Hoping for a fast answer. Michael

Michael, File:Südtiroler Pfadfinderschaft.svg seems to be an SVG version of File:New Logo of the Südtiroler Pfadfinderschaft- (For the articles in the english, german and italian Wikipedia-) 2014-05-11 09-58.gif so I used it's license. However File:New Logo of the Südtiroler Pfadfinderschaft- (For the articles in the english, german and italian Wikipedia-) 2014-05-11 09-58.gif claims that you are the author or creator of this logo. If that is not the case you should read Commons:OTRS (it is in several languages) and you should contact the scouts to see if they can help you find the original creator of the logo or it's copyright holder and ask them to send an email to OTRS. --Jarekt (talk) 16:45, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Module talk:Date/sandbox/testcases discrepancies[edit]

Hi. I saw the odd errors on the test page, and this line of code seem to show the problem:


Looks like there's an additional space before "2014". Do you know what might be the cause and could you fix that? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 15:16, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Is the space in the template or lua versions? And BTW how did you compare them? I usually look at the sourcecode of the page but there are no differences there. --Jarekt (talk) 15:35, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
The space seems to be in the original template version. Urlencode showed an additional "+" in it, which means an additional space when decoded. MW parser seems to remove the space before rendering the page to html, but it doesn't seem true when doing comparisons in Lua. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 15:55, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, I modified Module:UnitTests so multiple spaces are ignored as a difference. One reason we are working on the module is that the {{ISOdate}} is unmentainable. I can not fix a space there. --Jarekt (talk) 16:07, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. The current discrepancies seem mostly come from the time part. Unfortunately, I have even less idea about this than the previous one due to the weirdness of the character counts. Eg:
  • {{str len|{{ISOdate/time3|2010-08-18 08:15:30}}}} = 10 (Isn't there only 19?)
  • {{str len|, <nowiki/>}} = 45, {{str len|, <nowiki/}} = 10 (difference in only one char but count up to 35)
--Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 15:02, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
It is a head scratcher, but I am very exited to get this ball rolling. {{ISOdate}} is unmentainable in the current form, and once we match the current capabilities we might be able to expand number of supported date formats. May be even add some short-cuts for {{other date}} (like ~1900 == {{other date|ca|1900}}, etc). But in the mean time we are stuck in the comparison step. I for example can not figure out the logic of
  1. {{urlencode:{{#invoke:Date/sandbox|ISOdate|1999-08-18 08:15|lang=en}}}} gives
  2. {{urlencode:{{ISOdate|1999-08-18 08:15|lang=en}}}} gives
  3. {{#ifeq:{{urlencode:{{#invoke:Date/sandbox|ISOdate|1999-08-18 08:15|lang=en}}}}|{{urlencode:{{ISOdate|1999-08-18 08:15|lang=en}}}}|same|different}} gives "same"
But the displayed strings are identical !? Another think is that I am not sure if <nowiki/> still serves any purpose. --Jarekt (talk) 15:19, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
My guess is that <nowiki/> is replaced by a semi-random hidden string to mark its existence when mw parsing the page, and removed when mw renders the expanded wikitext to html. This may be the cause of the weird logic of "{{#ifeq:<nowiki/>|<nowiki/>|same|different}}" = "different". Maybe ask a mw dev about this? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 12:10, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Missing license: File:Verlage nach Nielsen.jpg[edit]

You left a message on my page regarding File:Verlage nach Nielsen.jpg . I've tried to add the missing copyright information and to categorize the file. Please check it out. And: Who will delete the entries "No license since|month=June|day=4|year=2014" and "Uncategorized|year=2014|month=June|day=3"? Will you do it or am I to do it? Thanks, Jürgen - Konpress Schuerer (talk) 12:33, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

All Pictogram voting keep.svg Fixed --Jarekt (talk) 17:25, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

File:X Siberian auto moto festival named after Igor Koulikov (2014).jpg[edit]

Hello Jarekt,
Thank you for informing, I made corrections concerned the license!

Smiley.svg Thank you --Jarekt (talk) 17:25, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

North Carolina highway shields[edit]

I may have forgotten to put the actual template on, but please note that the file description clearly states that the file is public domain. In the future, please remember to check this, so as to save yourself time by not having to send unnecessary messages. —Scott5114 [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 06:00, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Since all images are required to have a license templates it is necessary for us to alert uploaders that their files do not have required metadata before they are deleted. Also since we have couple hundred files a week uploded without license templates, we do not have enough volunteers willing to scan all the new uploads for hints about the license in the files descriptions, to get all the files fixed without involving uploaders. --Jarekt (talk) 12:38, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Yes, but you had to edit the file page anyway to add the "no license" tag. It would have been in the best interests of the project to just add pd-self instead of the no license tag. Instead, by failing to read the file description, you caused three edits to happen when one would have done. Also, had I not corrected the license template, the admin that showed up to delete it would have checked to see if there was no license, found there was a license, and then they would have had to have corrected it. So, you're really not saving any of the project's man-hours here by being negligent in your tagging. —Scott5114 [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 22:11, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
I am using "no license" script of the Help:VisualFileChange.js and can add dozens of them within a single click to files detected with CatScan. However I also want uploaders to be aware of the problems so it is less likely that they will repeat it. And all the time we "save" on new files we "squander" on old files that lost licenses through some recent edits. Those have to be fixed by hand and take a lot of time. --Jarekt (talk) 03:37, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Surely the tool allows you to read the page before you submit the edit though? —Scott5114 [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 04:22, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
I am able to read as many pages as I want, beforehand. For example here is the last batch I did of new uploads without license. However I want uploaders to fix them, otherwise we have the same problem over and over again. --Jarekt (talk) 11:29, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-24[edit]

07:39, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Logo i warszawskie Pragi[edit]

Hej Jarek, zerknij proszę na to, chyba potrzebny jest OTRS? Przy okazji mam prośbę: zmieniliśmy kilka tygodni temu "Pragę Północ" i "Pragę Południe" na "Pragę-Północ" i "Pragę-Południe", zgodnie z zasadami języka polskiego. Cała dyskusja jest w wątku Praga Północ czy Praga-Północ? w Kawiarence. Na pl_wiki wszystko zostało przebotowane na wersje z dywizem. Czy dałbyś radę zmienić obydwu dzielnicom nazwy głównych kategorii na Commons? Niestety, tutaj dalej są bez dywizu. Serdeczne dzięki z góry, gdyby się udało, i nie trzeba byłoby przenosić ręcznie. Boston9 (talk) 14:09, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Tak, File:Logo_OptiBuy.jpg powinien przesłać OTRS lub zmienić licencje na {{PD-textlogo}}. Co do Pragi to jak ja tam mieszkałem to nazywało się to "Praga Południe" a nie "Praga-Południe". Książki były na temat "Pragi Południe" np. ta. Ale widocznie język się zmienia. By przerobić wszystkie Category:Praga_Południe na Category:Praga-Południe, to najłatwiej stworzyć ręcznie nowe kategorie i dodać {{Category redirect|Praga-Południe}} do starych. Boty po pewnym czasie przeniosą pliki i kategorie. --Jarekt (talk) 14:44, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Cześć, serdeczne dzięki za pokazanie, zrobiłem to samo z Pragą-Północ. Tak, język polski się zmienia, ja się cały czas czegoś nowego dowiadują edytując Wiki, bo Rada Języka Polskiego dopuszcza nowe rzeczy. Ale dzielnica już jakiś czas temu się dostosowała, zerknij na ich stronę. Jeszcze raz dzięki! Boston9 (talk) 12:45, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

File:Bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus) Nest.JPG[edit]

Hello Jarekt,

I uploaded this image on behalf of a friend who took the picture. He gave me permission to upload the image so that it can be used by the public, but if it is used he would want his name recognized as the person who took the image. I do not know what specific copy right or licensing would have this clause. Can you help me in copyrighting the image properly.

Thank you,


That sounds like {{cc-by-3.0}} license. The only issue is that if the photographer and the uploader are different people than we required the photographer to send an email to com:OTRS officially stating what you just told me. You can find sample emails also at com:OTRS. --Jarekt (talk) 02:26, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Coat of Arms of Bardenas Reales.svg[edit]

Cop status done. Thanks for all.--Heralder (talk) 11:57, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Please test the new feature Special:PageMigration[edit]

As a Google Summer of Code Intern, I have been working on the Mass Migration tools project for Wikimedia. We are now ready with a minimal working product. The tool helps translators and translation administrators import the old translations into the Translate Extension.

An instance of the same has been set up on labs. You can find some useful instructions on the main page.

Please test the tool and report bugs/suggestions using the link provided on the main page itself. You can have a look at the tracking bug to check already reported bugs.

Looking forward to hearing from you! Cheers. BPositive (talk) 15:01, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-25[edit]

07:13, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


amended. Please have a look.--Foamposite (talk) 17:28, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Cybersemiotics star[edit]

Dear Jarekt, The page has the information on Creative Commons. The issue is that in the Wikipedia Commons form page to add the image there was no link or reference to the version 4.0 or the limitations to the commercial use. How should I proceed? I can get written permission from the people who develop it if necessary. Thanks for your work! Crau999 (User talk:Crau999)

Crau999, unfortunately Commons does not accept Non-commercial or Non-derivative works. So the only thing you can do is to negotiate a compatible license with people who developed it. That is why you could not find proper template. --Jarekt (talk) 17:11, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Dear Jarekt, We updated the CC for Cybersemiotics Star to Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC By-SA 3.0). Does this solve the problem? If it does, should I remove the Deletion template or you will do it? Thanks millions! This is a lot of work!! I deeply appreciate your work!! --Crau999 (User talk:Crau999)


Poproszę Pana o sprawdzenie, czy teraz plik jest już OK ? I ewentualne poprawienie jeśli coś jeszcze nie tak. Dziękuję ! --Grb16 (talk) 06:24, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Archeological Museum of Lamia[edit]

Czy mogę Pana prosić o dodanie takiej kategorii ? wczytałem tam trochę zdjęć, wykorzystałem je już w haśle o tym mieście, przydałaby się na te zbiory kategoria (mam jeszcze trochę więcej zdjęć). Ale nie umiem. Pozdrawiam... --Grb16 (talk) 17:44, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

✓ Gotowe Stworzyłem kategorie. --Jarekt (talk) 18:02, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Dzięki :) !
A w którym miejscu należy (czy też nie potrzeba ?) wpisywać informację, że wykonywanie nieprofesjonalnej jakości zdjęć jest tam standardowo dozwolone ?

About File:Liz as Miss Wales GB.jpg and File:Liz wins Dream Girl in Taiwan.jpg[edit]


If you look into source of image description it says image is licenseced under cc4.0 I will be thankful if you can restore the image

In such a case you should add {{Cc-by-4.0}} to them at the upload time. Verbal description is not enough. --Jarekt (talk) 18:28, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

thanks man, I will remember to add it from now on.

File:Adam Willaerts Coastal Landscape with Ships.jpg[edit]

Hi, you deleted File:Adam Willaerts Coastal Landscape with Ships.jpg instead of File:Adam Willaerts - Coastal Landscape with Ships - WGA25763.jpg. That is alright with me, but you did not remove the nomination template from the file description. Could you look at that, please? Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 21:15, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Help needed[edit]

Hi Jarekt! Hey, I reset the Template:Date to an earlier version, maybe your changes made some scripts collapse. Face-smile.svg Maybe have a look here as well? Thanks! And don't hit me for reverting! ;) --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 05:34, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting, I can test and test, but I did not realized that Date can take non-numeric arguments for month. I will add more code. --Jarekt (talk) 11:54, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
No problem. S hit happens. Thanks for all the coding you do here! :) --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 05:03, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

File:Renault 14 Safrane.jpg[edit]

Hello Jarekt, Thank you for warning me regarding the picturen. However, this picture has been taken by ourselves and it concerns our own car. I added {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to the picture; hopefully I did it in the right way. Regards, Raving thunderball.

Raving thunderball, It seems like you uploaded it twice and the other copy had proper description and license so I deleted the duplicate --Jarekt (talk) 21:16, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you![edit]

Gaufre biscuit.jpg good try on copyheart, but as you see, what passes for inquiry is really justification for the "seat of the pants"; no minds are changed here. Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. BTW that is very clever re-licensing, since (my) queries for detecting images without licenses will not find those. --Jarekt (talk) 20:44, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

well, it is kind of beneath me, but since the discussion was ad hoc, and not a general consensus at RfC: stuff will happen. let the war on "cuteness" continue, whenever they can get their act together. if they want a GDFL, i can do that, eventually. <drawing unethical commons cartoon> Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge 18:11, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-26[edit]

07:20, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Template:Date again[edit]

Hi Jarekt, it seems that there is still something wrong in Template:Date. I.e. we now getting more an more entries in the nonexistant category Category:By year. Thats likely because if the {{date}} template used with just a month but without a year it returns nothing an not the month name. Can you please reinvestigate the case. Thx. --JuTa 16:38, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

As i see you are on wikibreak, I reverted you last modification of {{date}} to prevent problems. Hope you understand. --JuTa 16:42, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
If the new behavior differ from the old one, and it is not fixing some long standing bug, than please do revert. I reverted it once myself when I noticed an issue (something about caching of the pages with {{int:Lang}} which seems to be different for pages where it is called from a template and from a module), and did not have time to imminently investigate. I will look into it in the next day or two. --Jarekt (talk) 03:10, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
@JuTa:, I will add this functionality, but this template is a rather bad fit for getting month names, since it does a lot before finally calling {{#time}}. Was it a template calling it for that purpose and if so than which one? --Jarekt (talk) 04:05, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Yes, it was {{monthbyyear}} I noticed an possibly some more I didn't noticed. The resulting category "<monthname> by year" became a "By year" before my revert. regards. --JuTa 05:18, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
@JuTa:, Thanks, I added support for month only output in Module:Date and replaced such calls with calls to {{#time}} in {{monthbyyear}} and few dozen similar templates. I will restore {{date}}. Once the new version of {{date}} actually sticks I will switch my attention to {{ISOdate}}, which is my main goal. --Jarekt (talk) 15:10, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
OK, thx. Lets see what happens... :) --JuTa 15:14, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-27[edit]

06:53, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

The Weaver[edit]

I think it can be deleted. Now that I look at the detail of Mexican law, the artwork must be visible from a public place. This is inside a Chicago museum, not public. Keizers (talk) 13:29, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

The Vowel Chart[edit]


The IPA vowel chart in question is a derivative of Wikipedia's own IPA vowel chart. It's significantly different from the original, but it is still based on it.

Now, I was merely using this chart that I uploaded to explain something in a discussion that I was having with -sche on Wiktionary. At this point, I don't really care what happens to the file. Nonetheless, I doubt that it has any particular copyright attached to it. If you find that it does, feel free to remove it. Still, I doubt that it does. Tharthan (talk) 16:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Tharthan, all files on commons have to have a license, and all I was doing was alerting you that yours does not. So if you would like to keep this file than please pick a license. I would suggest {{PD-author}} or {{PD-ineligible}} if you do not think there are no copyright issues. --Jarekt (talk) 16:56, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
I'll go for the latter; {{PD-ineligible}}. Tharthan (talk) 17:07, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


How do I pronounce your username?

/'jɑɾɛkt/? /'jɑɾɛxt/? /'jɑɾeɪxt/? /'jɑɾeɪt/? /'jɑrɛkt/? /'jɑrɛxt/? /'jɑreɪxt/? /'jɑreɪt/? /'jæɾɛkt/? /'jeɪɾkt/? /'ʒɑɾɛkt/? /dʒɑɹɛkt/? /dʒæɹɛkt/? /dʒeɪɾkt/?

If it isn't one of those, I'm not sure how one would pronounce it. Tharthan (talk) 16:41, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

I am not sure is all usernames are meant to be pronounced, but my follows my name: "Jarek T." pronounced the Eastern European way, so probably /jɑɾɛk t/. --Jarekt (talk) 17:06, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Alright then.
Also, I just noticed that your userpage says that you are Polish. Well, I am (among other things) of Polish descent. I am a fourth-generation descendant of a [redacted] family and a [redacted] family, and live in the the New England region of the United States. My [redacted] and [redacted] immigrated to New England in the very early 1900s. Jak się masz? Tharthan (talk) 17:19, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Cédric Le Bozec.JPG[edit]

Hello Jarekt, Further to your message, Cédric Le Bozec.JPG is a cropped version of File:Sibéril Le Bozec Loudeac.jpg. I hope this provides the information required and solves any issue. If not, kindly let me know since I am no experienced wikipedian. --Teñsor Jambou (talk) 07:04, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks it is all Pictogram voting keep.svg Fixed --Jarekt (talk) 11:40, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Korolupy celkový pohled před rokem 1945.jpg[edit]

Já si vůbec nevím rady, mohl byste mi pomoci? Stačí tyto licence {{Bild-frei}}, {{cc-by-sa-2.0-de}}, {{PD-Art}}?--Lenka Lyalikoff (talk) 08:47, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting keep.svg Fixed--Jarekt (talk) 12:00, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Nawawi 40 manuscript.PNG[edit]

Hi. About this file, it is an old (hundreds of years) manuscript. I believe this means it is okay as copyright is expired.--Aa2-2004 (talk) 09:01, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

All Pictogram voting keep.svg Fixed --Jarekt (talk) 11:53, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Marie Marvingt in Deperdussin aeroplane 1912.jpg[edit]

Hi, This file comes from here: [263] using Copy to commons utility... If it is not ready to do so, please remove it from here and the warning from there. --Marcric (talk) 12:48, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

I fixed it, but you managed to loose all the descriptions and licenses during the transfer. The Copy to commons utilities are not perfect and it is the uploader task to ensure none of the metadata is lost. --Jarekt (talk) 13:03, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Robin Quivers by Jocelyn Saurini.jpg[edit]

Hi. Why not simply add the license? It's been a simply omission, no need to template me. Best regards Hekerui (talk) 14:31, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Hekerui I tagged ~100 files with {{no license}} on Tuesday and 60+ today. We do not try to figure out the license templates for new uploads, but spend a lot of time restoring licenses of files that "lost" it. Sorry you feel inconvenienced by me alerting you about the issue. --Jarekt (talk) 14:43, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


Dear Jarekt,

The discussion with permissions-nl over this type of images in the image donation by the Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, is still ongoing: the institute donates with CC-3.0 but permissions-nl questions the copyright of the photographer(s), "license pending". PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE this image, which proves that upload from a domain is possible. PLEASE REMOVE THE DELETION TAG, as it complicates the acceptance process of the donation. Thank you, kind regards,

Hansmuller (talk) 14:07, 4 July 2014 (UTC), Wikipedian in special residence, and

PS. I have added the intended license CC-by-sa-3.0

Tech News: 2014-28[edit]

07:07, 7 July 2014 (UTC)


Hi, I moved this file to Commons without checking license (sorry), but I think unfortunately the user who uploaded the file doesn't contribute more. What do you think we should do? I suppose we should wait a bit and then delete the file... --Tn4196 (debates) 19:39, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Files without license will be deleted within 7 days. We can move it back, but if the file did not have a license to start with (is that the case?) than it is not valid on any projects. If you speak the language you should alert the article talk page that they will likely loose this file. We should also alert the uploader, he might still have email alerts about changes to his talk pages. --Jarekt (talk) 19:48, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
The uploader didn't add a license, so the file was deleted. Anyway a file can't stay in Wikimedia without a license, not only here in Commons, as you said. --Tn4196 (debates) 07:03, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Train wreck at Montparnasse 1895.jpg[edit]

Hi, are you familiar with {{split}}? I posted a comment on the Village pump, so I was quite aware that you had already re-uploaded the same file. We now have two copies for no particularly good reason. If we split the image page and its history it has the advantage that it retains the original upload history of both versions, and doesn't leave us with two duplicate copies of the same file lying around on the server. It also avoids the situation of having to maintain two copies of the same information about the same picture in two different places. Once split, just copy all the info that you've put together on your duplicate upload and delete the duplicate. --Tony Wills (talk) 05:56, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

@Tony Wills: I guess I am not familiar with this approach to split. So far the best practice I am aware of was to reupload earlier version of the image and correct the documentation of both images, and that was what people called splitting. I thought that was what I have done. If there is a better way, I guess I should read up on it. Is there goings to be a better final version of images + metadata, or is the only improvement be in the history? --Jarekt (talk) 13:40, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Funny thing, I've always used {{split}} and never seen anyone trying to document two versions of a file on one file page, and you've apparently always done things the other way around and we've not noticed over all these years :-).
-The split history approach is admittedly only really needed when it's someones own work so that we retain that provenance thread, rather than having it re-uploaded by someone else. In this case it is a file obtained from another source and is still available there (on even if not on the source url). So I think you can simply state the source of the file as being the original URL (with a link to the copy), and just mention it was originally uploaded here by this name.
-I think it is very problematic to try and document two different photographs under one wikimedia page, and I don't believe I've seen it done before. I makes things a bit messy if they are completely different files (different author, different source, and potentially different licensing). It's a bit like having duplicate files where the main problem from a file repository point of view is not just the waste of space but that you are forever going to maintain the information about the photo in two different places.
1) So the cleanest solution would be to do the {{split}} procedure (I would just add the template and see if there is still someone with plenty of practice doing these, who keeps the category cleared, and will just go ahead and do the work required). If perchance no one regularly does this anymore and it is not well documented then go to the next alternative:
2) A second option would be delete the documentation for the original upload from this file and just document everything under your new upload of it. And perhaps to be tidy, delete the first revision from the first one so that no one is tempted to revert to it. --Tony Wills (talk) 09:18, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
So I though I did the second option (before you added {{split}}: I reuploded the original image as File:Train wreck at Montparnasse 1895 - 2.jpg, copied all the metadata related to that image from File:Train wreck at Montparnasse 1895.jpg and removed the info from that image. I did not delete the first revision until today. I agree that documenting and sourcing 2 images on the same file page is crazy. I reuplied my changes which were added since - I hope it is correct now. --Jarekt (talk) 01:54, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, yes I think we've got to the right result now :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 09:30, 7 July 2014 (UTC)


Dear Jarekt,

Thank you for retracting the deletion nomination of File:Delhi-slum-improvement-IHS-98-02-1983.JPG. I have the samen query for the similar image:

The discussion with permissions-nl over this type of images in the image donation by the Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, is still ongoing: the institute donates with CC-3.0 but permissions-nl questions the copyright of the photographer(s), "license pending". PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE this image, which proves that upload from a domain is possible. PLEASE REMOVE THE DELETION TAG, as it complicates the acceptance process of the donation. Thank you, kind regards,

Hansmuller (talk) 14:07, 4 July 2014 (UTC), Wikipedian in special residence, and

PS. I have added the intended license CC-by-sa-3.0

Hansmuller, Once you add a license template feel free to remove {{no license}} template. Cheers. --Jarekt (talk) 13:39, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

picture Alice Eckenstein[edit]

hello Jarekt,

I don't know wikipedia very well; i think it's complicated... for me anyway. I don't know where to reach you !? I suppose it is here (?)

My grandfather was 1 of the 1400 children saved by Alice Eckenstein. I have many lettres written and signed by her in 1916-1918 here at home. the picture of her tomb was taken by me in 2011 with content of Matthias Eckenstein (nephew of Alice) who was present the day i took the picture. Please help me with making the picture legal on wikipedia.

thank you !!!

best regards,

bruno voeten Lier belgia

Bruno, There is not much that is needed from you. All images on Commons are required to have a license template which is usually added at the upload time. In case of images of sculptures we usually need a license from the sculptor and the photographer, but luckily Switzerland has so called Freedom of Panorama laws so all we need is a license from you. You should read about license templates and pick one, I would suggest one of {{CC-zero}}, {{CC-by-4.0}} or {{CC-by-sa-4.0}}. Please add to the image or if you have problems let me know here which one and I will add it. You mentioned lettres written and signed by Alice Eckenstein in 1916-1918. Those would be very interesting documents to scan and upload. The tricky part would be the licensing again, since the ever-present copyrights belongs to Alice's heirs. You could upload if you could contact some of her heirs and ask for release of the copyrights. Read more about it at COM:OTRS. Let me know if you need any more help and thanks for contributing. --Jarekt (talk) 16:35, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

hello Jarekt ! I read about the templates; i suppose the cc zero is logic, no ? If you can do it for me that's okay for me, because I really don't understand a word of it all ! I don't have a university degree, sorry ! Can I send you pictures from her lettres by mail ? you could add some? She doesn't/didn't have any heirs, she never got married and never had children, she was a member of the feminist movement; she stood for herself all her life. Her nephew does not even have a picture of her !!! "read you" ! thank you ! bruno

Bruno, I added {{CC-zero}} to your image. About the letters: I or anybody else can not add any scans of letters unless we do our homework and figure out the legal situation of those letters. As I said the easiest solution would be locate the heirs and ask for release of the copyrights. If there are no husband or children than the heir would be other closest relatives, like the nephew. But I am not a lawyer and definitely know nothing about Swiss inheritance law, but I can not think of another way those can be uploaded here. You could also ask around on some forums or wikipedia that uses language you are most familiar with. --Jarekt (talk) 02:18, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello Jarekt ! I have sent a letter to Switserland to Matthias Eckenstein in which I ask him if I can publish them here. But are letters not like books and paintings? No copyright anymore once they are 70 years or older.... bruno

In most countries it is 70 years since death of the author if the author is not anonymous. By the way, the permissions should follow the format outlined in Commons:OTRS#Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries, because if you just get a "sure" reply than it is not clear what he/she agreed to. --Jarekt (talk) 14:46, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

hello Jarekt, thank you for the info. mail has been sent. greetings. bruno

File:Frederico Morais, Coach Education for the Danish Football Association - DBU.jpg[edit]

Dear Jarekt, the photo of me - Frederico Morais - coaching, I declare under my responibilty that the photo is mine. Can you help editing the licence? I own all the rights to the photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morralespt (talk • contribs)

Morralespt, I do not have any reason to doubts that this is your file. The issue is that it is missing a license template, which should have been added during upload process. A list of license templates available can be found here. I would suggest {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}, which is the default license during upload. --Jarekt (talk) 03:09, 10 July 2014 (UTC)


Hi! Link in the template is not working. Is it possible to fix it? --Hayk (talk) 20:14, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

I tried once or twice after their web page redesign, and I wrote some emails to USHMM asking for advice, but so far I did not figured it out. But please see if you can or others can come up with URL that allow searching their website by the photograph ID. --Jarekt (talk) 02:35, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
As I understand, you can only get to the results page. Like this - --Hayk (talk) 09:09, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Hey that is great! I just changed the template and it seems to work. Previous query also could only get to the results page. Thanks --Jarekt (talk) 11:51, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you too! --Hayk (talk) 12:16, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-29[edit]

07:48, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Prośba o pomoc z szablonami[edit]


Stowarzyszenie WIkimedia Polska nawiązało współpracę z Archiwum Państwowym w Poznaniu. Mam ich szkolić w zakresie ładowania skanów do Commons w najbliższy czwartek i do tego przydałoby mi się mieć już gotowe szablony, takie jak ma AGAD. Na razie sam zrobiłem szablon Institution:Archiwum Państwowe w Poznaniu. Przydałby się jeszcze szablon: taki jak ten: Template:AGAD record i ten: Template:AGAD partnership, tylko na razie bez logo, bo jeszcze muszę uzyskać od nich zgodę na użycie ich logo na jakichś wolnych zasadach. Ich logo nie jest niestety PD - mają takie "nowoczesne". Ew. zamiast logo może dadzą jakąś grafikę ich budynku. Jak znajdziesz na to chwilę czasu, to będę serdecznie wdzięczny. Polimerek (talk) 08:26, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Znalazłem takie logo i stworzyłem Template:National Archives in Poznań partnership. Oryginał mógłby być nawet lepszy, i chyba tez można by było użyć {{PD-textlogo}}. Szablon typu Template:AGAD record czy Template:Piłsudski Institute document napisać mogę jeśli trzeba ale {{Artwork}} może być wystarczająco dobry (np. ktoś poprosił o Template:AGAD record ale osoba przesyłająca wolała {{Artwork}}). Co do ładowania to może by użyć GLAMwiki Toolset? Ja nigdy tego nie używałem ale wiele osób próbuje i wygląda na to ze działa dosyć dobrze. --Jarekt (talk) 03:51, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Dzięki, W sumie Artwork starczy na razie. CO do tego narzędzia - to może faktycznie - w przyszłości - na razie planowałem nauczyć ich używać Vicunię. Wygląda, że GlamTool jest dobry jak już wcześniej coś jest wystawione na jakimś serwerze i ma dobrze przygotowane metadane. Polimerek (talk) 17:22, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Vicuna chyba może pracować z szablonem {{Artwork}}. Czytałem o tym ale nie próbowałem jeszcze. Co do specyficznego szablonu dla tego archiwum to jak trzeba to stworze. Ale musiałbym mieć przykład ich metadanych. --Jarekt (talk) 01:18, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Polimerek, Widzę ze zacząłeś przesyłać pliki. Po poporawialem trochę opisy. Jeden problem to jak przesyłać pliki z szablonem {{Artwork}} używając "Vicunię" - tu znajdziesz dyskusje na ten temat. --Jarekt (talk) 13:18, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Dzięki za pomoc. Mam jeszcze prośbę - czy mógłbyś zrobić instrukcję krok po kroku - co trzeba zrobić z tym szablonem i Vicunią i wysłać to na mój E-mail?. Jak im pokazywałem ten szablon to też miałem problem ustalić co wpisać w które pole. Idealnie by było mieć dla nich szablon z polskimi nazwami pól w rekordach, ale jak to za bardzo skomplikowane, to niech będzie ten artwork. Oni planują ładować swoich skanów naprawdę sporo (tysiące i mają to robić studenci-stażyści) - więc musimy mieć łopatologiczną instrukcję, co mają robić krok po kroku żeby było dobrze. Polimerek (talk) 21:22, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Spróbuję ale ja nigdy nie używałem Vicunii w ten sposób, jedynie czytałem ze jest to możliwe i nie udokumentowane. Ja zazwyczaj używam pywikibot do tych celów. --Jarekt (talk) 02:55, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Yarl postanowił napisać im dedykowaną modyfikację vicuni - więc to już nieaktualne - jedyne co to pewnie będzę ew. potrzebna Twoja pomoc w sprawdzieniu czy ta dedykowana wersja będzie poprawnie ładawała opisy. My dla nich musimy mieć coś prostego, co nie będzie wymagało wiedzy programistycznej, zagłębiania jednych szablonów w drugich, czy stosowania kolejnego szablonu do podania tak prostych informacji, że coś jest drukowane na papierze... Polimerek (talk) 08:56, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Polimerek, Niestety, Większość parametrów w {{Artwork}} wymaga stosowania kolejnych szablonów aby tekst tego pola został przetłumaczony na inne języki. Na przykład zobacz moj upload File:Leonardo da Vinci - Portrait of Cecilia Gallerani (Lady with an Ermine) - WGA12698.jpg w wersji chińskiej: większość danych jest przetłumaczona mimo ze ja nie znam słowa po chińsku. Jedynie opisy czy tytuły nie potrzebują drugorzędnych szablonów jedynie {{pl}}. Ale rozumiem ze nie to realistyczne by oczekiwać od nowych wikipedystów wiedzy jak używać te wszystkie szablony, ale jeśli można to im więcej tym lepiej. Także jeśli Yarl stworzy specjalna wersje vicuni to wiele takich szablonów może zostać dodane automatycznie przy pomocy regexp wbudowanych w ta wersje. Także warto by było dostać listę parametrów archiwom kataloguje dla każdego obiektu (zakładam ze maja jakąś bazę danych albo arkusz kalkulacyjny), by się upewnić ze możemy znaleźć odpowiednik w {{Artwork}} a jak nie to stworzyć nowy szablon dla nich. Np. {{artwork}} nie ma parametru "język" gdzie można dodać język dokumentów. --Jarekt (talk) 15:02, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Gadamy o tym mailowo. Czy mogę Cię dodać do tych maili? Polimerek (talk) 12:31, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
OK --Jarekt (talk) 13:28, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Luiz Alberto Dias Menezes.jpg[edit]

Hi Jarekt, this is the first time that I upload a file with the template {{OTRS pending}}. I've uploaded this file (also menezite.jpg) with the agreement of the author. I understand by your text that I need to add some license (like {{cc-by-3.0}}), am I right? --Yuanga (talk) 18:38, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, License has very little to do with {{OTRS pending}}. All files need a license at the upload time (or a template like {{no license}} that keeps track of images missing them so they can be deleted, if license is not provided within 7 days). {{OTRS pending}} is a template needed for copyrighted material if the uploader is not the author. Still the uploader needs to know the license before the upload. So it is the author who needs to decide on {{cc-by-3.0}} or other license. Once he decides and license is compatible with Commons you can upload and he can send the email to OTRS stating his decision. --Jarekt (talk) 02:30, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! --Yuanga (talk) 10:19, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


I, er, think I fixed the error. (It was at File:Sheep-shop-tenniel.gif, right?) But something's wrong with the autotranslate template - it didn't actually tell me what image needed looking at. It's been out of sorts for a few weeks now, it seems. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao (talk) 12:54, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the license, as for your talk page the issue is that you had too many notices and your talk page is now in Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded. Which means that you need to start archiving your page (and provide less reasons for you to be contacted due to license issues). I added some archiving code to your page and hopefully it will clean it up. --Jarekt (talk) 13:10, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Ah, thanks. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao (talk) 14:29, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

image:René Fonck Spad XIII Spa 103 en 1918.JPG[edit]

Cher Jareckt, merci pour ton intervention, j'ai , me semble-t-il corrigé cet oubli.

Dear Jarekt, thank you for your help Garitan (talk) 14:25, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Files with copyright status unclear[edit]

Hi Jarekt, I've added the {{PD-old-70}} or {{PD-old-100}} to this files:

This one is probably OK due to age, but why do you think this is a selfportrait? I find it unlikely. --Jarekt (talk) 14:43, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • You are right the autor is unknown. --Jmcasals (talk) 16:37, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Template:Corrected --Jarekt (talk) 18:46, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Unless all staff committed suicide when the company closed, the closing does not mean that the artist is dead for 70 years. This license makes no sense. --Jarekt (talk) 14:43, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • The autor is unknown, is there any possible license in this case?, --Jmcasals (talk) 16:37, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
I do not know. The most likely suspects like licenses due to death date of the author or the anonymous work will not work. But there might be other possibilities based on specific country of publication laws. That kind of legal research can be tricky and take time and is usually done by the uploaders. But if there is nothing that fits than we have to assume that it is still copyrighted. --Jarekt (talk) 18:46, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
When did Enric Ponsá died?--Jarekt (talk) 14:43, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Enric Ponsá died in 1939, --Jmcasals (talk) 16:37, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Template:Corrected --Jarekt (talk) 18:46, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you!--Jmcasals (talk) 14:22, 16 July 2014 (UTC)


Hi You left me a message saying Tatz.jpg and Lalla.jpg have insufficient licences and may be deleted soon, but I do not understand why. Previously, I upload a different picture (Shado.jpg) with the exact same information and licence - it was even from the same site, and the owner gave me the same permission. File:Shado.jpg was fine, but these aren't? Please explain what I should add to my images. Please do not delete them yet. Dovikap (talk) 18:26, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

The only difference is that File:Shado.jpg had a license ({{cc-by-sa-3.0}}) and File:Tatz.jpg / File:Lalla.jpg do not. Add the license and the files will be fine. --Jarekt (talk) 18:34, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
But I sent a email that had a clear licence.
Emails you send to OTRS are totally independent from the requirement that all images on Commons have to have a license template. See COM:LIC. --Jarekt (talk) 18:40, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

" I hereby affirm that CHOOSE ONE: [I, (Luke Tagg), am] the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of and

I agree to publish that work under the free license STANDARD CHOICE; SEE BELOW FOR MORE INFORMATION ON TYPE OF LICENSE: [ "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported" and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts).]

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[SENDER'S NAME AND DETAILS (Dovikap)] [SENDER'S AUTHORITY (Wikipedia editor)] [7/7/14]" was part of my email. Isn't that good enough?

I cleaned up both images and replied through OTRS, but all I was originally looking for was a license template in the file page which is supposed to be added at the upload time. OTRS can be send and processed later. --Jarekt (talk) 19:08, 16 July 2014 (UTC)


Hi. I was curious if the pictures on this page are free to use on wikipedia. Nowhere on the site does it say you can't. I'm looking at the judges at the top of the page. Dovikap (talk) 18:32, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Castrocielo- Photo[edit]

Dear Jarekt, as the poster of the photo of the town of Castrocielo, I declare under my responibilty that the photo is mine. It was my first time at posting photos on Wikipedia, and I ignored that it was my duty to put the licence on it. I hope now it goes better.

--Francesco Camplani (talk) 20:03, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-30[edit]

07:41, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Reverting NARA templated edit solves nothing[edit]


I see you've reverted my edit to Template:NARA-image-full, restoring the button that sends the User: to Wikisource to transcribe what in theory should be a doc (or at least an image of a doc) with actual text content to transcribe/proofread/etc.

The problem for us on Wikisource is that hardly any of the uploaded .tiff files (sometimes.jpg too) from NARA have anything [meaningful] to transcribe more than 98% of the time; users wind up creating alot of pointless, orphaned junk files as a result.

One example out of hundreds...

... why folks have the urge to start the process with such file(s) is beyond me; maybe they just don't get it.

So if you know a way to modify the template to not show the button instead of my disabling it altogetther, I'd sure appreciate that. Seems to me the TIFF parameter should be set to detect PDFs & DjVus instead. -- George Orwell III (talk) 06:08, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to butt into this conversation, but just a suggestion - add parameter "text=no" to relevant images [331]. If 98% is true, then perhaps this should be the default and people have to explicitly change to "text=yes". --Tony Wills (talk) 12:39, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
That's fine by me but I still think the real problem is with the presence of the {{{TIFF}}} parameter. You don't get the button with the JPG version of a file
I fully understand that there a few multi-page TIFF files that are indeed scans of a real archived paper document uploded to Commons - but we'd download the PDF version of that same file since PDFs have text-layers more often than not (making transcription far easier than %^$#^* OCR'ing an image file; or worse -> converting the image file(s) to DjVu or PDF). Its as simple as that.

And as far as "98%" goes - just look through the category yourself and you'll see its almost all photos & graphic art but very sparse in the way of [images of] paper documents. --- George Orwell III (talk) 16:57, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

I do not have opinion on this subject, I just do not like sudden changes to template used on thousands of pages without some discussion. Lets ping @Dominic: who is very familiar with it. I guess we should somehow separate images of text and photographs. The first group should have the link to transcribe it at wikisource, and the second should not. I wonder if that is something we can do with info we already have in each file description.--Jarekt (talk) 02:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for pinging me. I appreciate all of the concerns expressed, and share them. The transcribe button is really still a proof of concept. It is restricted only to the TIFF versions because we did not want to encourage duplicate transcriptions of the same document. One of the issues we discovered after doing the bulk of the original uploading was that we had not imported the medium (or "specific media type" in NARA's language). That Kennedy portrait, for example, is marked as a photo in the original record. As a result, there was no obvious way to distinguish textual records from the rest, so the button was made to simply appear on all NARA images, which is clearly not ideal. It's clear this encourages a lot of experimentation from new users on highly visible images.
Tony's parameter is a cool idea, but I don't want people to have to spend any of their time marking whether something is transcribable or not, since that is just creating an additional backlog. If the Wikisource community would prefer to disable the button for now (or make it default to text=no), that is fine with me. Ideally, our upload script still needs some help from someone good at python to make it handle pagination better (so we can upload all of the multi-page textual documents we have not yet), import the medium field so the template can selectively display the transcribe button, and even do things like programmatically create Wikisource index and author pages as part of the upload process. Right now, I am focused on other tasks and not able to actively work on our Wikisource project. Dominic (talk) 17:01, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Either solution is acceptable here but I would think the text=no parameter option would also require amending any relevant documentation at the same time. Regardless, we are in agreement something should be done to stop the previous behavior re: Wikisource. Can we please select one or the other and make the change(s)? -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:06, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello? Is there any reason the template in question hasn't been reverted/edited yet? -- George Orwell III (talk) 17:18, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot about this discussion. The text=no parameter option was implemented and documented years ago. Tony Wills was reminding us about it. If we can find some pattern with Record group, Series, File unit, or Variant control numbers. We could change default of the "text" based on one of those numbers. I will be traveling next 2 weeks so I will not have chance to look into it. --Jarekt (talk) 00:57, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
...find some pattern??? thats crazy

Maybe I just assumed too much or just didn't explain myself in detail earlier so let me try again & be a bit less diplomatic about it...

NONE of the resulting files from the NARA bulk downloading scheme seem to be Textual Records and that is the only type of file that is remotely worth sending over to Wikisource for transcription, etc. Near all the incoming referals from Commons to date have been of the Photographs and other Graphic Materials type. The difference between the two types is pretty straight forward and clearly given over and over again on the grown-up NARA site.

* An example of a Textual Record - HERE
* An example of a Photographs or other graphic materials - HERE
The types are listed in the Type(s) of Archival Materials: field (2nd row, details tab)
Trust me, there is no easier solution than polling for that field before trying to nail down then compile the corresponding ranges of IDs, Variants, Record Groups, File Units & similiar that mirrors that simple data point.

Or you can think of it this way - by the location of the source Institution:. Granted every NARA entity/repository has some percentage of textual records in their holdings but there is really only one primary group dealing with preserving the desired type. Its id code is RD-DC-1 and you can revisit the contact field in the previous examples for all the other relevant identifier info. Any other NARA entity would be highly specialized in media and graphics (good for Commons; bad for Wikisource) or is a Presidential Library.

In short, if you folks insist on still including us in all this, please build the #if trigger that points to Wikisource around the location of the Institute: the file was uploaded from rather the current .TiFF/JPG/etc, file format detection. This way we circumvent the need to look for file types, doc types, media types altogether!

It's late but I hope that made some sense. -- George Orwell III (talk) 03:49, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

George, I am sorry I can not look at this at the moment. I have very little bandwidth at the moment since I am preparing for 2 week vacation. My original revert was mostly on the basis that the change was made without discussion or consensus of the community. Please propose it at the template talk page and if you get consensus ( or if nobody objects) I will restore the change in 2 weeks, unless someone beats me to it. --Jarekt (talk) 12:19, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Naruszenie prawa autorskich?[edit]

Jarek, zerkniesz proszę? Moim zdaniem wszystkie stanowią naruszenie praw autorskich, na tych dotyczących Warszawy nie ma adnotacji, że zdjęcia są na wolnej licencji. Boston9 (talk) 11:35, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Tak, zobacz User_talk:ConchitaWurst69#Problemy_z_licencjami--Jarekt (talk) 12:35, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Dzięki Jarek, jak zawsze można na Ciebie liczyć. Boston9 (talk) 12:41, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
O rany, przeczytaj to. Bardzo dużo pracy przed nami:( Boston9 (talk) 13:11, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Może jest to okazja na nauczenie tego użytkownika na tematy licencji. Także może poprosić kogoś w Warszawie o wybranie się na wycieczkę i zrobienie zdjęć tym wieżowcom? --Jarekt (talk) 13:52, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Rzeczywiście nie znam się na licencjach. Cała wikimedia commons ma dla mnie dziwne procedury, rodem z ACTA. Mówię, że się nie znam. Poza tym została zgłoszona moja praca. Screen z gry ETS 2, który zrobiłem sam. Posiadam tę grę. Zrobienie zrzutu ekranu proste. Mam rozumieć, że robiąc własne zdjęcie, również zostanę posądzony o naruszenie (własnych) praw autorskich. Wszystko to jest dziwne. Na tym całym dziwnym portalu są tysiące dodawanych zdjęć z licencjamy 4.0 czy 3.0, w których i tak nie wiem o co chodzi.ConchitaWurst69 (talk) 14:33, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Licencje to niestety "zło konieczne", mało kto je rozumie jak to się pojawia to raz pierwszy ale niestety trzeba się z nimi zapoznać jeśli chcesz przesyłać pliki. Co do gry ETS 2 to wedle Commons:Screenshots licencja zależy od licencji oprogramowania: jedynie przyjmujemy screenshots programów używających licencje Copyleft. --Jarekt (talk) 14:55, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Jak użytkownicy skyscrapercity mają wyrazić zgodę na udostępnienie ich fotografii, bo jeden z nich zgodził się tylko nie wie jak to wyrazić. W sumie ja też i chcę wiedzieć jak mu odpowiedzieć?ConchitaWurst69 (talk) 15:21, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Świetnie, przeczytaj Commons:OTRS/pl ale w skrócie to musi przesłać emaila a tym tekstem do --Jarekt (talk) 15:25, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Rozesłałem prośby wraz adresem e-mail i stroną z wnioskiem do 4 użytkowników, których zdjęcia przesłałem. Czekam na ich zgody. Jeden już ją zadeklarował. Poza tym podobnie jak ja potępia politykę szanownej Wikimedii Commons i ich dziwne licencje. Jeśli pozostali się nie odezwią trudno. Choć są to aktywni użytkownicy, którzy mają na koncie kilka tysięcy postów. Mam nadzieję, że najważniejsze zdjęcia Warsaw Spire nie zostanie usunięte.ConchitaWurst69 (talk) 15:55, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Posiadam zgodę 3 użytkowników Morris, AdamMa i Zbieraj. Napisali mi, że się zgadzają. Czy wysłali te maile. Jeśli mi nie tak wierzysz mogę ci przesłać screeny z ich zgodami. ConchitaWurst69 (talk) 15:42, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Widzę korespondencje z Morris71 i AdamMa, ale nie znalazłem korespondencji od "Zbieraj". Moze nie doszła a może nie wiem jak szukać: próbowałem szukać maili z wyrazem "Zbieraj" albo z "Budowa warsaw spire.jpg". Jeśli sadzisz ze zgoda została przesłana to daj mi jakiś wyraz czy fragment który mogę znaleźć w tym mailu. Moze data albo nazwa pliku. --Jarekt (talk) 17:07, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Właśnie użytkownik Zbieraj zapewnił mnie o wysłanym mailu ze zgodą. W tytule podał "Warsaw Spire". Znalazłeś go?Thepiterwayne (talk) 15:30, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Mail doszedl ale nie ma tam wystarczajaco wiadomosci. Ktos sie skontaktuje ze "Zbieraj". Ja znikam na 2 tygodnie. --Jarekt (talk) 15:41, 22 July 2014 (UTC)


Hi! Can you mark it for translation? I requested it on translators' noticeboard, but I haven't got reply. --Tacsipacsi (talk) 10:11, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

I could, but I think this template should be a specialization of the Template:Map/Proposal (when it becomes {{Map}}) and not of {{Information}}. I do not think it is a good idea to start the translation process when it is likely the template will change. --Jarekt (talk) 12:11, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
I've rewritten it for the Map template, now can you mark it for translation? (I won't use it until the Map template become stable, but I can add the translations.) --Tacsipacsi (talk) 02:13, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

RfC on the scope of file renaming criterion 2[edit]

Pursuant to the closing of the RFC "Proposed overhaul of the "Which files should be renamed?" section", a second RfC has been opened at Commons:Requests for comment/File renaming criterion 2 specifically to address the scope of criterion 2, which currently reads "To change from a completely meaningless name to a name that describes what the image displays." Since you participated in the initial discussion, I am notifying you of the follow-up RfC.

Please note that I fully anticipate that the first few days will see a number of additional options proposed, so it may be a good idea to check back periodically on the RfC.

Thank you. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:43, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-31[edit]

08:08, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

About File:Jielbeaumadier lezard des murailles mandelieu 2012.jpeg[edit]

Hi Jarekt, you deleted a photo of lizard that I uploaded on Commons. It seems that no required license templates were detected at the file page, which was a mistake on my own. I understand your message and the motive of the deletion. However, you leave a message on my talk page on July, 20th and the deletion was made on July, 28th. I find this is a quite quick deletion (especially in summer, which is an holiday period), since I am not a new contributor. I uploaded hundreds of photos, so it was obvious that it was a probable mistake. Uploading photo, witch category, good description etc. takes time, please let a litlle more time before deleting images ! Thanks for advance, sincerely yours. Jiel (talk) 12:09, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Jiel, I only tagged the image as "no license" someone else deleted it and yes it is quite a loss to delete well described and categorized photo. Seven days period from alerting the user to deletion is not arbitrary - I do not know how people come up with it but it was the same for years. You can always propose to extend it, if there was such a proposal 5 would support it. Also if by any chance you get a file deleted for lack of license I will be happy to undelete it if you provide the license. Sorry for the trouble. --Jarekt (talk) 19:12, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-32[edit]

07:37, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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

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

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


Yours sincerely Эlcobbola talk 15:33, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Tauron Basket Liga - donated photos[edit]

Hi Jarek; some time ago, Tauron Basket Liga, the top basketball league in Poland, donated about 160 pictures to Commons. There was an idea of supplying them with a unique template, such as the Polish Senate Partnership, but we were not sure whether we'd get more. I am currently uploading 300+ more pictures from the organisation and there seem to be more on the way. Could you try to think of a template to mark these donated uploads? The pictures all land in the Category:Polska Liga Koszykówki from where they are recategorised. Wojciech Pędzich Talk 10:58, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Ok, zaproponuj tekst tego szablonu. Moze: "Niniejszy plik został udostępniony w Wikimedia Commons przez Polska Ligę Koszykówki Tauron Basket Liga." Zakładam ze nie ma żadnej oficjalnej współpracy ze Stowarzyszeniem Wikimedia Polska. --Jarekt (talk) 13:20, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Nie, to była inicjatywa jednego z wikipedystów dzięki której pozyskaliśmy dużo zdjeć i będzie jeszcze więcej. Tauron Basket Liga jest aktualnie chyba oficjalną nazwą rozgrywek więc PLK bym z szablonu usunął, poza tym OK. Wojciech Pędzich Talk 13:43, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
✓ Gotowe Popraw jeśli trzeba--Jarekt (talk) 17:21, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Saint Onuphrius[edit]

Can you disentangle this mess, please? Somebody overwrote your upload at File:José de Ribera - Saint Onufri - WGA19388.jpg (apparently your own photo), and now somebody else took a copy from the Internet and re-uploaded it as File:Onufri 2014-08-05 07-20.jpg. Lupo 12:42, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

✓ Done and by the way File:José de Ribera - Saint Onufri - WGA19388.jpg was not my own photo but came from WGA collection. --Jarekt (talk) 12:18, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


Fine now? 1, 2.--Asqueladd (talk) 20:37, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes. Thank you--Jarekt (talk) 02:25, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of File:Mathematics.pdf[edit]

Hi, I did not have enough time (under an hour) to provide justification before deletion:

If you look at the top left corner of the book you will notice the stamp of the ministry of education. the test is an official document which they have produced and also themselves freely distribute on drop boxes. Example: the ebooks in pages lead to the following open drive all of which is listed as public as well. For these reasons its set under the

Public domain This work is not an object of copyright in Egypt because it is an official document. Regardless of their source or target language, all official documents are ineligible for protection in Egypt, including laws, regulations, resolutions and decisions, international conventions, court decisions, award of arbitrators and decisions of administrative committees having judicial competence. (Article 141 of Intellectual Property Law 82 of 2002) Flag of Egypt.svg
license category)..  (

Additionally its not a plain text document, as its a scanned PDF the aim was to create a wikisource index of it and proofread and create a softcopy version. Kerberosmansour (talk) 23:59, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-33[edit]

07:43, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-34[edit]

07:16, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Smoke Hole WV farm - 1.jpg[edit]

You're welcome! ;-)
It's a beautiful picture (set as background image on my computer for the next days...).
BarnCas (talk) 06:41, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Nether Wallop - Former Shop-geograph-1812426.jpg[edit]

Hi there! The copyright status is now cleared up. A typo in the file description caused the info to be invisible. Do I remove the warning myself or is there a procedure? --Judithcomm (talk) 16:23, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


I had added the license info the very minute after i uploaded the file File:Android L Develpment Preview.png, if there are any other issues i missed out, please point it out. Thank you! :) Tatiraju.rishabh (talk) 06:34, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

User:ViperSnake151 already fixed it. --Jarekt (talk) 06:47, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Your work with Commons templates and Wikidata[edit]

Hi. I don't know if you've seen the new d:Wikidata:WikiProject Structured Data for Commons -- it is intended to be an all-inclusive user group for Commons users on Wikidata.

You've been a pioneer using JarektBot of matching Commons:Creator people and Commons:Institution organisations to their corresponding items on Wikidata, and transferring or reconciling the data between the two.

It would be great if you could write a few notes at d:Wikidata:WikiProject Structured Data for Commons/Data transfer to explain what you've done, what sort of issues you faced, strategies for dealing with them, and next steps etc.

(eg what are good ways to accelerate item discovery on Wikidata? What are good tools to use on Commons?)

It could be really valuable for helping the rest of us to learn how to do these things.


Jheald (talk) 05:54, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Sure, I will look into it. --Jarekt (talk) 06:30, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you so much. To have that kind of detail (and the code!) is really really useful. It's quite daunting that it was such an involved process -- which means, I think, that we now know we owe you even more gratitude than we already thought we did, because this data matching and data transfer was no small task. Jheald (talk) 20:45, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Film stills[edit]

Hi! Is a film still a "photograph" within the meaning of {{PD-Polish}}? For example, File:Kiezun W 28 sierpnia 1944.jpg seems to come from a film. --Stefan4 (talk) 12:04, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

This I do not know, but I would think it would be OK since the image was published (and republished) as a photograph since 1950's. --Jarekt (talk) 15:24, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Anna Rueling[edit]

Hi! I was a bit unsure about File:Anna Rueling.jpg, so I asked for help at Commons:Help desk#A 1910 photograph, author unspecified. All information I could gather about the image is there. I was not sure what template to use, however. Could you help out? Thanks, Surtsicna (talk) 12:46, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Creator template and Wikidata ?[edit]

Hello Jarekt,

It's been a long time… now I'm working on wikidata for Creators and wikisource Authors... :)

Do you know when (or if, but I don't think it will not be done - sooner or later) the {{Creator}} template will be entirely fed from Commons as default ?

Is it something near, or should I just continue with the current template ? as I just imported new books, from Creator:Dominique Rouquette, and continue to do so regularly…

Thanks for explanations about how far is the project for Commons (on wikisource-fr, we're on last testings Clin)

Yours, --Hsarrazin (talk) 14:28, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Hsarrazin, I do not think anything happen in in the effort to move Creator data to Wikidata, but there is a talk about it at d:Wikidata:WikiProject_Structured_Data_for_Commons. I guess we were waiting for wikidata being accessible on pages not connected by interwiki. I am not sure if that was fixed or not. So I would be adding new Creator templates the old fashioned way, but I assume that there will be some major changes with Creator templates in the coming year or two. I was lately more involved in rewriting some high traffic templates in LUA, and that goes quite slowly since we do not want to impact existing pages. --Jarekt (talk) 15:28, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Ru-IossaAN.JPG[edit]

Hi, Jarekt,

in response to your message: {No license since|month=August|day=25|year=2014}, I report there was only {PD-Old-70}, but now we have the following: {PD-Russia}, {PD-Old-70}, {PD-1923}. And also:

English: Tomb of the architect Andrey N. Iossa and its monument in Smolensk Orthodox cemetery
Source Photo by Dj-2, made on 23 August 2014
Author Unknown
(Reusing this file)

Not applicable, copyright expired

Is it enough?

Yours sincerely, Dj-2 (talk) 08:15, 25 August 2014 (UTC)Dj-2

Dj-2, I am quite confused, since I am tagging new uploads that do not have ANY licenses and your file had {{PD-Old-70}}, so my process was not supposed to tag it. That said, there are still some issues with the license, your current license deals with the subject of the photo, but you still need license for the photograph itself. I added {{Art Photo}} template which is a little better suited for this kind of photographs. Can you add a license for your photograph, like {{cc-by-sa-4.0}}, etc. in the "photo license" field? Once you do feel free to remove {{no license}} template. --Jarekt (talk) 14:18, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Dear Jarekt, I've done as You suppose, of course photo is "cc-by-sa-4.0". Very grateful to you for your attention!!! Dj-2 (talk) 19:03, 25 August 2014 (UTC)Dj-2
Dear Jarekt, it is out my imagination!!! I've provided 3 free licences!!! Author is unknown, tomb and monument dated 1907. You yourself provided license to my OWN photo, you recommend delete your tag. And now new claim??? That's too much. Delete and will be all happy.

Tech News: 2014-35[edit]

09:21, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Template:Al Jazeera[edit]

Template:Al Jazeera. Should the language links be removed from this template? Per our previous discussion here:

I assume they should be removed if non-logged-in users get a language menu in the sidebar. --Timeshifter (talk) 20:53, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I removed language links from Template:Al Jazeera. --Jarekt (talk) 00:46, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! I see that the main language links are at the bottom of the doc page: Template:Al Jazeera/doc. So editors can find and edit the various language subpages easily. --Timeshifter (talk) 02:04, 26 August 2014 (UTC)