User talk:Magog the Ogre/Archive 1

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.



Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Magog the Ogre!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | Estremeñu | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Frysk | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Latina | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Scots | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−

Better late than never, sorry you are getting a welcome only now. Patrícia msg 11:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Death_Penalty_World_Map2.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

SkyBonTalk\Contributions 19:45, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Image permissions

Regarding this, the uploaders userpage at claims that the site where the images are found is his. I guess that isn't good enough for Commons. If not, there's no need to wait to delete them. -Atmoz (talk) 23:20, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

That's probably good enough, although it would be great if we could get an {{OTRS}} tag from the user. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:44, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

URAA and other dirty little secrets

I am all in favour of a general discussion.

If you're going to be a gadfly - and why not? someone should be - have a look at Commons:Bundesarchiv. If, after that, you're pondering what I'm pondering when I read it, there's a nice can of big fat worms to be opened. And if we believe the Bundesarchiv, will we now believe the LOC and the Canadian Archives, who also make claims as to public domainness, and if not, why not?

Have fun and congrats on your successful RfA, Angus McLellan (Talk) 19:42, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

The Bundesarchiv would surely be allowed because the copyright holders donated the copyright to it (I think). I can't speak for the others, but the disconnect in policy and practice is rather shocking, IMHO. My only attempt here so far for clarification is Commons:Help desk/Archives/2010Aug#US: post-1923 but author died 70+ years ago., but this is probably an issue that should be dealt with by the foundation and its lawyers; maybe I should ask someone with access to the important people. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:19, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

If the BA are only sending stuff that was donated, fair enough, although I'd point out that even that isn't good enough usually. You nominated en:File:The Original Paganini Quartet.jpg for deletion, rightly, but that came from a private archive. If I donate a pile of stuff, or my heirs do, that doesn't mean I took the photos. It looks like copyfraud. Pro-public domain copyfraud, but copyfraud all the same. Why one rule for the masses and another for the favoured few? Angus McLellan (Talk) 08:34, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

True, though there is no evidence that image was placed in the public domain by the archive, while the license on the image is patently wrong (pd-old-50 != USA). But BA asserts that the Federal Archives owns sufficient rights to be able to grant this kind of license. I try to play things fair, although I may make a mistake occasionally. Magog the Ogre (talk) 13:12, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

File:Corps de Charlemagne Péralte.jpg

Hello. Are you OK with the sourcing on File:Corps de Charlemagne Péralte.jpg now? Regards, Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:45, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

And could you have a think about File:Cobra-Badge.jpg. For me it's non-free most likely, but maybe not. Angus McLellan (Talk) 16:20, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Ooh that second one sure is low resolution, but it's probably a derivative, yeah. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:52, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Fog Bowl 1988.jpg‎

You might want to take a look at my comment concerning the licensing of the image you nominated for deletion. Ks0stm If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. 04:54, 27 November 2010 (UTC)


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

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

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

Artem Karimov (talk | edits) 15:18, 27 November 2010 (UTC)


As grandson of sculptor Erminio Blotta (1892-1976), all their images are free of panorama. Rosarinagazo (talk) 22:29, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, tú eres el heredor de los derechos de la escultura? Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:35, 6 January 2011 (UTC)


You have tagged File:Bangles1.jpg as missing permission, but this is the picture of a pair of bangles from 1880. I think this should be classified as a derivative work of a product in public domain. Can you share you thoughts? --Sreejith K (talk) 10:23, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah; the 3D objects themselves are alright, so there are not derivative issues, but the photo was taken by a third party website. IMO, {{PD-art}} doesn't apply because this is a 3D object and has creativity to it, just as if it was an image of two pencils sitting next to each other. Magog the Ogre (talk) 14:46, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Re:Please do not overwrite files

Ok, thanks. --Marco dimmi tutto! 12:48, 22 January 2011 (UTC)


Hi! This file was uploaded from Chinese Wikipedia, where it was available under the same licence (aka public domain). I think the file was later deleted by them because they saw that somebody uploaded it to Commons. And finding the author would be an impossible mission because the photo was taken in the 1920s. What should I do now? Laci.d (talk) 07:52, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps you can contact a Chinese administrator and ask for them to look at it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 07:54, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

The problem is that I don't really speak Chinese. But I will try to contact them somehow. Laci.d (talk) 14:17, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually I looked, and there was the same upload at English Wikipedia, and it gave a source. It's a source that no longer works, mind you, but it is a source. Magog the Ogre (talk) 14:20, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Baseball en Europe.png

Hi, I downloaded this file from the english wikipedia. I don't know if I had to/could do it. It was just not working trying to use it in the french wikipedia and that's the only way I found to make it. Let me know how we can handle this situation. Maximinus18 (talk) 17:50, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi. First off, I've notified the uploader on English Wikipedia about the issue, so hopefully s/he will be able to handle it. Second off: one thing I've tried doing is going through the blank maps (e.g., Category:Blank maps of Europe). Sometimes it can take a bit of time, but hopefully you'll be able to find an exact match. Let me know if there's anything else I can do! Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:55, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

File tagging File:Luxembourg_by_hamid.sarve.jpg

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Luxembourg_by_hamid.sarve.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS ( This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Masur (talk) 18:32, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Vipera darevskii.jpg

Hi Magog,

are you sure that the license change is correct? I'm quite sure that Камалян001 uploaded the image with a multi-cc-license at ru.WP, only the (later uploaded) duplicate at en.WP is GFDL+CC 3.

Greetings, Rbrausse (talk) 10:00, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:16, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
thanks! Rbrausse (talk) 19:20, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Hello, Magog the Ogre!

Tip: Add categories to your images

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:


2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations"). Pro-tip: The CommonSense tool can help you find the best category for your image.

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 10:56, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

re File:AUT_Traiskirchen_COA.jpg

Hi, I have added some missing information (after [1]) to this file and remove template You have insterted there. Of course if You feel that there are still missing information, You can insert the template again. --Magul (talk) 10:22, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Re: File:Lectern_-_Jhelum_by_Khalid_Mahmood.jpg

Hi. Unfortunately, I'm not able to find the missing information for this file, since I uploaded it to Commons directly from the English Wikipedia. However, in order to avoid problems, I removed the image from it:Jhelum (città) and replaced it with another file already on Commons. Should you have more details on this file, please let me know. Thank you for your co-operation. Tonkawa68 (talk) 22:09, 5 February 2011 (UTC)


Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Magog the Ogre. You have new messages at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Seal of Tripura.gif.
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 | +/−

--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 08:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Have A Little Faith.jpg

Thanks for the note that this image needs more info re permission. I have written to copyright holder yesterday (2-10-11) giving exact words of permission email for My hope is she will respond quickly. Thanks again! Resnicoff (talk) 13:28, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Re: File:Abraham_Lincoln_commemorative_plaque_by_Schwarz.jpg

I noticed that you have doubts about the license of above image I have uploaded to Commons. I have rechecked the history of the original file in English Wikipedia, I found that the uploading user set the image to be fair use, and then some others changed it to PD license. I am not sure whether that license change is correct. If that is not, I clearly misunderstood something, and please explain the details to me. Thanks. --Altt311 (talk) 12:10, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh wow, you're right. Frankly you could just mark it as speedy deletion here on commons in that case. Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:05, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Wanted: your opinion

Take a look if you would at Commons:Village_pump#Housekeeping_vs._sabotage.

It's somewhat influenced by your recent string of sculpture-fop deletion requests - to which I have no objection per se (it's mostly crappy sculpture - can you also delete these idols in real life?). In my opinion, these files have enough in common to qualify for a common mass del page, rather than a swarm of individual noms.

NVO (talk) 07:41, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Regarding Commons:Deletion requests/File:Somerset coat of arm.png

I've made a comment there which may be of interest to you. - Amgine (talk) 22:53, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

File:William Ellery Channing statue in Touro Park.jpg

Hello. I was just wondering why you added the {{dw no source since}} tag to this image. If it is due to the fact that there is no information on the date of the statue, I looked it up. Apparently the statue was cast in 1892 and dedicated in 1893. The statue is mentioned in the Newport entry in the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica. Given that the artwork was installed well before 1923, I don't think it presents a problem. But perhaps I have misconstrued the reason for the tag. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 12:55, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

No that's it; just needed information about the statue itself. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:25, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm glad I could be of help. Cheers. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:44, 7 March 2011 (UTC)


Hallo Magog the Ogre, could you please you answer me at de:Benutzer_Diskussion:Magog_the_Ogre#nowCommons (sorry - maybe I should have asked directly here)? Thank you! Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 02:08, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Small question: we are currently discussing exact the thing you made a bot for: old file versions and CommonsHelper transfers! Many old file versions get lost because the transferring people do not care about and neither most of the deleting admins. :-(

Can you tell me more about your cool bot? Can anybody use it? Any info page about it? :-) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 02:35, 7. Mär. 2011 (CET)

Yes! My bot mostly works on English Wikipedia, where it delinks images: w:Special:Contributions/OgreBot. However, by the time I got this up, 80% of the work was already done (the background of getting a bot set up), so I decided to quickly set it up to transfer the history of an image to commons: the request is here: Commons:Bots/Requests/OgreBot. It's written in PHP, and it's not even that long. I'd be glad to share it with you. You'd need a PHP interpreter on your computer (native to Linux, not to Windows or Mac though), and a working knowledge of how to use the command line.
FYI, you can contact me on my en.wp page or my commons page; if I haven't been around for a month or so, commons would probably be better because I get email notification there. Magog the Ogre 03:19, 7. Mär. 2011 (CET)

I have moved this to here now - easier for both of us (no need for talkback templates).

I have Linux running. But we need some more automated/easy solution. We were thinking about such a but which automatically runs after each Commons transfer. However, I guess it would be not hard to port your bot to the toolserver, would it? I have no TS experience but maybe we can find someone who will do it.

A TS request page (could be linked from our "nowCommons" template) like where just the original filename, wiki and new filename needs to be put in would be great. So if the deleting admin sees there are versions missing he can quickly transfer them. Of course the first CommonsHelper file version is a bit annoying but it would be better than nothing.

What do you think? Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 03:19, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

OK which version of the bot were you referring to? The one that delinks files with a different commons name or the one that copies over old versions?
It would be much easier to do the one that copies over old versions. That would seriously take like 3 minutes (OK I'm understating it). Most of the work would probably be in setting up a toolserver to interface with the bot, as currently everything I'm running is command line. Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:10, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello Magog, The bot transferring all old file-version to commons is the one that de.wp are interested in. I think it would be great, if the bot can be interact with commonshelper, so that oldest file-version is transferred first, then reuploading version after version, so that there will be no need to revert at last to the first (transferred) version as it is now. --Quedel (talk) 21:37, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Hmm. I'll look into it; at worst, I can give the script to one of you guys, and one of you can publish it on the toolserver. I'll think on it a bit. I would want at least one other admin to have control over it, as I am prone to disappear from the Wikimedia projects at some point, due to life circumstances changing. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:26, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Megog. I think we could find someone operating it (if you can't) at the TS. I just had an idea: Maybe we need to additionally confirm the operating user like mentioned at the bottom of - otherwise people could use the upload bot as a tool for vandalizing anonymously. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 14:39, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, this had definitely occurred to me, and it is the most worrisome part of the whole issue, IMHO. Would it be easy to interface with TUSC? Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:01, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes - it is easy (see the bottom of the link to TUSC I pointed to). returns 0 as this is not my TUSC password for commons. But it return 1 if it is correct. According to the page the request should be a POST request to not make the tusc password show up in the log file (which it would if GET is used).

If the imagined Magog_the_Ogre_bot service would also accept the needed parameters via GET one could also use it with a bookmarklet.

Our semiautomatic commons transfer bot user:boteas (which calls Commonshelper internally to make the transfer) maybe could be modified to automatically call the Magog_the_Ogre_bot service to transfer the remaining versions. Maybe (I did not yet ask him) the operator of this bot could also "host"/maintain the Magog_the_Ogre_bot service. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 01:06, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh no no. The programmer part of me is already shaking his head. I don't like the idea of sending a password via a GET statement. To be fair, not even Magnus Manske uses the feature. However, most modern browsers have autofill - which works quite nicely on Magnus' page Face-smile.svg, to the extent that I don't even notice it asking for my username anymore.
So tell me more about exactly how Boteas works. Can only admins invoke it? Magog the Ogre (talk) 08:22, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Magnus' tool accepts GET params (I use it via a bookmarklet which I simply call on files' pages via a keyword in Firefox). I do not like autofill. :D

(I am not the programmer of it ..but:) Boteas can (in theory) only be operated by admins and a few trusted users. It just processes this list de:Wikipedia:Commons-Transfer_per_Bot/Anfragen to which entries are added by a user java script which checks the user's rights. Theory and practice are equal - in the 10 months of running no additions by non permitted users happened. Boteas then calls Magnus Commonshelper using Boteas TUSC account to transfer the file and if susccessful adds the nowCommons template to the local file. I guess in about one week the programmer of Boteas will have some more spare time to drop in here.

However - a cooperation with Boteas would be nice but it is not the most important part as many(most?!) files are transferred by using Magnus' Commonshelper the ordinary way. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 01:06, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

You don't like autofill? What's wrong with you Face-smile.svg? Then I'm thinking we should interface the bot with TUSC and have it respond only to admins or Boteas. Is that a good idea? Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:29, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Yep a TUSC interface would be needed and useful. However, I guess it would not be easy to check if the TUSC account which is asking is Admin or Boteas. Just make it work for every TUSC user - as every user. Well, it uploads quite fast many files.. but - hm .. if only admins were allowed to operate it it would not have a big usefulness/profitabilty. And I have never heard someone does vandalism by using a TUSC enabled bot. Do you? Sorry - no new ideas from me today. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 22:46, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

First off, sorry for taking so long to respond, but my computer broke, and I really don't feel like typing out long comments on my smart phone's 2x4 inch LCD. Face-wink.svg. Anyway, just a technical question: I don't suppose you know if the toolserver has a really high bandwidth to the Wikimedia servers? The bot framework I have doesn't have asynchronous uploading enabled, so really large files (e.g., 4-5MB+) tend to cause a timeout. This would be a problem I'd have to fix before making it public. Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:02, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

at the TS wiki page there is some info but not about the bandwidth. However - I think it has fairly high bandwidth. At least I did not notice that large files take longer than small files when transferring them with Commonshelper's FileUploadBot. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 13:38, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

See here. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:34, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh, great. I will go through it in depth to check for errors, improvements, whatever - but not now - too tired. Probably tomorrow.

Just curious: Who is Quadel? ;-)

Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 23:06, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

It is a typo for User:Quedel. We'll call ourselves even after you called me "Megog" above (I'm afraid the scholars of Abrahamic religion will be having a conniption at that: it's based on de:Gog und Magog Face-wink.svg). Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:53, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I see :D Sorry for vandalizing your name, Magog the Ogre. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 13:42, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I have read through it now: sounds good!

"*If the filename on commons doesn't exist, the interface will give the user the option to generate the text via commonshelper or to input their own text." - great - well, just came to my mind. in fact your bot should be integrated in commonshelper. ;) Would ease some things.

"*Each revision of the file will come with a preview of the version (~100 px rendering of the image) and a checkbox " can I get the size in px and kilobytes, too? :-) Would sometimes even be more useful than the thumb.

"8MB/4MB" - which Inet connection do you have? I guess this is the limiting factor. Do you have 1024 kbit/s down and 512 kbit/s upstream?

Oh, and: "Quadel" nor I are admins at Commons. I guess the source code for all TS tools is open source anyway - so even if you vanish someone could take it and set up a new service. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 21:58, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Sure, sure, we can include all that later. I'm just coming up with a rough framework. I don't usually add-on the goodies until they occur to me, and they don't occur to me until I eat my own dogfood. has me at 980Kbps download, 500 Mpbs upload - wow, those estimates really were accurate.
I don't know about the source on the TS - but at least one person would have access to the bot password, which I presume is not open source. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:10, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Magog the Ogre, do you want to transfer a file? :-D de:Datei:DEU Tutorial - Hochladen von Bildern neu.svg got only the last version transferred. :( Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 21:06, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

✓ Done Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:15, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Umm.. well, Thank you, but this was the wrong target file. The correct target is here (like the nowCommons template said): File:DEU_Tutorial_-_Hochladen_von_Bildern_neu.svg. You had uploaded the versions to: File:DEU Tutorial - Hochladen von Bildern neu+Commons.svg. --Saibo (Δ) 22:49, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Not sure how that happened; oops. Anyway, ✓ Done. I'd clean it up at the wrong file if I was an admin here, but I'm not, and it's too complicated to bother with otherwise. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:56, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Could be an nice to have idea for the toolserverbot: check (maybe by requireing at least one version of the original to be already present) that it is the correct file before uploading. ;-)

Wrong Versions got deleted by magic. :-D Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 23:36, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Good idea; will require an override. Unfortunately, I was sloppy enough in my work that an override may not have worked anyway. Face-blush.svg Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:39, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Austrian coat of arms


I have seen that You have mark for deletion some of austrian coat of arms, reuploaded from to commons by me. For every file, You have mark, I have upload new version, adding reference to official website of austrian land or commune, or I have add only reference to this site.

I guess, that, according to this, it should work. --Magul (talk) 00:56, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it shortly, when I'm competent to do so (right now, I'm not). Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:29, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


Hi, why this is nominated for deletion? DenesFeri 07:47, 23 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DenesFeri (talk • contribs)

I have placed my comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Peterborough-i sziklafigua.jpg. Magog the Ogre (talk) 08:39, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I see, but I don't understand. DenesFeri 11:27, 23 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DenesFeri (talk • contribs)

Please deselect “Az aláírás wikiszöveg (nem lesz automatikusan hivatkozásba rakva)” in Special:Preferences. --Leyo 12:53, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
I am saying that because someone else took that photograph, it's not free of copyright. Yes, the original sketch is very old, but the photograph itself is not. Also, I agree with Leyo; please deselect the option that allows you to customize your signature.

That I understand, but this picture were used just by enwiki and from my opinion other countrys should use this picture, not just English. Am I right? DenesFeri — Preceding unsigned comment added by DenesFeri (talk • contribs)

Well I nominated the picture for deletion on as well, since I don't believe it's free anywhere. Magog the Ogre (talk) 15:58, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

That picture looked good in one of my work.

hu:A peterborough-i sziklavésetek

DenesFeri (talk) 16:00, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm glad it looked good. But I was requesting deletion on grounds of copyright problems, not aesthetic problems. You don't have to remove it from that page though unless an administrator decides to delete the image anyway. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:16, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

OK than. DenesFeri (talk) 16:24, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

By the way, if you have any other questions, or are in any way confused, you can try to ask User:Grin, who is an administrator here and who speaks fluent Hungarian. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:41, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, I will. DenesFeri (talk) 11:12, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

"Russia and abroad" - ?

I'm totally confused with your edits in the "Licensing" section of File:Ogata Gekko General Major Odera Yasuzumi in the Battle of Weihaiwei.jpg. Why is it "Russia and abroad" when its author was Japanese, lived in Japan and published his works in Japan? The fact that I, uploader, provide file description in Russian has nothing to do with the the author of the original work. Ari Linn (talk) 13:17, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

✓ fixed Magog the Ogre (talk) 13:21, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Cuadros y círculos (Squares and circles)

¿Entiendes el castellano? Verás en la imagen de 2011 Libya uprising, creo que sería más conveniente usar círculos con un ratio, es decir usar círculos y cuadrados progresivamente más grandes para poder ver bien su ubicación en el mapa. Círculos progresivamente más grandes, podría haber hasta 3 círculos de diferentes tamaños y luego dos tipos diferentes de cuadros, uno para la capital, Trípoli y otro para Misurata y Bengasi. ¿Qué opinas? Bye! Thor8 (talk) 13:22, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Como dice mi página de usuario, puedo «contribuir con un nivel intermedio de español» Face-smile.svg. No respondí a tu pregunta aquí porque no tengo una opinión firme. Pero me gusta el mapa así como está, con seis distintos círculos para seis distintos tamaños de ciudad (aunque tal vez deberemos quitar las ciudades del círculo más pequeño porque en realidad tienen muy poca importancia en la lucha). Y el cuadro: no me gusta la idea; pero como ya he dicho, no me importa mucho. La única cosa que sí me importa mucho es que existan distintos tamaňos de círculo (es decir: quiero que Trípoli no tenga el mismo tamaňo como Bin Jawad). Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:37, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Libyan Uprising.svg

hey, thanks for editing the map. Please note that the name most commonly used of the town is "Sirte" not not "Sirt", can you please change that on the map? Thank you. Gryffindor (talk) 18:24, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

FYI, there seems to be some disagreement on that one: w:Talk:Sirte. Is there any talk about it locally being the best idea? Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:35, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Edouard Beaupre.JPG

Hello. While it absolutely infruriates me when people upload something without a source, isn't it safe to assume this image is PD since the subject died in 1904? This article would suggest that the image is, in fact, of Beaupre.--Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:35, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

The original source may be this. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:44, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict)I'm thinking, probably but not necessarily. The image was surely created before 1905; but its publication date remains unknown. This is due to a quirk in US copyright law which at one point let unpublished works remain under indefinitely copyright protection. Therefore, the image would be non-free under nay of the following circumstances [2]:
  • It was not first published until March 1989 or later (or never published until uploaded to en.wp... perhaps the uploader found it in a private collection?), and the author died 1941 or later, and the photo wasn't taken until 1891 or later.
  • It was not first published until March 1989 or later (or never published until uploaded to en.wp... perhaps the uploader found it in a private collection?), and the author is unknown, and the photo wasn't taken 1891 or later.
  • It was published between 1978-February 1989 originally without a copyright notice but later with a notice within 5 years.
  • It was published between 1964-February 1989 with a copyright notice.
  • It was published between 1923-1963 with notice and its copyright was later renewed.
It seems likely to me that the image was published before 1923, but I certainly couldn't verify that. Maybe someone else could. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:54, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Responding to your second statement - it's hard to tell, because the internet archive doesn't have that page. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:56, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. The photo was probably taken in the U.S., and I hadn't even considered the U.S. copyright issues - I always forget it dates from publication, not creation. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 20:13, 29 March 2011 (UTC)


I've rejected your recent rename requests, as it is technically impossible to rename a PNG to a GIF. Please upload the GIFs if possible and request the deletion of those files as duplicates. Thanks. --theMONO 04:54, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Dutch coins

I agree with the removal of these coins.I them placed under a free license to the Russian Wikipedia.Coins of Portugal, Gambia, Zimbabwe, are protected by copyright? They are also in the Commons.Remove this files:Tanzania_200_shillings-2.JPG Tanzania_100_shillings-2.JPG Botswana_2_pula_2004.JPG Botswana_2_Pula_2004_s.JPG underdeveloped User:Jcb removed all my files in a row he has not had the sense to remove them as well.Numizmat 675 —Preceding comment was added at 02:23, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Female head of state/government map

Hi, you didn't reply on the map page so I'm bringing my question here. Please delete this if that's not appropriate. I was just wondering if the sources I provided for Mali and Kosovo were reliable? I don't know how to update the map myself, so I'm checking with you instead. -- 22:14, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

In the future, feel free to leave the {{tb}} template to notify me of the discussion. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:22, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Talkback (2)

Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Magog the Ogre. You have new messages at File_talk:Female_heads_of_state_and_govt.png#Mali and Kosovo.
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 | +/−

—Preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 20:58, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

File:SB2Cs on USS Yorktown (CV-10) 1943.jpg

Hi, I agree that the source for the above photo is poor. However, if you look at this photo [3], you may concede that it was taken a few minutes earlier from the same point of view. US National Museum of Naval Aviation photos are US Government photos, as proven by communication with the NMNA (send to Commons). It is not exactly the same photo, but I would deduce that it was taken by the same USN photographer. Maybe that would help. Thank you. Cheers Cobatfor (talk) 23:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Alright. I'll add that. Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:02, 18 April 2011 (UTC)


Please don't use {{lf}} when you are doing a mass DR nomination. It makes using DelReqHandler much harder, because there are then two sets of action links and it's hard to dig out the right ones.

With DelReqHandler enabled a line with the template looks like this:

  • File:SEAL-TEAM2.jpg [keep] [del] (edit [keep] [del]|talk|history [keep] [del]|links|watch [keep] [del]|logs)

Thanks,      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:49, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

OK. Magog the Ogre (talk) 13:04, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:55, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Clean up guideline

Hi Magog, I saw you have "cleaned up" some images I transferd from en:Wikipedia to Commons. Could you tell me the principle/guideline that are behind this? So next time I can do it by myself... Regards and thanks in advance :) --Pilettes (talk) 08:13, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Can you give me a link to jog my memory? I have some pretty small cleanups, this is usually what I do:
  • If the original uploader is the image author, I modify the field from saying "author=original uploader was X" to "author = X"
  • I remove the "permission=" text if it's just rehashing what the templates say below in the license section anyway; it's redundant, and the {{Information}} template will just say "see below" when it's empty anyway.
  • I move any information that's in the description, but should be in other fields, to the other fields. Sometimes a bot will just blindly convert information, and the source information remains in the description field.
  • I fix the licensing field. A lot of times, the bot will (stupidly) copy the same template multiple times (e.g., directly and improperly transcluding the {{cc-by-sa-3.0-migrated}} template or not providing the proper parameters to the {{GFDL-user-en-with-disclaimers}} template).
  • Remove bad information in the information template (e.g., the date field giving upload date on en.wikipedia and author field giving the uploader on en.wikipedia, if we're talking about it coming from a third party source anyway)
  • I try to internationalize as much as possible: "I created this work myself" becomes {{own}}, I use the {{date}}, {{according to EXIF data}} and {{unknown}} templates.
  • I remove redundancy, where applicable. If the bot code says "author= [[:en:User:X|X]] ([[:en:User talk:X|talk]]). Original upload was by [[User:X|X]] at [ en.wikipedia]", then it's a bit overdone.
  • I put language links around anything in the description, if not already there.
  • I unicodify the whole thing, although it's not necessary. It's just a pet peeve of mine; why store it as 300×300 when you can store it as 300×300? And I try to remove unnecessary formatting like comment tags or nowiki tags that don't apply. Again, not necessary, just my thing.
  • I remove any duplicate uploads from the upload log; they're just confusing to the reader who can't see the original upload log.
Magog the Ogre (talk) 08:42, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
I meant this and that image for example, but I think you have mentiond this all in your detailed answer. Thank you for that. Should be written down somewhere how the description page should look like. Again thank you. :) --Pilettes (talk) 18:32, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi again Magog the Ogre, why do you replace 2010-10-03 by {{Date|2010|10|03}}? The ISO date format is recognized by the information template and easier to read/edit for humans. :D Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 23:43, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
I wrote a script which always replaces it, because the template doesn't recognize it unless it's the only text in that parameter field (e.g., date=2010-03-04 is OK, but date=2010-03-04 (original upload date) is not). I can rewrite the script not to do that if you want. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:48, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I see. :) Well, it would be better, I think. But do not do it if it is much work. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:57, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Money of India

Thanks for the notice. I`m not interested in these coins. (they are modern) --Carlomorino (talk) 18:02, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

It's OK Face-smile.svg. I just wanted to inform you that your images were up for deletion. You have a notice on your userpage requesting we contact you at it.wp rather than here, and IIRC you had numerous images among the ones nominated. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:44, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

None of them. --Carlomorino (talk) 19:19, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

OTRS missing for File:Anneliese Van der Pol Publicity Shot 2010.jpg

I don't know anything about this. I just transferred it from English Wikipedia. For more information, please ask the original uploader ( the link to original file has been added)--Hoangquan hientrang (talk) 05:01, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I've already done that; the only reason I've notified you is that the built-in Javascript tool provided to all registered users automatically notifies the commons uploader; it was also as a FYI for a file you've uploaded. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:08, 26 April 2011 (UTC)


Estimado Magog. Te informo que una persona del círculo de coleccionistas me dijo que en el apartado "Reproducción de imagenes de billetes y monedas" de la página de preguntas y respuestas del Banco de México dice "¿Cuál es el procedimiento para solicitar permiso de reproducción de imágenes de billetes y monedas? Como lo establece el Artículo 17, de la Ley Monetaria de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, está prohibida la imitación o reproducción total o parcial, de monedas metálicas o de billetes, nacionales o extranjeros, en rótulos, viñetas, anuncios o en cualquier otra forma, salvo en aquellos casos en que la Secretaría de Hacienda y Crédito Público, oyendo previamente al Banco de México, lo autorice expresamente, por tratarse de imágenes de monedas que carezcan de idoneidad para engañar, que no conduzcan o puedan conducir a la falsificación de dichas piezas ni, en general, afecten la seguridad de la circulación monetaria." la pregunta aquí es si el Banco de México tiene alguna ocasión autorizado la reproducción de imágenes como las subidas en forma libre en algún otro lugar compatible con Wikimedia Commons. Recuerdo en una ocasión un boletín del banco ilustrando los actuales billetes en circulación decía que se autorizaba su libre distribución siempre que no alterara el contenido ni el tamaño de los billetes, de igual forma se emiten billetes de menor tamaño para juegos infantiles de imágenes idénticas pero con la marca de agua "sin valor" o algo semejante.

La otra cuestión es si los autores de libros pidieron permiso o se ampararon de alguna ley para colocar fotografías de sus monedas y billetes de forma tal que has pudieran comerciarlas incluídas en los libros, por cierto sigo en respuesta de los autores. Lo que es lamentable el quitar las fotografías ya que podrían ser ejemplo para mostrarles a las autoridades para que me den la respuesta correspondiente.

Retomando el tema, espero la respuesta de los autores de diversos libros de numismática mexicana quienes me podrán decir "sí se puede porque cuando edité mi libro está permitido por esta ley, etc., etc." o bien decir "no se puede pues está prohibido", en vez de esperar el tan anhelado permiso, ya que la burocracia mexicana es muy lenta y apática por lo general y se me hace un tanto complicado para ellos ponerse a leer las licencias de Wikimedia.

Ahora respecto a la plantilla original que tenían las imágenes es aplicable para los anversos de cualquier moneda ya que ostentan el escudo nacional y quedan amparados por tratarse de uno de los emblemas mencionados en dicha ley, por lo que no debe haber problema en subir las imágenes con dicho escudo. Nadie puede reclamar la autoría del mismo, esté representado donde sea.

He modificado la página con el apartado "Mexico" para agregar lo dicho con la esperanza que alguna persona que tenga buen dominio del idioma inglés la traduzca y quizá tenga la respuesta a nuestro dilema.--Inri (talk) 21:53, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Si lees mi respuesta en Commons talk:Deletion requests/Images of Banknotes of Mexico 2, verá que respondí a tu pregunta directamente: La prohibición a modificar la aparición de las monedas es incompatible que las licencias de commons Face-sad.svg. Y entiendo la frustración con la burocracia de Wikimedia, ni qué hablar de la burocracia mexicana. En commons, preferimos "pecar de prudente" (como se dice, creo) con las imágenes, si no estamos seguros.
Lo que recomiendo es esto: que pidas a Jcb que te envíe una copia de los billetes por email, ya que no podemos restaurarlos en Commons debido a las leyes de copyright (para proteger la integridad de la enciclopedia, y para proteger contra las reclamaciones legales). Así tendrás una copia para enviar a la numismática y a los autores de los libros. Si Jcb se niega a hacerlo, ciertamente podrías pedir otra opinión en COM:AN (lo que es el tablón de anuncios de los bibliotecarios). A mi no me parece que sea un problema darte las imágenes, pero no soy bibliotecario en commons (solamente en en.wikipedia).
Una segunda cosa que trata de los derechos sobre las imágenes: estamos hablando solamente de los derechos de autor, es decir, copyright. Es probable que la ley mexicana prohíbe la duplicación en una manera que dé la aparición de un billete legítimo. Pero esto es completamente distinto de la ley de derechos, que solamente existe para guardar la creatividad de las obras de arte. Es posible que la numismática está usando el segundo concepto (copyright) para lograr el primero (evitar la falsificación de los documentos). Pero en realidad, solamente puede reivindicar estos derechos para billetes creados después del 22 de Junio, 1928.
Otra cosa: si tienes libros con ejemplos de los billetes, podrías decirnos si existen las imágenes de billetes de después de 1928, pero teniendo un diseňo bien semejante al diseño de billetes de antes de 1928. Éstos sí podríamos restaurar porque los cambios a los billetes no tienen suficiente creatividad para permitir a la numismática a reclamar sus derechos (para unos ejemplos, vete la galería en threshold of originality).
Buena suerte; déjame saber si tienes otras preguntas. Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:32, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Gracias por tu respuesta y estoy totalmente de acuerdo contigo. Lo que me llamó la atención es que se haya pedido borrar mis imágenes (y las de otros) pero se conserven algunas como esta ([4]) que se prestan al fraude.

Por otro lado esta [5] no muestra los billetes completos ni siquiera en primer plano a diferencia de esta que muestra las monedas completamente [6] y me recuerda al dilema que si un dibujo de Homero Simpson en una playera viola o no el copyright y el artículo dice que si muestra sólo el dibujo en primer plano sí, pero no si la foto muestra a la persona entera y me pongo a pensar si una foto de una billetera con algunos billetes mostrados en abanico parcialmente sería aceptable.

Respecto a los billetes anteriores a 1928, si hay pero no tengo alguno en mi colección, pero si existen y en este documento en la página 11 los puedes ver [7] pero sí hay algunas monedas en mi poder anteriores a esa fecha, incluso hay algunas posteriores pero idénticas a otras sólo de diferente fecha, por ejemplo tengo una de 1935 y que se emitió en 1920 y es a lo que te refieres cuando dices "no tienen suficiente creatividad". Yo me baso en el catálogo "Coins & Prices" anunciado aquí [8] que es donde me informo de mi colección y es probable usarlo como referencia.

Respecto a lo que me dices "Es posible que la numismática está usando el segundo concepto (copyright) para lograr el primero (evitar la falsificación de los documentos)" sí hay algo de cierto, pero el único en emitir billetes válidos es el Banco de México y tal vez ése el principal dilema: (1) si el gobierno realmente es el dueño y se necesita permiso para evitar delitos o (2) bien puede reproducirse libremente sin aparente legitimidad bajo pena de castigo en caso de hacer parecer la pieza como válida.

Para finalizar diré que el gobierno tiene en secreto los nombres de quienes les diseñan los billetes y monedas por lo que deduzco que ellos se ostentan como únicos en derechos.--Inri (talk) 16:44, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

La razón que no borramos esas imágenes es que Wikipedia inglés tiene uso legítimo, una doctrina que sí existe en el mundo de la ley anglosajón, pero que no existe en muchos países que usan la ley romano/neorromano (vete File:LegalSystemsOfTheWorldMap.png) - notablemente la mayoría (tal vez todos?) de los países hispanohablantes. Porque los servidores de Wikimedia se quedan en Flórida, Wikipedia inglés sigue las leyes de los Estados Unidos. En México, es probable que tal cosa sería ilegal.
El concepto de Homero Simpson: estás refiriendo a de minimis.
Lo siento, no sé la diferencia entre la numismática y el Banco de México. Si dije numismática pero tenía sentido, quería decir la entitdad que tiene el derecho de autor.
En la mayoría de los países, si el autor es anónimo (o seudonónimo), el derecho de autor se le extiende como si el autor hubiera muerto en el día que se publicó la obra (hay excepciones notables: Estados Unidos - 120 años después de la creación, Chile - 120 aňos después de la creación). En el caso de México, la obra está en el dominio público hasta cien aňos después de la publicación (o 75 años, para obras publicadas anteriores a Junio 1928).
Miraré ese archivo PDF dentro de poco. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:48, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Taken on V/s According to EXIF data

Any particular reason why you prefer {{Taken on}} over {{According to EXIF data}}? You seem to be doing this change recently. I am transferring images from English Wikipedia using a custom script and is confused which one to use. Also, I would like to know why you added origdate parameter in this edit (and did not use {{Taken on}}) --Sreejith K (talk) 04:45, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I use taken on when the uploader directly states the date; camera EXIF data can have the clock properly not set. In the above case, the uploader directly stated July 2008 (see the description I removed). Magog the Ogre (talk) 07:27, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks so much for cleaning up the files I've transfered from Wikipedia!


I just want to let you know that I really appreciate all the cleanup work you've been doing on the files I've transfered from Wikipedia. I know that tedious work like that doesn't always get the appreciation that it deserves, so I really wanted to thank you for it. Also, I've been going through your revisions, and I've learned how to better use the "circa" template, as well as the "between" template that I did not know about before (thank you for teaching me indirectly!). I had one question about the "date" template, however; when uploading, should I always avoid it and use the simple yyyy-mm-dd notation instead? Thanks so much and take care!

TFCforever (talk) 04:00, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Well thank you! It's always nice to receive praise for a job done Face-smile.svg. To answer your question, the {{information}} template automatically uses {{ISOdate}} for the date field parameter. This means if you input a date in the yyyy, yyyy-mm, or yyyy-mm-dd format, it will automatically translate the date format correctly. But if you add anything else at all aside from whitespace, (e.g., a comment, a <br/> tag, etc.), the template won't recognize the date and it will display as is. So I don't use the date template if I can place it in that format (see someone else's request above at #Clean up guideline; it also saves on server time); but if other notes are necessary, I will use the template.
Also, as a note, it is still preferrable IMHO to use the date template even when just adding in a year, as even this displays differently in some languages. {{Date|1932}} renders as:
  • Most languages -> 1932
  • Chinese, Japanese -> 1932年
  • Farsi -> ۱۹۳۲
  • Hindi -> १९३२
  • Hungarian -> 1932.
  • Korean -> 1932년
  • Latvian -> 1932. gada
  • Lithuanian -> 1932 m.
  • Thai - 2474 หรือ 2475
As you can see, some languages prefer the date notification so they can display properly. Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:23, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I really appreciate your reply. Take care! TFCforever (talk) 19:43, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

NZCC images

Not worried. I just wanted to have free versions replace these poor fair use ones on en.wikipedia. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 00:50, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Not to mention it was in a lossy format. They were {{PD-text}} as well; it's just that back in 2007, the Wikimedia community wasn't familiar with the concept of PD-text. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:WP Johannes Baltzer.jpg

Hello! Please take care as soon as possible that the above image is restored - your deletion request was a blunder. Certainly, the pedagogue named de:Johannes Maaß died as late as 1953. But did you read the German Wikipedia article on him at all? He has only the name in common with the professional photographer Johannes Maaß, who made this photo and died already in 1930 - the date is veryfied by his obituary. So, correct your mistake, please. And the next time, don't request deletions based on purely coincidental similarity of names, but do some research first. Thanky. --Der Bischof mit der E-Gitarre (talk) 15:45, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello Magog the Ogre, I just wanted to write you the same. How did you come to the conclusion that the author of de:Datei:WP_Johannes_Baltzer.jpg is de:Johannes Maaß (not a photographer, not living in northern Germany (if I see correctly)? Bischof even gave the source (a article on his death in a newspaper) for his date of death on the file's description page. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 20:08, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
FYI: I now startet an undeletion request - see Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:WP_Johannes_Baltzer.jpg. regards --JuTa (talk) 20:35, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
File:WP Johannes Baltzer.jpg is undeleted now. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 22:56, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Eh, I don't speak a word of German. Sorry. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:05, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
I would like to suggest you leave out the (suspicious) files in Category:Files moved from de.wikipedia to Commons requiring review and focus on other subcategories of Category:Files moved to Commons requiring review. The German language team has a reasonably good man-power. --Leyo 06:17, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
*Sigh*. It was a legitimate mistake guys; no need to beat me up over it. I wasn't even the one that deleted it for that matter; an administrator did that. Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:19, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
But it was not the first such case… --Leyo 07:22, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
The second one you provided remains unsourced. You are assuming that the uploader is the same as the author, but that is never stated. Magog the Ogre (talk) 08:14, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
I / We do not want to beat you up - just the follow up in order to prevent such a thing next time as it causes disruption (the original uploader does not like Commons very much and if such things would happen often I am sure he continues to do so ;-) ) and unnecessary work.
Regarding the "second one" File:Kirche_Maur.jpg: You are right. I cannot see a source confirming {{own}}. It is listed in the uploaders list of pictures de:Benutzer:Albinfo/Bilder - but it is not the list of "self photographed" pictures or similar. I checked other uploads by him but he always gave the date as "source" when he mentioned this name (as he did often). But I think the hint that it is listed on his user sub page and that it is an old upload and that he uploaded many pics from the photograph slightly suggest that this name is he. Maybe we can find out a bit more and properly verify the {{own}}. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 10:14, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Everything is fine with that image. I initiated this transfer, because I am sure about it. It is obvious from the file page in de.wikipedia plus the user page and this user's other uploads. And if you still don't believe me, I have also met this user in RL. --Leyo 17:53, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Okay, a short comment (at least in the edit comment) about why you assumed {own} would be good, though. Especially if someone tagged it no source. ;-) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 19:02, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Supposed duplicates

File:Canada 2011 Federal Election seats.svg and File:41st Can House.svg are not truly identical; at least not in purpose. The former will stay the same forever, but the latter will change as the 41st Parliament progresses. The first change will be on June 2, when the Commons elects a speaker, and it will continue to change as members resign, die, are elected in by-elections, change parties, etc. -Rrius (talk) 05:42, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I see. Well then perhaps it would be best to make a minor change to the former in the SVG code (e.g., add some whitespace) to throw off the duplicate image detector (it can only detect exact, bit-by-bit duplicates), and then make a note to the effect on the talk page. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:47, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I thought of the same thing and did so immediately after posting here. -Rrius (talk) 05:56, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I also meant to thank you for all the trouble you went to deleting and restoring and all that. It occurs to me that you could also help me do a better job of moving files from Wikipedia to Commons. I used CommonsHelper and may have screwed up the process somehow. At first the upload history was goofy, appearing as a block of text with no links or thumbs, or even separation, for different versions. Your bot fixed it, but I can't help feeling I did something wrong. How can I do better next time? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rrius (talk • contribs) 23:17, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Well I wouldn't really call it a "bot"; it's actually just a sloppy piece of Javascript I use, because making the same edits over and over was getting tedious. It's located at User:Magog the Ogre/vector.js. But if you want some general guidelines that I use, try seeing above at #Clean up guideline. But you didn't do anything particularly wrong, no; it's just that the bots are a little sloppy (IMHO) in the way they transfer over the images. Magog the Ogre (talk) 14:45, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Osteitis fibrosa cystica tibiae X-ray

Hi, what's the problem with the copyright not being verifiable? I've included a link to the author's page in the description page here and it clearly indicates that the image is in the public domain. --Eleassar (t/p) 11:41, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't see anything on that page indicating the item is in the public domain. Magog the Ogre (talk) 11:42, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

There's an icon on the page under the description. --Eleassar (t/p) 11:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Well they sure hid that pretty well (in non-standard font, right above the "all rights reserved" notice). I'll mark it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 11:46, 20 May 2011 (UTC)


...for cleaning up File:Starkweather Chapel.jpg! After moving it from Wikipedia, the licensing and description templates were such a mess that I wasn't quite sure what to do. I tried playing around with it, previewing my changes, but I wasn't sure which ones needed to stay on it. cmadler (talk) 11:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

It's all good. After a while of doing this, you start to recognize the patterns. Face-smile.svg Magog the Ogre (talk) 12:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC)


I responded on the talk page to your crop suggestion . Geo Swan (talk) 00:00, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

JFYI: move cleanup was missing three : in the author link. Therefore it disappeared. Please see history. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 23:27, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Do you mean I missed the colon (:)? Yeah I made a few mistakes like that before I fixed my cleanup script, but thanks. Magog the Ogre (talk) 13:25, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
Could your script be used to fulfill the request on MediaWiki talk:Botcheck.js? --Leyo 13:36, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
Only if the pages are categorized as such, or if I had a list of them, and it isn't too large of a request, because it is a manual script (i.e., part of my vector.js file). I could try AutoWikiBrowser on it, or it might just be a job for a bot. Magog the Ogre (talk) 13:46, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes I meant the colon (":"). Only one character missing but it has severe effects - in fact the image was a copyvio without it. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 15:34, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

For me, it does not have to be implemented into MediaWiki:Botcheck.js. It would also be great to include it into vector.js/monobook.js to (semi-)automatize the most tedious work steps. --Leyo 15:45, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
Leyo: I don't understand what it is you're asking. Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:25, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
OK, trying again: I think that your cleanup script could also be helpful if it is included into the personal vector.js/monobook.js. MediaWiki:Botcheck.js should be for changes that can be made in all cases. A script would then be useful for the second step (already being in the edit mode an seeing the source text of the file description page), e.g. for converting the date or to place {{own}}.
Does your script provide individual “buttons” for different cleanup tasks? --Leyo 20:21, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
Yes; it has an own button and a cleanup button. It would need quite a bit of cleanup before going live though. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:57, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
If you'd like to take a closer look at my vector.js page, feel free, and I'll be glad to contribute anything I can, so long as I have the proper cues. If I'm not mistaken, you don't even need permission from me to take it, as the screen clearly states my contribution is automatically cc-by-sa-3.0. Any contribution from me would unfortunately be put on the back-burner to the project I've discussed with Saibo above, though. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:20, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
Is everything in there (except the two lines on popups.js) for the cleanup functionality? Is there any reason to believe that is would not work with monobooks.js? I would copy your script into a separate place and load it using importScript. --Leyo 22:36, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
Yes, everything is in there, but frankly it has too many bugs to go live. If you want to help debug it with me, feel free. Face-smile.svg Also, would you feel OK putting it on a subdirectory of my userspace so I could edit it? I am an administrator at en.wp, if that means anything for credibility in terms of not modifying it maliciously. Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:41, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
I would like trying to include some cleanup procedures that are specific for transfers from de.wikipedia and chemical structures from en.wikipedia. If this is OK for you, the script could be stored at User:Magog the Ogre/cleanup.js. --Leyo 12:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
OK. Please let me know exactly which functions you want me to test and get ready. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:47, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
OK, it's there. Tomorrow, I will start with testing the current functions. --Leyo 17:13, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
In all honesty, I actually already know a few of the bugs just from my own use. I'll work on it a bit too. Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:15, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Do you prefer bug and feature requests reported here or on User talk:Magog the Ogre/cleanup.js? --Leyo 12:41, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
The second one. Are you trying it already? Magog the Ogre 2 (talk) 02:54, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I have been doing it for two weeks now. There are four other users who included this script to their vector.js/monobook.js. BTW: Have you noticed my posting to User talk:Magog the Ogre/cleanup.js? --Leyo 06:56, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
I did not see that page! Face-blush.svg I'll get to work on it but I'll leave some responses there. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:32, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Your revert


Your recent revert on this file is not correct. Per COM:L sources like "Originally uploaded on en.wikipedia (Transferred by Ulf Heinsohn)" is not valid source information. That an image is really the own work of the uploader. This must explicitely stated by the uploader which is not given in this particular file. So, if you disagree with my no-source-tag, feel free to start a deletion request as long as additional source information is not given. --High Contrast (talk) 20:05, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

You're kidding me. If you are going to use state that the GFDL-self tag isn't valid, then you're going to want to delete 3/4ths of images on commons. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:56, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

You obviously do not understand: the problem is not licence tag, but the the fact that there is actually no proper source. Please read COM:L. --High Contrast (talk) 07:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)