User talk:Zhuyifei1999/Archive 3

 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.

Credit lines in FlickrreviewR 2

Hi, I don't think it's good that FlickrreviewR 2 adds credit lines to the license templates. For most of the photos in Category:Files from Holding Graz Flickr stream, the (presumably intended) credit line is something else than the Flickr account name, namely the name of the photographer which is written in the description. I think it shouldn't add any credit line. darkweasel94 15:20, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

The intention is actually OK but I'd change the basic license template to 'Self' with 'author=' parameter and insert the Flickr userlink there. An empty 'attribution=' parameter could be used if there's a need to fill out specific attribution request (has to be done manually). --Denniss (talk) 15:49, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
There is no possible algorithm to reliably find out what credit line one should use. That's something that a human needs to deduce from the other fields. The credit line parameter is not a required parameter of CC license templates, it's perfectly allowed to be empty, and definitely shouldn't be added by any bot. darkweasel94 16:18, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Function removed @Denniss: isn't that what you asked in Commons:Bots/Requests/FlickreviewR_2? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 09:49, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I asked for this function as many uploaders fail to even link to the photographer page at Flickr (and I stand behind this request). Really sad the CC template automatically use the author as attribution even if the attribution parameter contains no text. Without this we could at least have the photographer link in the license tag. --Denniss (talk) 10:35, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps the bot can do something if there isn't yet a link to the author's Flickr profile on the page, but if there is (as with files coming from F2C), it should not do anything. darkweasel94 10:45, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
• Did the new flickr review bot stop working at 8:50 or is it in maintenance? I don't know. Unlike panoramio or picasa, flickr marks a lot of images every day. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:05, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

FlickreviewR 2 stopped

It is not working since yesterday, anything wrong? Revicomplaint? 03:56, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

I accidentally pasted the path of the review script at the first line of the script while removing the function mentioned above, causing a syntax error. Now fixed. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 09:58, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement

Picture of the Year 2013 Results

The 2013 Picture of the Year. View all results »

Dear Zhuyifei1999,

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.

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.

Thanks,
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)

Commons:Bots/Requests/YiFeiBot (17)

This is now marked as approved; good luck with your work, and thanks so much for everything you do on Commons :-)) odder (talk) 10:41, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

You might be interested in this discussion. --Jarekt (talk) 12:42, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Random observation

moved from User talk:FlickreviewR

On File:Deanna_Geiger_and_Janine_Nelson_Geiger_v._Kitzhaber.jpg the bot correctly reported that something is different. But actually the raw image MD5 determined by FFmpeg is the same as on the source, and the meta data is apparently also identical. If the uploader tried some jpegtran tricks it didn't work wrt the size, it's still 1,346,445 as on Flickr, cf. help desk archiveBe..anyone (talk) 02:12, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Random observation 2, if the real bot is now User:FlickreviewR_2 it should also wikilink its message boxes on failing images to User talk:FlickreviewR_2 instead of User talk:FlickreviewR, ending up here instead of nowhere. –Be..anyone (talk) 03:35, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
1. For File:Deanna_Geiger_and_Janine_Nelson_Geiger_v._Kitzhaber.jpg, I do not know what really happened. Perhaps it's an occasional commons api error or flickr server error. The log file shows that the file is the only occurrence of hash_not_matching.(Moved to Help Desk)
2. For the message boxes issue, perhaps it's better to ask an admin ;) --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 08:47, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Flickrreview suggestion

Bot should check the Source field first for gathering the Flickr link, no the first Flickr link presented on the description page (the latter should only be the fallback option). See [1] - multiple flickr links in description cause the review to fail as Bot picked the first link, not the valid Source link. --Denniss (talk) 10:57, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I lack the time of doing that atm. I'll do that when Panoramio Review Bot is done, or anyone can provide a fix for that in source. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 11:11, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for continuing your work. I have a nother suggestion: File:Mgr Fellay Écône (02).JPG was uploaded by a blacklisted Flick account, Review Bot couldn't determine copyright status and did not check further for the Blacklist, maybe the Blacklist check could be done earlier. --Denniss (talk) 19:34, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
Will do this Friday or after Panoramio Review Bot (the sooner one) --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 09:13, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
If you have time please take a look at handling/detecting ARR and NC/ND images, working through the human review cat I had several images marked as such instead of unfree. --Denniss (talk) 08:20, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Status:

1. Link detection (fixed in flickr_tools.py):
1. Multiple source  Done --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 09:04, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
2. Source site = *.staticflickr.com  Done --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 09:04, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
2. Blacklist check  Done (example[need manual PD check]) --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 10:29, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

@Denniss: Any more bugs? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 09:04, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Seems fine at the moment. Thanks for your work. --Denniss (talk) 14:57, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Bare=1

Hi! I saw you added bare=1 in Creator:José María Romero López. What does it do? --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 20:24, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

See Template:Authority_control/doc#Template_parameters ("bare=1" will show only links without top line or the box. This option is used in {{creator}} to display authority data.) --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 02:16, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
Done Thanks! --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 20:02, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

IRC

heya, do you still use IRC? Wanted to discuss something with you. Cheers, russavia (talk) 02:49, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Coming --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 02:52, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-14

09:20, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

FlickreviewR 2 (talk · contribs) bug report

Hi, your bot is tagging files with FlickreviewR (talk · contribs)'s templates, which means it is leaving, for example, User:FlickreviewR/reviewed-nosource on files. This says that the file was reviewed by Bryan's bot, FlickreviewR, when in fact it was reviewed by your bot. Storkk (talk) 16:18, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Also, it's tagging strange files as Flickr files, for example File:Herpes.png (tagged as speedy, so it may be gone by the time you see this) has no Flickr source (source is Qiagen.com). It was categorized by the uploader into Category:Flickr review needed, however your bot should probably check that the file has a flickr source before attempting to review. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 16:24, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
This is clearly the intended behavior: if it detects a flickrreview template but no Flickr link, then it tags it with such a red template. That's not a bug. darkweasel94 17:22, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Well maybe, but the bot is saying two things: "This image was initially posted to Flickr" and "this image was reviewed by FlickreviewR". Both of these things are incorrect and can cause knock-on issues (they did to me on that file, which is why I reported this here). Storkk (talk) 07:06, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Either way, maybe those templates should be copied over to User:FlickreviewR 2's userspace and changed... or perhaps they should just be changed to have ~~~ in them instead of a hardcoded username. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 07:11, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
I see no need in creating another subset of review templates, on the old Bot's userpage it's clearly stated this Bot is inactive and task taken over by version 2. Changing the template to four tildes would most likely break existing uses. And the misplacing of flickreview tamplates on non-Flickr images is in most cases user error in the upload form where they originally ticked 'Flickr image' but entered something else. --Denniss (talk) 07:51, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
What about changing the text to ""This image was claimed to be initially posted to Flickr" " for "source not found" cases? Jee 08:12, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
How about "This image was tagged as a Flickr-sourced image, but when reviewed by FlickreviewR or FlickreviewR 2, no source could be found" (potentially with a parameter that would default to FlickreviewR (so as not to break legacy tags) but FlickrevierR 2 could set)? I think the main issue is FlickreviewR 2 should not be tagging files as reviewed by FlickreviewR, and linking to the defunct bot's page. Storkk (talk) 09:41, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
I think Flickreview templates should be moved to a template namespace and the name of the bot that was used can be passed to the template as one of the parameters. --Jarekt (talk) 11:51, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Agree but that will break scripts and possibly some bots. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 12:25, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
We could always leave redirects, default values, etc. So the change could be done gradually. May be move them with while leaving redirects, than change redirects to template calls with the filled bot name. Than suggest to bot operators to update their code, so the new files do not have to rely on usernamespace templates. Afterwards we could, but probably do not have to change templates in the old files. --Jarekt (talk) 13:50, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

FlickreviewR Issue/Problem - Help!

Hi,

I uploaded some images today and posted the sources but later I received this message.

"This image was originally posted to Flickr by at http://flickr.com/photos//. It has been reviewed on 2014-04-02 19:56:33 by FlickreviewR, which could not determine what the source image from Flickr was."

This is the source for the images I posted.

Author: http://www.flickr.com/people/60877182@N00 - Christopher Macsurak

Author: http://www.flickr.com/people/60877182@N00 - Christopher Macsurak

Both images are:

Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license. You are free: to share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work to remix – to adapt the work Under the following conditions: attribution – You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).

I would really appreciate the help.--Friendlypete2014 (talk) 18:20, 02 April 2014 (EST)

Please always link to the standard photo website, not the mobile variant as the syntax used by mobile Flickr may cause the Bot to malfunction. In the first case the correct link is https://www.flickr.com/photos/macsurak/11427608054 . Please redo the second image, it isn't cropped from the highest res version and has a hell lot of compression artifacts.--Denniss (talk) 08:17, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Review dates

Hi. Could you please use localizable ISO dates for Picasa review bot too. Thanks! 90.190.114.172 07:08, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

You mean for every translations of {{picasareview}}, display the date in its own language? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 08:03, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes. I mean use timestamp "2014-04-05" instead of "5 April 2014". 90.190.114.172 08:29, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
It's already using ISO date, just like Flickrreview bot. Just many old review tags are not using it. --Denniss (talk) 08:49, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Done --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 09:22, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Panoramio Review

I notice that the panoramio review category has grown to 425+ images. If your bot is ready, you can test it on some images.

PS: I intentionally uploaded an 'ARR' image below for your panoramio review bot to test when it is ready. It should fail the image. I made a statement in the image's talkpage. Once your bot fails the image, please speedy delete the image:

Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 21:09, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Note: The panoramio category was 430 images but now I see its 401 images. Perhaps someone marked some of the images but it wasn't me. Goodbye, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:05, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

• Yes. It was this Admin here who marked a few images. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:09, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
The bot is just waiting for a 'crat's approval (tested on 9 images, see Commons:Bots/Requests/Panoramio Review Bot). After it's approved (maybe just 3 more days), the bot will be running. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 07:40, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
• OK. Thanks for your help here. But if you wish, you can also test it on the ARR image. A second fail test might help. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 07:57, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
@Leoboudv: Could you review images in:
--Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 12:11, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
•  Comment: Admin Natuur12 created the panoramio categories but you may need to add some descriptions for these categories. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:08, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-15

08:00, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-16

07:18, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Airplanes

Hi, you've uploaded today some thousands images of planes from flickr. Fin. But as far as I can see is not one of them categorized. When you have planned to do this? Categories are important for the structure of Commons. Thousands of images without Category are not OK. Nobody want to do this per hand. Marcus Cyron (talk) 23:57, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

@Marcus Cyron: these have been uploaded with a bot as per my request as you can see from the upload notations on each file. Categorisation is ongoing and will be done by myself, and undoubtedly other aviation-interested editors. Please direct any further further questions on these uploads to myself. Cheers, russavia (talk) 00:04, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

ArchiveBot

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 07:46, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-17

08:34, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Current "FlickreviewR 2"-repo?

I feel that the name of the flickr uploader should be "escaped". Are you using a private repo or is it public so I can propose a commit myself? --McZusatz (talk) 12:32, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

http://tools.wmflabs.org/yifeibot/gitweb/botscripts.git (gitweb: http://tools.wmflabs.org/yifeibot/gitweb/?p=botscripts.git;a=blob;f=o/toolserver/bryan/flickr/bots/flickreviewr.py;hb=HEAD) Is that commitable? Sorry I'm a newbie in gerrit. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 12:41, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
\$ git push origin master
error: Cannot access URL http://tools.wmflabs.org/yifeibot/gitweb/botscripts.git/, return code 22
fatal: git-http-push failed
Me too. That's why I use github :)
Also I don't do python but the change will be likely in /flickreviewr.py (pastebin). --McZusatz (talk) 13:17, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
@McZusatz: How about replace('|', '{{!}}')? IMO it is not a good idea to add nowikis when there is no illegal characters. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 14:14, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Some users will use this to give credit to the author and I do not feel comfortable changing the name of someone. In general this is not limited to "|". Flickr allows every array of ascii chars to be your name, so expect the worst case. Maybe checking if the name contains only save chars and adding the nowiki appropriately is a better solution? --McZusatz (talk) 14:32, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
@McZusatz: How about if any of ['|', '{', '}', '<', '>'] are in author, add nowiki tags? BTW, git cloning, pulling, and pushing to ssh://tools-login.wmflabs.org/data/project/yifeibot/public_html/gitweb/botscripts.git for tool maintainers are now possible, and if you want to, I'll add you as a maintainer. (What's your username?) -Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 10:32, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Sounds ok, but what is about ['[', '['] ? --McZusatz (talk) 10:49, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
ok, will do Wednesday --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 11:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Done (example) (I have more time today than I thought ;) --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 10:10, 22 April 2014 (UTC)