User talk:Fæ

I may be slow to respond to questions. Despite automatic trimming, my watchlist hovers above 900,000 items, so it really helps if you remember to {{ping}} me on discussions that are not kept on this page. Feel free to email or for LGBT+ user group discussion become a contact on Telegram or Twitter where messages are persistent, for a more reliable off-wiki discussion. Keep in mind I lose track of emails too, especially complex ones I think I'll get back to but may lose track of. Faebot is alive in different places, not tied to any specific kit, so some tasks running on Labs have proven stability and carry on regardless of whether human me is still around. However tasks running from my local desktop may pause when my home machine is off for safety reasons. A few tasks run on a headless Raspberry Pi, which should be more resilient it can continue unattended. --Fæ (talk) 10:56, 21 February 2021 (UTC) Spring migration. Due to deciding to finally abandon Python2 based Pywikibot scripts, it may be that old housekeeping might just stop. With a focus on new projects, moving some of the older tasks to Python3 may either stay on the uncertain volunteer backlog for a very long time or will remain permanently under the watermargin. --Fæ (talk) 12:35, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

If you want to see Python source code that supports some of my projects, go to Github and help yourself. The code is not written with reuse in mind... --Fæ (talk) 15:57, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

If you are concerned that a category gets flooded with automated uploads, check that a template like {{Disambig}}, {{Photographs}}, {{Categorise}}, {{CatDiffuse}} or {{CatCat}} has been applied before complaining. In the case of my batch upload projects, any category marked this way will not be added to new photographs. --Fæ (talk) 16:32, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Thank you!

Dear Fæ,

I just wanted to say ‘Thank you!’ for your incredible restless work, which saves millions of images, many of them very valuable, for the benefit of all of us and maybe even for the benefit of future generations.

Thank you very much! --Aristeas (talk) 14:58, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! --Fæ (talk) 09:04, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations 🎉, again

I just saw that you had passed the six million edit mark, I think that probably almost half free files on Wikimedia Commons were uploaded by you. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 11:55, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar

Hello Fæ! I recently found the large and very important collections of artworks you've uploaded by George Cruikshank and Gustave Doré. I had to buy books of their works when I was studying illustration, satirical art, and life art in college, and what you've uploaded for free use is much more extensive and larger with more detail. As an artist, being able to download and examine these works is really priceless! I put Cruikshank on the high level of William Hogarth, and Doré really has no equal, especially in the beautiful, painstaking detail of his backgrounds. His London series alone is so full of detail I'll probably spend months on them. You uploaded some works by Hablot K. Browne too, the illustrator of several Dickens novels, and a very interesting and talented artist in his own right. I also downloaded the Hogarth and Bruegel collections. I'll be poring over these for years, and it's only a 5 gig collection all told. Thanks so much for these hugely valuable artworks. Anyone who says Commons is crap has to be an absolute philistine... Jenny 04:45, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! It's encouraging to read of how some of the images I upload are so useful for research, and enjoyed. --Fæ (talk) 09:14, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Noah Silliman 2016-11-02 (Unsplash).jpg

{{Please link images}}

File:Noah Silliman 2016-11-02 (Unsplash).jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) Stombari7 (talk) 21:56, 25 May 2018 (UTC)Stombari7

Request for batch upload

Hi Fæ! I hope you're well. I wanted to know if you might be interested in working on a medium-sized project of batch uploading some of the photos from the JFK Library [1]. I've been uploading images from this collection and have found many rare color photos of political leaders from the early 1960s (many are politicians from the new post-colonial countries and there are few if any photos of these individuals on Wikipedia). As far as I can tell the White House Photographers (government employees whose photos are in the public domain) were Knudsen, Robert L. (Robert LeRoy)[2], Stoughton, Cecil W. (Cecil William)[3], and Rowe, Abbie[4]. In total there are around 17,000 photographs from these photographers in the digital collection. Would you be able to upload them? If there's anything I can do to help please just let me know. I would love to see these on Commons and will gladly help add categories for them and use them on Wikipedia pages once uploaded.Monopoly31121993(2) (talk) 19:12, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Large Flickr upload request

Maybe you remember my asking about a Australian Flickr users images a few months ago. The discussion is entry 381 on your 2018 archive page User talk:Fæ/2018. At my request the user has now changed their licencing to a free licence and is quite happy for us to use them. It must now be approaching 50,000 images as he told me that on a recent weekend he took and uploaded about 1,000. I suppose when you get around to it, and I know you have time constraints, you will have to make and add a suitable attribution category, such as Category:Files from sheba also Flickr steam or similar, but also a "to be categorised" category, so I and hopefully some other editors can work their way through them because his categorisation does not seem too detailed. Some of his images may not be usable and would probably need to be deleted upon manual review. Please ping me when you get time to proceed. Thanks in advance. Ww2censor (talk) 13:28, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ww2censor: This has been set up to drop the files in Category:Photographs by Sheba Also. There is a test run filtering on albums matching "Bridges", for which there is only one with 121 files in it. Take a look and depending on your feedback I can either upload everything else with some conditions (min name length = 15, good license, Flickr ID does not exist on Commons, bad text not in general blacklist) or upload specific sets of albums that you think would be more likely to be okay than others.

There is some limited auto-categorization. This only happens when Flickr tags exactly match a Commons Category name, and the category does not have any of the normal "diffusion" templates. If anyone complains about flooding, they should always add a diffusion template to the "parent" category. For example File:New Years Eve-BW (111839472).jpg had been auto-added to Category:Brisbane.

Many titles appear to have "+" and "=" in the titles. These are being used without replacement in the Commons filenames, however I do have an easy way to mass rename these later, so long as they stay in the bucket category. In particular I normally filter out "=" or replace it with "-" as this causes wiki problems if the filename is needed inside templates. --Fæ (talk) 16:36, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

I now actually see 211 images being both Bridges and Brisbane ComicCon. I was going to ask the photographer if he is happy with the overall category name you have given or would prefer something different. I don't see that you added a blanket "To be categorised" category because, as I understand it, placing them only within the photographer's own category alone means sifting through each one in that category, which will be huge, to find uncategorised files at a later stage. Personally I'd prefer to have such a additional category from the start and images can be removed from there once they have been categorised better. Unless you have a method of finding the uncategorised files easily without such a category; I don't know how you would do that. Getting rid of the "=" and "+" after the facts seems a good idea but not urgent. I'll look at his albums and see if there are some I think should be excluded or excluded at this time. Thanks for the quick response on this upload. Ww2censor (talk) 15:46, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

For now I have recategorised by batch task the 211 files into Category:Bridges in Brisbane and created a new category Category:Oz Comic-Con Brisbane 2017. Ww2censor (talk) 16:10, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ww2censor: Keep in mind you can build a neat query using the normal Commons search that can list files in the bucket category matching any particular Flickr album or tag name, as these are in the descriptions.

I am starting the run on all files now, ping me if something looks wrong and I'll halt the run as soon as I notice the ping.

The {{chc}} template is being added, in line with your question about to be categorised. To list the relevant files you can use https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=5887574. --Fæ (talk) 16:53, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Patrick Rogel: As this was my request, I'll review the Flickr users images to see if there any obvious upload excludables but with 45,000 images it may be easier to delete those that slip through. Maybe some individual albums can be excluded if they contain too many likely copyright images. Ww2censor (talk) 14:52, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Fæ and Patrick Rogel: I've had a decent look at the albums and indeed there are occasional derivative works which can no doubt be deleted as they are uncovered. This album "Sultanate of Oman Display Brisbane Mall" has many possible personality rights images and I see some other personal images of the Flickr user himself plus some family photos interspersed within albums. These to can probably be weeded out as they are found. My estimate is maybe 1^ or 2% might need to be deleted, and even that is a pure guess. I defer to your greater experience and knowledge. Ww2censor (talk) 10:07, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ww2censor: The flickr uploader has run through the whole stream once. The total unique photographs by Flickr id gave a total to upload of 37,024 images. It could be that the total we currently have of 22,000 is correct as only files with valid licenses, are jpeg files and have a "Safe" status, AND have deducesable valid file names (i.e. not short or duff names like "DSC 10998-3" or "Duck") will have upload attempts. It may also be the case that images which are not in any albums may be skipped. If you can spot a photograph that you expected to be uploaded from Flickr and there is no obvious reason why it was skipped, please give me a link and I'll think about what has caused a skip. In the meantime there is a re-run that may add a few missed files due to internet glitches. Note that I'll be having another long weekend away from my desktop from Thursday. --Fæ (talk) 12:38, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

A further 1,687 photographs have been added which were in no albums (Flickrsets). I normally avoid no-album photographs on the presumption that they are less interesting, however from what I have seen there is plenty of educational value in these remaining photographs. I'll draw the line here, if there is some reason that more useful files should be added, feel free to ping me with some examples. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 11:16, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

{{Personal collection}}

Is it not a valid source template? --Ruthven (msg) 16:23, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

No, it is not a source. I have already left a message on your talk page. --Fæ (talk) 16:26, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Ok, so how do you write that the file comes from a collection of prints/scans or whatever that is private? It's an old file > 120 years. Private scan? Own scan from uploader? --Ruthven (msg) 16:30, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

You have the OTRS ticket and you claim the evidence that it claims, that need not be in any template. OTRS is not there to hide the copyright evidence, copyright statements have to be verified in public. In my experience, collectors may claim all sorts of things that lack evidence. If the drawing was made during the subject's life and the artist was anonymous or demonstrably unknown (i.e. there is no signature on the back), then that may be sufficient for a license and a better one than PD-old-assumed too. --Fæ (talk) 16:39, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

I see what you're saying: you prefer a license as specific as possible. Thus, I suppose that {{PD-anon-70-EU}} will do (no signature, published more than 120 years ago). --Ruthven (msg) 16:55, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes, however COM:L also states "All description pages on Commons must indicate clearly under which license the materials were published, and must contain the information required by the license (author, etc.) and should also contain information sufficient for others to verify the license status even when not required by the license itself or by copyright laws." So, the goal should be to meet those requirements as far as we can and avoid obscuring or missing out that information when it is available. --Fæ (talk) 16:58, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Sure, but the pd-old template that was present before was informative enough imho. In any case, it's better now that we've found a commons ground. But have you ever considered that a more collaborative approach might bring better results? Instead of a lone war against the {{PD-old-assumed}} template, you could have contacted the uploader asking for more information and suggesting possible licenses. Cheers Ruthven (msg) 17:37, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Marking images as no source, when they have no source, is not a "war". Thanks --Fæ (talk) 17:39, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Well, it's not what suggests Jcb's message above: it's not the only file you've been tagging. Then you try a bizarre sort of "act of spite" (NdT: not very sure of the English expression, sorry) by asking further review? Hummm... again, I feel that a different approach could be more productive. But it's just a personal opinion… --Ruthven (msg) 17:54, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

I would rather deal with facts. No, there is nothing here that is spiteful, apart from attacking me with such a hostile allegation. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 17:56, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

No hostility, I assure you. I see no reasons to be hostile. It's just a relatively trivial consideration. Cheers Ruthven (msg) 18:01, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

My apologies if discussion here had not been exhausted before asking for a review. If you have more information to add to the image per COM:L, that would be appreciated, especially if they address the concerns raised. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 18:04, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

File:BIANCHINI EDUARDO serigrafia.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) --Fæ (talk) 18:27, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

After a little research, I've found that the image has been republished since 1896. I've added that source (which is in the PD as well), because it's more easily verifiable. Cheers --Ruthven (msg) 08:47, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Oblong Township High School, Oblong, IL (NBY 428645).jpg

File name and description are entirely incorrect. How do we fix this? Rmhermen (talk) 05:33, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

And another with the same problem File:Hardin County Y.M.C.A. and Secretary's Residence, Rosiclare, IL (NBY 428783).jpg. Rmhermen (talk) 06:21, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

@Rmhermen: These are incorrectly documented at source. The titles are wrong, but the copyright release is correct as a Teich postcard. There is no need for a deletion request, but the file could be usefully renamed and redescribed. Whether writing to the archives will result in a correction, I'm not sure. --Fæ (talk) 12:06, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

A further search found these as duplicates at source, with the other version showing correct metadata. Added in the new source links. --Fæ (talk) 14:25, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

What will happen to the Wikimedia Commons Flickr-account?

What will happen to the Wikimedia Commons Flickr-account after SmugMug will delete most of its images? Or are you planning to upgrade the account to avoid these mass-deletions? Also does Wikimedia Commons have a regular upload schedule to import images from Flickr: The Commons? Although I don't think that that service will be dropped anytime soon, it is possible that it might come under SmugMug's axe as the service obviously isn't profitable. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 17:56, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

There is no plan to pay $50 to Flickr to keep the account going. It will probably be kept for test purposes only.

Flickr Commons has been gone through previously. It is relatively straightforward to do updates (manually instigated, not automated), though I think it's almost all my uploads. --Fæ (talk) 09:49, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Question

How is File:Sanborn Fire Insurance Map from Coeur D'alene, Kootenai County, Idaho. LOC sanborn01581 006-1.jpg PD-USGov? It has a copyright notice from a private company on it. Maybe you meant to use a different template? World's Lamest Critic (talk) 03:14, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Good observation. I'll look in it. --Fæ (talk) 06:50, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Modern etchings, mezzotints and dry-points (1913) (14774311034).jpg

File:Modern etchings, mezzotints and dry-points (1913) (14774311034).jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Modern etchings, mezzotints and dry-points (1913) (14774311034).jpg Walter Anton (talk) 13:26, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

File:A soldier in a lunatic asylum. Lithograph by Conrad Felixmüller.jpg

File:A soldier in a lunatic asylum. Lithograph by Conrad Felixmüller.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:A soldier in a lunatic asylum. Lithograph by Conrad Felixmüller.jpg Mutter Erde (talk) 08:07, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Atti della Riunione, &c. I-VIII and XI. (11 Vol. in 10) (1845) (20353708551).jpg

File:Atti della Riunione, &c. I-VIII and XI. (11 Vol. in 10) (1845) (20353708551).jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Atti della Riunione, &c. I-VIII and XI. (11 Vol. in 10) (1845) (20353708551).jpg Jochen Burghardt (talk) 14:05, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Pierre Jacques Smit works from Flickr

—innotata 14:20, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Approve my videos please

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Movimiento_Naranja_-_Yuawi_-_Movimiento_Ciudadano.webm https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dar_reversa_al_gasolinazo_es_Amar_a_M%C3%A9xico_-_Movimiento_Ciudadano.webm --Werxa (talk) 22:33, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Fæ, I haven't seen you review anything recently (less than 5 years ago). I searched a bit and I'm down to 50 files and those were probably not reviewed by you either. These videos from Sol-lol are actually okay (copyright wise). Could be uploaded with better quality, but no copyvio from what I can tell. The sound on the gasolinazo video maybe, but I don't think we would normally make a problem out of that. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 00:47, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: With all due respect, do you have proof that I am Sol-lol?, no falsely accuse please.--Werxa (talk) 21:25, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

File:London Barking (4903492300).jpg

File:London Barking (4903492300).jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:London Barking (4903492300).jpg Chris j wood (talk) 15:46, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for changing the pictures in articles of el-Wikipedia! They look much better now. --Ttzavaras (talk) 21:07, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Sir John Scott Burdon-Sanderson. Wellcome V0022862.jpg

File:Sir John Scott Burdon-Sanderson. Wellcome V0022862.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sir John Scott Burdon-Sanderson. Wellcome V0022862.jpg -- Deadstar (msg) 10:51, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Vietnam memorial soldiers by Frederick Hart, Washington, D.C LCCN2010630680.tif

File:Vietnam memorial soldiers by Frederick Hart, Washington, D.C LCCN2010630680.tif (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Vietnam memorial soldiers by Frederick Hart, Washington, D.C LCCN2010630680.tif Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 16:14, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Bordeaux, France (Unsplash zuMVow41LEA).jpg

File:Bordeaux, France (Unsplash zuMVow41LEA).jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bordeaux, France (Unsplash zuMVow41LEA).jpg 176.151.104.235 16:56, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Rich Lock 2017 (Unsplash).jpg

File:Rich Lock 2017 (Unsplash).jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rich Lock 2017 (Unsplash).jpg 68.193.211.254 00:37, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

User:Fæ/Userlist‎

I am interested in the codebase behind this (so I can run it on kowiki), but the link in the header of talk page lists 2014 edition, which makes use of "user_daily_contribs" which was removed. Care to share the updated code, or if you don't want to share for some reason, can you run it for kowiki (with minimum edit of 5000 instead of 10000)? :D — regards, Revi 03:11, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

@-revi: The code is posted at https://github.com/faebug/reports/blob/master/userlist, it may be slightly out of date, I have not double checked. It's hacked about, so not well written, but will give you an idea. Let me know if you find better ways of doing the SQL. --Fæ (talk) 11:01, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:09 17 13 edited-1 (9971569895).jpg

File:09 17 13 edited-1 (9971569895).jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) And also:

Extended content
File:January 2015 Northeast Blizzard 150126-Z-SV144-008.jpg

Yours sincerely, BevinKacon (talk) 15:03, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

A Question

• For this image below, it appears that Jan made the image brighter from the source. Is that a problem...when the license is free?
• File:Sophie Divry (2018).jpg

That is my only question. Thanks Fae, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:16, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. Fæ (talk) 06:25, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

File tagging File:An album cover; chrysanthemums seen through a torn umbrella. Wellcome V0047444.jpg

File:An album cover; chrysanthemums seen through a torn umbrella. Wellcome V0047444.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Yours sincerely, Ruthven (msg) 19:02, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Zoltan Tasi 2017-04-11 (Unsplash).jpg

File:Zoltan Tasi 2017-04-11 (Unsplash).jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Zoltan Tasi 2017-04-11 (Unsplash).jpg Thesupermat (talk) 08:42, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Question

• File:Mary Cassatt - Under the Horse-Chestnut Tree - Google Art Project.jpg
• File:Under the horse chestnut tree2.jpg

Since you seem to know a thing or two about telling what colorization best resembles the original, any idea how to tell these two versions apart? GMG^talk 16:51, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

These look very different, because they are different original drypoint prints. Unfortunately there is no unique print number to tell them apart, but one is physically in the MFAH and the other physically in the LOC PP archives. Nothing the the records at either site indicates how many prints in total the artist made of this work. Both seem to have been scanned very well, which for research adds value as the highly different colouring could be informative for a researcher examining the artist's techniques.

It worries me slightly that the "digitally restored" LOC version has had its colors altered, when all it needed was a crop and slight rotate. The colours appear unnecessarily saturated compared to the LOC original. But meh, life's too short to get into another debate on avoidable recolouring. --Fæ (talk) 19:22, 13 November 2018 (UTC)