Commons:Administratorzy

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Commons Administrator.svg

Uprawnienia administratora przyznawane są znanym i zaufanym członkom społeczności, którzy znają politykę Commons. Uprawnienia administratora nie mają sugerować kontroli edytorskiej nad projektem.

Administrators as of January 2019 [+/−]
Listing by language
Listing by date
Listing by activity

Number of Admins: 227

  1. -revi, ko, en-3 (steward)
  2. ~riley, en, fr-1, es-1
  3. 1Veertje, nl, en-4, de-1, fr-1
  4. 32X, de, en-2, hsb-1, ru-1
  5. 4nn1l2, fa, en-3, ar-1
  6. 99of9, en (bureaucrat)
  7. A.Savin, ru, de-4, en-2
  8. Abuse filter (automated tool)
  9. Achim55, de, en-3, nds-3, la-2
  10. AFBorchert, de, en-3
  11. Ahonc, uk, ru-4, en-2, de-1 (global renamer)
  12. Aka, de, en-3
  13. Alan, es, eu-3, en-2
  14. Alno, fr, en-3, es-2, pt-1
  15. Amada44, de, en-3, fr-1
  16. Ankry, pl, en-2, ru-1
  17. AnRo0002, de, en-2, fr-2, es-1
  18. Anthere, fr, en-3
  19. Arthur Crbz, fr, en-4, es-3
  20. Aude, en, ar-2, de-2, es-3
  21. AzaToth, sv, en-4
  22. Barcex, es, en-2, fr-1
  23. Basvb, nl, en-3, de-2
  24. Benoît Prieur,fr, en-3, pt-2, es-1, it-1, hy-1
  25. Benoit Rochon, fr, en-4
  26. Billinghurst, en
  27. Blackcat, it, en-3, fr
  28. BrightRaven, fr, en-3, nl-2, es-2, zh-1
  29. Butko, ru, uk-2, en-1
  30. Cambalachero, es, en-3
  31. Captain-tucker, en
  32. ChrisiPK, de, en-3, fr-1
  33. Christian Ferrer, fr, en-2, es-2
  34. Ciell, nl, en-2, de-1
  35. Common Good, en
  36. Cookie, es, en-2
  37. Courcelles, en, es-2, fr-2
  38. Czar, en
  39. DaB., de, en-1
  40. Dantadd, it, pt, en-3, es-3, fr-3, gl-3, ca-2, ro-1, el-1
  41. DarwIn, pt, en-3, es-2, fr-2, gl-2, ca-1, it-1, oc-1
  42. Davepape, en
  43. David Levy, en
  44. De728631, de, en-5
  45. Dereckson, fr, en-3, de-1, nl-1
  46. DerHexer, de, en-3, grc-3, la-3, es-1 (steward)
  47. Dharmadhyaksha, mr, en-3, hi-3
  48. DMacks, en
  49. Didym, de, en-2, fr-2
  50. Dschwen, de, en-3, fr-1 (bureaucrat)
  51. Dyolf77, ar, fr-5, en-2, it-1, es-1
  52. D-Kuru, de, en-2, it-1
  53. Ebrahim, fa
  54. Edgar181, en, de-1, fr-1, es-1
  55. Elcobbola en, de (checkuser)
  56. Eleassar, sl, en-3, de-2, fr-2
  57. Elitre, it, en-3, fr-2
  58. Ellin Beltz, en (bureaucrat)
  59. Emha, de, bar, en-3, fr-1
  60. Érico, pt, en-2, es-1 (global renamer)
  61. EugeneZelenko, ru, be, en-2, bg-1, pl-1 (bureaucrat)
  62. Explicit, en, es, ko-2
  63. Ezarate, es-3, en-1
  64. Flominator, de, als, en-3
  65. FunkMonk, da, en-4, no-3, fo-2, sv-2, de-1, es-1
  66. Geagea, he, ka-3, en-3, ru-1
  67. Geni, en
  68. George Chernilevsky, ru, uk-3, de-2, en-2, bg-1, la-1, be-1, fr-1
  69. Gestumblindi, als, de, en-3
  70. Gnangarra, en, nys-1
  71. Golbez, en, ja-2
  72. Green Giant, en, de-1, fr-1 (steward)
  73. grin, hu, en-3, de-1
  74. Gruznov, ru, en-1, fr-1
  75. Guanaco, en, es-1
  76. Hedwig in Washington, de, en-4, nds-1
  77. Hekerui, de, en-4
  78. Herbythyme, en, fr-2, es-1, it-1
  79. Hesperian, en
  80. Howcheng, en, ja-2
  81. Huntster, en
  82. Hystrix, de, en-1
  83. Indeedous, de, en-3, fr-2
  84. Infrogmation, en, es-1
  85. Jameslwoodward, en, fr-1 (bureaucrat, checkuser)
  86. January, en
  87. Jaqen, it, en-2
  88. Jarekt, pl, en
  89. JarrahTree, en, id-1
  90. Jastrow, fr, en-3, ro-2, de-1, it-1
  91. Jcb, nl, en-3, es-3
  92. Jcornelius, de, lt-2, la-2, en-2, pt-2, fr-1
  93. Jdforrester, en
  94. Jdx, pl
  95. Jean-Frédéric, fr, en-4, es-1
  96. JGHowes, en, fr-2, de-1
  97. Jianhui67, en, zh-3, ms-1 (global renamer)
  98. Jmabel, en, es-3, ro-2, de-1, ca-1, it-1, pt-1, fr-1
  99. Joergens.mi, de, en-3
  100. Jon Kolbert, en, fr-4, de-2
  101. Josve05a, sv, en-3
  102. Juliancolton, en
  103. Julo, pl, en-2, de-1, ru-1
  104. JuTa, de, en-2, fr-1 (bureaucrat)
  105. Jusjih, zh, en-3, fr-2, ko-1
  106. Kaldari, en
  107. Kallerna, fi, en-3, sv-2, de-1
  108. Kelly, en
  109. King of Hearts, en, zh-3, es-2, ja-1
  110. Klemen Kocjancic, sl, en-3, de-2, hr-1, bs-1
  111. Krd, de, en-3 (bureaucrat, checkuser)
  112. Krinkle, nl, en-3, de-2
  113. KTo288, en, zh-4
  114. Kwj2772, ko, en-3
  115. Leit, de, en-3, fr-1
  116. Léna, fr, en-3, es-1
  117. Leyo, gsw, de, en-3, fr-3, es-1, la-1
  118. Lokal Profil, sv, en-4, pt-2, fr-1
  119. Lymantria, nl, en-3, de-2, fy-2, fr-1, zea-1
  120. Magog the Ogre, en, es-2 (checkuser)
  121. Mahagaja, en, de-4, fr-2, ga-2, la-2, cy-1
  122. Maire, pl, en-4, es-2, fr-2, de-2, ru-1 (global renamer)
  123. Majora, en, fr-2, it-1
  124. Marcus Cyron, de, en-2
  125. Mardetanha fa, az, en-3, tr-2, ar-1 (steward)
  126. Martin H., de, en-2
  127. Masur, pl, en-3, de-1
  128. Matanya, en, he (steward)
  129. Materialscientist, en-4, ru-4, nl-3, fr-1, es-1
  130. Mates, cs, en-3, sk-4, de-1
  131. Mattbuck, en, fr-1, la-1
  132. Maxim, ru, en-3, fr-2
  133. MBisanz, en (steward)
  134. Mentifisto, en, mt, it-2 (steward)
  135. Mhhossein, fa, en-3, ar-1
  136. Micheletb, fr, en-3, it-1, es-1
  137. Mike Peel, en, pt-2, fr-1
  138. Missvain, en
  139. Mitchazenia, en, es-2
  140. Miya, ja, en-2
  141. Moheen, bn, as-1, bpy-1, en-3, hi-1, hif-1
  142. Morgankevinj, en, es-1, la-1
  143. MPF, en, da-2, de-1, fr-1
  144. Multichill, nl, en-3, de-1, fr-1
  145. Mys 721tx, zh, en-3 (global renamer)
  146. Nagy, de, en-3, fr-2, es-1, sv-1
  147. NahidSultan, bn, en-3, bpy-1 (steward)
  148. Natuur12, nl, en-3, de-1
  149. Neozoon, de, en-4, nl-4, fr-2
  150. Nick, en, sco-2, fr-1
  151. Nilfanion, en, fr-1
  152. notafish, fr, en-4, de-3, es-2, it-2
  153. Nyttend, en, ang-1
  154. odder, pl, en-4, de-2 (bureaucrat, oversighter)
  155. Otourly, fr, en-2, it-1
  156. P199, en, nl, fr-2, tl-2, de-1
  157. Perhelion, de, en-3
  158. Pi.1415926535, en, es-2
  159. PierreSelim, fr, en-3, es-1 (oversighter)
  160. Pitke, fi, en-4, sv-2
  161. Platonides, es, en-2, fr-1
  162. Pleclown, fr, en-3
  163. Poco a poco, es, de-4, en-3, fr-2, it-2, pl-2, pt-1
  164. Podzemnik, cs, en-2
  165. Polarlys, de, en-2, fr-1, no-1
  166. Putnik, ru, en-2
  167. Pyb, fr, en-2
  168. Pymouss, fr, en-3, de-2, it-2, he-1
  169. Racconish, fr, en-4
  170. Ragesoss, en, de-1, fr-1
  171. Ra'ike, de, en-2
  172. Rama, fr, en-3, de-2, la-2, es-1, it-1, ja-1 (oversighter)
  173. Rastrojo, es, en-3, fr-2, eo-1
  174. Raymond, de, en-3, nl-1 (oversighter)
  175. Rehman, en, si-1
  176. Reinhard Kraasch, de, en-3
  177. Rimshot, de, en-4, fr-2, it-1
  178. Rodhullandemu, en, fr-1, de-1, sv-1
  179. Romaine, nl, en-3, de-2, af-1, fr-1
  180. Ronhjones, en, fr-1
  181. Rosenzweig, de, en-3, fr-1, la-1
  182. Royalbroil, en, es-1
  183. RP88, en, de-1
  184. Rudolphous, nl, en-3, de-2
  185. Ruthven, it, fr, en-4, es-4, nap-4, ca-2, de-1
  186. Sanandros, als, de, en-3, fr-1
  187. Sealle, ru, en-4, pl-2, sk-2, uk-2
  188. Shizhao, zh, en-1, ru-1
  189. Sphilbrick, en
  190. Spiritia, bg, en-3, ru-2, mk-2, de-1
  191. Sreejithk2000, ml, en-3, hi-3, ta-1, kn-1
  192. Srittau, de, en-3
  193. Steinsplitter, bar, de-4, it-3, en-1 (global renamer)
  194. Stifle, en, ga, fr-2, de-1
  195. Storkk, en, fr-3, de-2, eo-2
  196. Strakhov, es, en-2
  197. Tabercil, en
  198. Taivo, et, en-3, ru-3, de-1
  199. Tarawneh, en, ar, de-1
  200. Techman224, en
  201. Teles, pt, en-3, es-2 (steward)
  202. Themightyquill, en, fr-2, de-1, hu-1
  203. Thibaut120094, fr, en-2, ja-2
  204. Thuresson, sv, en-3, no-2
  205. Trijnstel, nl, en-4, de-1, fr-1 (checkuser, steward)
  206. Túrelio, de, en-3, es-1
  207. VIGNERON, fr, de-2, en-2, zh-1
  208. Waldir, pt, en-3
  209. Wdwd, de, en-2
  210. Well-Informed Optimist, ru, uk-4, en-3
  211. Whym, ja, en-2
  212. Wikitanvir, bn, en-3, as-2, bpy-1
  213. Wutsje, fy, nl, en-3, de-2, fr-1
  214. Wuzur, de, en-3
  215. wvk, de, en-4, fa-3, fr-2
  216. Yann, fr, en-4, hi-2, gu-1
  217. Yarl, pl, en-2, de-1, ru-1
  218. Yasu, ja, en-2, de-1
  219. Y.haruo, ja, en-1
  220. Ymblanter, ru, en-3, de-2, fr-2, nl-2, it-1, es-1
  221. Yuval Y, he, en-3
  222. Zhuyifei1999‎, zh, en-4
  223. Zzyzx11, en, es-1, fr-1
  224. CommonsDelinker, (bot)
  225. CommonsMaintenanceBot, (bot) see request
  226. Embedded Data Bot, (bot) see request
  227. GifTagger, (bot) see request
  228. KrinkleBot, (bot) see request

The system currently recognizes 227 administrators. If that is not the last number in the list above, there is an error in the list.

Administratorami posługującymi się językiem polskim są:

Administrator to po prostu zaufany użytkownik, który może:

  • zabezpieczać i odbezpieczać strony
  • usuwać i przywracać strony
  • usuwać grafiki i inne przesłane pliki
  • blokować i odblokowywać użytkowników
  • edytować wygląd interfejsu i innych zabezpieczonych stron

Możesz poprosić o przyznanie uprawnień administratora na Commons jeśli spełniasz poniższe kryteria:

  • Nie jesteś zupełnie nowy w projektach Wikimedia. Jesteś użytkownikiem od co najmniej 2 miesięcy oraz rozumiesz i zgadzasz się z celami projektu
  • Posiadasz stronę użytkownika na Commons i jesteś aktywnym (dodającym i modyfikującym zawartość projektu) użytkownikiem
  • Zgadzasz się przestrzegać zasad i respektować ustalenia zawarte przez użytkowników Commons
  • Użytkownicy projektu zgodzą się na przyznanie ci uprawnień administratora

Zgodnie z polityką uprawnień administratorskich na Meta, nieaktywni administratorzy mogą zostać pozbawieni praw.

Requests for adminship[edit]

Create a subpage Commons:Administrators/Requests and votes/Username with the following text:

==[[User:Username|Username]]==
{{custom edit|Template:Administrators/Requests and votes/Username|text='''Vote'''}}

Reasons why you think you should be an admin. ~~~~

===Votes===

and list it on Administrators/Requests and votes.

Shortcut
COM:VOTE
This project page in other languages:

This is the requests and votes page, a centralized place where you can keep track of ongoing user requests, and where you can comment and leave your vote. Any user is welcome to comment on these requests, and any logged in user is welcome to vote.

When requesting rights that do not need the support of the community (e.g. filemover) please go to Commons:Requests for rights!

How and where to apply for additional user rights on Commons[edit]

All applications made on the above pages are automatically transcluded onto this page.

How to comment and vote[edit]

Any logged-in user is welcome to vote and to comment on the requests below. Votes from unregistered users are not counted, but comments may still be made. If the nomination is successful, a bureaucrat will grant the relevant rights. However, the closing bureaucrat has discretion in judging community consensus, and the decision will not necessarily be based on the raw numbers. Among other things, the closing bureaucrat may take into account the strength of any arguments presented and the experience and knowledge of the commenting users. For example, the comments and votes of users who have zero or few contributions on Commons may at the bureaucrat's discretion be discounted.

It is preferable if you give reasons both for Symbol support vote.svg Support votes or Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ones as this will help the closing bureaucrat in their decision. Greater weight is given to argument, with supporting evidence if needed, than to a simple vote.

Purge the cache. Use the edit link below to edit the transcluded page.

Requests for Oversight rights[edit]

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Oversighters/Archive.

  • Please read Commons:Oversighters before voting here. Any logged in user may vote, although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

No current requests.

Requests for CheckUser rights[edit]

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Checkusers/Archive.

  • Please read Commons:Checkusers before posting or voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

No current requests.

Requests for bureaucratship[edit]

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Bureaucrats/Archive.

  • Please read Commons:Bureaucrats before posting or voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

No current requests.

Requests for adminship[edit]

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Administrators/Archive.

  • Please read Commons:Administrators before voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

Gbawden[edit]

Vote

Gbawden (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · SULinfo)

Scheduled to end: 08:40, (UTC)

Today I would like to introduce Gbawden to become an administrator for Commons. They have over 189,000+ edits in total, with 167,000+ live and 22,000+ deleted. They are a file mover, patroller, and rollbacker. They are experienced with DR, CSD, and assist in categorization work. With their familiarity of how things work here, they could help clear the admin backlogs. Thanks again! -- 1989 (talk) 08:40, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Acceptance of Nomination

I accept the nomination and thank User:1989 for noticing me and nominating me. At the outset I need to mention that my early years on Commons I didn't have the appreciation for the policies and guidelines that I do now and during that time I did upload images that I believed should be PD but weren't. I am now a lot wiser and have realised the error of my ways. Gbawden (talk) 08:50, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Votes[edit]

Comments[edit]

Elisfkc[edit]

Vote

Elisfkc (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · SULinfo)

Scheduled to end: 01:11, (UTC)

Today I would like to introduce Elisfkc to become the next Commons administrator. They have over 700,000+ edits in total, with 670,000+ live and 39,000+ deleted. They obtain the license reviewer, file mover, and rollbacker rights. They are thoroughly experienced with CSD and DR, and with their knowledge, they could help the admin backlogs. Thanks for your time and I hope you agree! 1989 (talk) 01:11, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Acceptance of Nomination I humbly expect the nomination to be an administrator. --Elisfkc (talk) 01:44, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Votes[edit]

Comments[edit]

@Лушников Владимир Александрович: Many of the uploads that are found to be license laundering cases (I'm not sure about every single one of them) I had uploaded because they were uploaded using the wrong format or something else similar from Flickr, causing them to end up in Category:Flickr images needing human review. I try my best to see if the files are license laundering, but unfortunately I cannot catch every single one. One of my biggest initiatives in the past was going through this category and many of its subcategories and fixing the files in them. Unfortunately, I took a Wikibreak a couple of months ago and the categories got full again. --Elisfkc (talk) 02:14, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
And what about this particular upload: File:Galatea lakes exploring (36087121320)-video.webm? --Лушников Владимир Александрович (talk) 12:25, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
@Лушников Владимир Александрович: They made a mistake adding the {{licensereview}} instead of {{flickrreview}}, causing it to be part of a backlog that isn't monitored by a bot. The file wasn't reviewed in nearly a year, and the recently promoted LR just got to the file. During that duration, the author could of changed the license. @Hedwig in Washington: Could you verify this? -- 1989 (talk) 12:59, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
@Herbythyme, Jeff G.: They responded to your concerns. Reconsideration? – 1989 (talk) 02:24, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Service: Deleted file:

=={{int:filedesc}}==
{{Information
|description=A spot of video with the wrong lens at Galatea lakes.
|date=2017-08-10
|source=[https://www.flickr.com/photos/davebloggs007/36087121320/ Galatea lakes exploring - Flickr]
|author=[https://www.flickr.com/photos/davebloggs007/ Thank you for visiting my page]
|permission=
|other_versions=
|other_fields=
}}

=={{int:license-header}}==
{{cc-by-2.0|Thank you for visiting my page}}
{{LicenseReview}}
[[Category:Alberta images by Artix Kreiger]]
[[Category:Nature of Alberta]][[Category:Images by davebloggs007]]

[[Category:WebM videos]]
[[Category:Uploaded with video2commons]]

It's possible that the license changed. @Zhuyifei1999: Does video2commons check the license at the time of upload? --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 17:54, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, but it is not enforced, only as a prefilled file description page that can be altered before upload. It is less trustworthy than UW's Flickr review. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 18:35, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
Thx! AFAIK the Flickr user ist LTA Wyntersteppe, aka Artix Kreiger,.... I assume that the file has been correctly uploaded and the license changed later because of anger that he was found out. Again. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 09:12, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Ijon[edit]

Vote

Ijon (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · SULinfo)

Scheduled to end: 15:13, (UTC)

I am a longtime Wikimedian, and have been an OTRS agent for a couple of years. In my OTRS work on the (severely backlogged) Hebrew queue, I sometimes run across files that have already been deleted (due to said OTRS backlog), and it would be useful if I could undelete the files as I process the OTRS permission. This is the immediate reason making me request adminship right now, but of course, I will be helping out as an admin in any other way I can. Ijon (talk) 15:13, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Votes[edit]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Barely active, no CSD experience, etc. I’d be more active here if you want the bit. There’s more to it than OTRS. -- 1989 (talk) 17:09, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:19, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Being an OTRS volunteer is not sufficient. Commons benefits from well rounded administrators, with an active interest in content related issues and solid contributions on this project. Knowing you from other contexts, you are clearly experienced and trusted, but the nomination needs a better explanation of your relevant activities within this community and how that would continue. -- (talk) 18:21, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above. Sorry. The idea isn't bad, but will never be accepted here. Commons is too complicated. Cheers! C(_) --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 20:12, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I understand the concerns about inactivity here on Commons but Ijon is a vast and experienced user with a sound knowledge of copyright policies. Knowledge of copyright precede activity and I'll be very reluctant to oppose people like Ijon who has a grasp knowledge of copyright. OTRS works are thankless and Commons benefit from activities of users like Ijon at OTRS. Many of these users works at OTRS focus primarily on request about images uploaded to Commons, that they are not workaholic on Commons Wiki does not mean they don't contribute to this project. In general, I trust Ijon and I believe they will be net positive to this project. Regards. T Cells (talk · contribs · email) 16:31, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per Hedwig in Washington. Idea is good, but ofcourse you also need to know a bit about our project and it's rules. Marcus Cyron (talk) 02:42, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I do not really see a problem with having admins that are not well rounded but excel in a few areas.--Cabeza2000 (talk) 11:19, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I'm not a priori against, and Ijon has experience with copyright releases. However a little more of dealing with Commons usual admin's work would be appreciated from a lot of users here. I invite you to participate more to Commons talks and procedures, and reapply later on. --Ruthven (msg) 10:28, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Per COM:A, "Administrators are experienced and trusted members of the Commons community." Edits on the Commons are too few for this experience and trust on Commons. Indeed, for example, This sort of upload is completely unacceptable and the classic example of just slapping PD-Old on an old looking image with no appropriate thought or evidence (e.g., uses a pma tag, despite source giving, at best, (vague) date of creation and claims author as "unknown" merely because this particular source fails to attribute an author.) This seems to demonstrate an unawareness of the difference between date of author death and date of creation, a lack of diligence (claiming "unknown" because it is unknown to them/us as opposed to researching to determine whether unknown to anyone) and, frankly, carelessness. Эlcobbola talk 12:26, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per Ruthven.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 13:04, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. -- Geagea (talk) 16:02, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above. Sealle (talk) 08:17, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I see no reason to distrust Ijon and have seen evidence of knowledge of copyright and actions that indicate he would readily learn and defer to community norms were necessary. Though I understand the calls for more commons activity before application, I see no reason to deny the application given his vast experience with the Wikimedia communities as a whole and Commons in specific. If this does fail, I do hope Ijon persists with the community and reapplies . Chico Venancio (talk) 15:07, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Comments[edit]

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I don't think the experience in e.g. DR's is sufficient at the moment. Are you aware that you can always request temporary undeletion at COM:UDR to handle a ticket? Jcb (talk) 17:20, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
    Sure. It would just help me process more tickets if I could undelete myself. I did not realize participation at CSD was considered mandatory for adminship (it does not appear to be required in the Howto page linked from the instructions). If it is indeed mandatory, I definitely don't qualify. If it is only desired as a proxy to assessing one's understanding of copyright, I think that can be established by other aspects of my overall contribution, including e.g. this talk, contributed using my work account. Ijon (talk) 18:12, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
    The problem is imho your activety level as well, you have 3,595 (Including VFC, POTY, ...) total edits here. Not active enoigh imho. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:27, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
    CSD experience is to determine you understand COM:L, COM:DW, etc. No, it’s not mandatory (but a few here and there would be nice). You could do a lot of sucessful DRs and still receive the bit, as you have the knowledge to close them. However, you haven’t been involved in the process a lot (8 DRs – very low number), so I can’t determine you’ll be active in clearing the DR backlogs if you were to receive the bit. Your main purpose is solely OTRS, and that’s an issue. -- 1989 (talk) 18:32, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
    @Ijon: If you need to reduce the backlog of he queues, feel free to ping me to temporary undelete files (here or on OTRS wiki). Generally, having one (or more) supporting admins, helps the work a lot. --Ruthven (msg) 10:25, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Ijon is experienced and knowledgeable about Wikimedia Commons and its guidelines, probably also about its general customs, but I'm not sufficiently aware of his track record in sysop or sysop-like activities here or on other wikis to have a definite opinion. Nemo 20:14, 16 January 2019 (UTC)


Requests for license reviewer rights[edit]

No current requests.

Requests for permission to run a bot[edit]

Before making a bot request, please read the new version of the Commons:Bots page. Read Commons:Bots#Information on bots and make sure you have added the required details to the bot's page. A good example can be found here.

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Bots/Archive.

Any user may comment on the merits of the request to run a bot. Please give reasons, as that makes it easier for the closing bureaucrat. Read Commons:Bots before commenting.

OsmHydrantBot (talk · contribs)[edit]

Operator: OsmHydrantBot (talk · contributions · Number of edits · recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought:

  • upload new images (and new version of images)
  • change descriptions of existing images
  • delete images (could be restricted to files created by OsmHydrant or OsmHydrantBot

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Continuous

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 100 actions per minute

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Programming language(s): PHP

OsmHydrantBot (talk) 08:28, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  • Please give more details on the scope of the request. Please note:
    • Image uploads are normally expected to be performed under the main account
    • Note that images can be deleted only by admins and CC licenses are irrevocable.
    • For these type of tasks, the edit rate should be limited to 5 actions per minute
  • --Schlurcher (talk) 10:58, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback:

  • I can use the main account for uploading, but I fear that 5-10 actions per minutes might be too less, given a usage of recently 136 users in the last 30 days, editing 3000 nodes and possibly uploading/updating images for each of these nodes. Source: http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-changesets?comment=OsmHydrant#3/31.65/-49.04
  • In the upload field, I demand users to not upload people, license plates, nor copyright-infringing material. However, sometimes people upload groups of people, cars without blurring anything and screenshots from Google Street View. How can I get rid of it besides 'Nomination for deletion'?
  • --OsmHydrantBot (talk) 16:48, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. I'm still struggling to understand the scope of this request. Currently I understand that OsmHydrant is an Open Street Map project to flag fire fighting facilities. The process includes an option to upload pictures (with a CC-BY-SA 2.0 license). This option is, however, rarely used. Thus, only a fraction of the edits will include media files that would be in scope for commons. The media files are not uploaded to Open Street Map nor OsmHydrant but to OsmHydrant Flickr Account located at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/132033145@N08/
This account currently gives around 9'000 images. So in other words, you want to import around 9'000 images from your Flickr account (supplemented by metadata from OsmHydrant). The goal would also be to keep these files (and potential others) updated. Please correct me.
It is the uploaders responsibility to ensure that the files comply to commons. Thus, you would need to ensure this before uploading. Once uploaded the only way to delete them would be to nominate them for deletion or speedy deletion. For copyright violations, please use the corresponding template. This will ensure that these issues get addressed rapidly. For this reason we also keep the edit rate small, as otherwise it is impossible to comply with this. Do you have a number of how many of the edits on OsmHydrant would result in a file update on Commons? --Schlurcher (talk) 09:00, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

SchlurcherBot (talk · contribs)[edit]

Operator: Schlurcher (talk · contributions · Number of edits · recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Remove duplicate transclusions from all pages linked under User:SchlurcherBot/Monitor

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): One time run on old deletion request summary pages, then continuous monitoring of pages given under User:SchlurcherBot/Monitor

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 30

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): N (Bot has flag already)

Programming language(s): Pywikibot

Schlurcher (talk) 21:19, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  • This request started as a work request, please see: [1]. Example edits for a one time run on the most recent deletion requests are given here: [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]
I would like to discuss the pages in scope. :@Incnis Mrsi: suggested to monitor the most recent deletion request pages. The bot is setup to monitor all pages given under User:SchlurcherBot/Monitor. Currently, this is limited to the most recent deletion request pages; but the list can be extended.
I would also like to discuss the monitoring frequency. The current suggestion is every 5 Minutes. This seems faily frequent to me. My initial guess was more once every hour. Please advise --Schlurcher (talk) 15:19, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
Krdbot currently does most (if not all) archiving of closed deletion request. I think it doesn't cost me much to removes dupes while during the archive process when touching the pages anyway, so without additional edits. I think this could already cover 90% of the cases. (I'm not opposed to having a different bot doing this.) --Krd 08:08, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
I have checked the recent deletion request pages. It seems Krdbot is currently performing an edit roughly every 2 hours on them (even on the one of the current day). To me this seems frequent enought and if Krd is willing to incorporate this into Krdbot, then the original intention of this request could be fulfilled.
Are there additional pages of interest, that KrdBot is not working on?
FYI, the Python-regex I am currently using is (r'(\{\{[Cc]ommons:)([^}]+\}\})(.*?)\1\2\n?' to r'\1\2\3' --Schlurcher (talk) 18:01, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
Done, see: Special:Diff/334814956. --Krd 13:50, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
That would be a very clever solution. @Krd: Could you please check, why your bot left the following 5 behind: [7]--Schlurcher (talk) 20:20, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
To save some edits (and edit conflicts) the bot currently only removes dupes when touching the page anyway. At the start this will miss one or another, but lateron I don't see this as relevant drawback. I can change it, but I'd say it's better the way it is. --Krd 20:58, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
I understood that your bot only performs changes once it touches the page. That was the reasons, why I brought the above edit to your attention. There have been no further edits between the edit of your bot and the edit I made. However, I see now from the timestamps of the edits, that the bot edit might have be before you updated the coding. I will check again later today to see if I can find another more recent example. In any case, I think we can close this request as implemented within KrdBot. I will leave the functionality implemented in my bot, but not perform further edits on this task. In case there is need for this later on, I am happy to re-open the request. --Schlurcher (talk) 11:49, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. I think this should be closed as approved anyway, just in case. --Krd 09:03, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

WieraleeAWB (talk · contribs)[edit]

Operator: Wieralee (talk · contributions · Number of edits · recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Everything AWB can do, Changing categories, adding descriptions, adding links, but now especially for changing licence templates on file pages according to template changes, especially at Category:PD-Art (PD-old-100-1923). I have already used AWB as a pl.wikisource administrator, but I'd like to create a bot account for mass edits.

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Some parts automatic, but mostly supervised

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Every once in a while

Maximum edit rate (eg edits per minute): 10

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Programming Language(s): AWB seems to be written in C#

Test run => look here Wieralee (talk) 14:51, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  • Please use edit summaries which reflect actual changes. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:13, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
    @EugeneZelenko: I'm not sure I understood you correctly... Have you meant just this? Wieralee (talk) 17:56, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
    Yes, but please exclude section header. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:06, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
    @EugeneZelenko: when AWB makes only my replacement, it uses section header... but when AWB makes general fixes too, it doesn't use section header. Sometimes it's just removing an empty line only... but AWB marks it as a general fix. Wieralee (talk) 15:25, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
    AWB has an option to not use section headers. Please check the menu bar for the appropirate checkbox. --Schlurcher (talk) 15:26, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
    Please also note that the general fixes for AWB are mainly customized for the english wikipedia and do in general not apply to commons. They should never be applied unsupervised. In fact, I would recommend not using them here. --Schlurcher (talk) 15:29, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
    @Schlurcher: well, I will not make general fixes during template changing then. WieraleeAWB (talk) 15:20, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
  • This could be done with the main account or the AWB account, but I don't think a bot flag should be used. --Krd 06:56, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
Agree, the task description is faily open. I do not think a bot flag should be used for these type of tasks. A dedicated AWB account without bot flag seems appropriate to me. --Schlurcher (talk) 15:26, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
@Krd, Schlurcher: I've received many comments due to mass changes without a bot flag... that's why I decided to start this procedure. There're more than 500 000 files in this category... and it's not the only one such a category... but OK, if you think it's better to make it using my main account, it's much easier for me. Thank you very much :) WieraleeAWB (talk) 15:19, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
@EugeneZelenko, Krd: I am not sure that we want extra half a milion edits in RC. Ankry (talk) 19:09, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
I don't think that RC is a factor here as long as the account is autopatrolled. More important is if the edits shall occur on watchlists. I'd currently say yes, and we won't anyway botflag an account that is used for manual edits as done here. --Krd 10:57, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
Still agreeing to Krd. The request includes Everything AWB can do, which is far to open to be perform without being noticed on watchlists. If the requester is willing to narrow the scope to specific high volume edits, I am happy to review them and the discussion would be completely different. Also notice that single high volume category moves could be outsourced to CommonsDelinker bot, see User:CommonsDelinker/commands --Schlurcher (talk) 12:11, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
@Schlurcher: CommonsDelinker is skipping really big tasks. Look, what it's doing with Category:Molluscs at Naturalis from the Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie. It hangs from September... and day by day it's skipped... and nobody care. It will be the same with "PD-expired" categories, I'm afraid.
I've based my bot's request on another successful request Commons:Bots/Requests/MultichillAWB. I didn't expect a controversial content there... Wieralee (talk) 18:02, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
@Wieralee: @Multichill was already an Admin, and so had sufficient access to approve his own AWB bot.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 18:13, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Oh, it's bigger problem... I'm not an admin on Commons, so I have AWB automatic and half-automatic editions on Commons blocked... It means that without a bot permissions I can do my task only if I'll do it manually... it means a year of a hard work... WieraleeAWB (talk) 10:44, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
    We should separate the two different rights. To be able to perform automatic edits in AWB, you need to be listed under bots in Commons:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage. As a general rule, only approved bots will be listed there. In case you will not get approved for the wikimedia bot flag, you should highlight on the AWB request page that you ask for AWB bot rights without wikimedia bot flag (I think the outcome of this wikimedia bot right discussion here is still completely open, so please give us some more time for consideration). Exceptions are possible in rare cases. If you can convince the community you will be able to perform automatic edits in AWB even without wikimedia bot flag. I speak here from personal experience, as my regular username is an approved AWB bot. --Schlurcher (talk) 12:11, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
    @Schlurcher: It would be very convenient to have my regular username be an approved AWB bot.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 18:13, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

  • I think this requests deserves a new assessment after the changes to the proposed scope. I think the bot could be approved for mass changes to templates, categories, adding descriptions and adding links. Wieralee should, however, not use this bot for general AWB tasks (that do not result in a substantial amount of changes) --Schlurcher (talk) 10:53, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

AnankeBot (talk · contribs)[edit]

Operator: Nemo bis (talk · contributions · Number of edits · recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Import some Flickr albums/photostreams which would disappear at the beginning of February 2019 and which have adopted a free license, as part of the Flickr preservation campaign where I'm writing to thousands of photographers.

Automatic or manually assisted: Mostly automatic

Edit type: Occasional runs

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): No more than 120 uploads/minute in the worst case, I expect

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Yes

Programming language(s): Python: a slightly adapted flickrripper.py (to add categories)

Nemo 15:16, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  • Are there any filtering planned? For example, Commons:Project scope, Commons:Derivative work, Commons:Freedom of panorama, etc. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:32, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
    • For now I'm doing albums manually, choosing the streams which contain almost only suitable photos, although the occasional less-than-perfect photo may slip in (e.g. a selfie in an album of hundreds photos of a place). These users have already been selected as suitable/interesting by the community across the years by importing and keeping their photos in the past. Nemo 15:41, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
      I think will be good idea to create accompanied project for this task and at least needs review category. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:26, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
      • I'm adding the {{Check categories}} where no specific category is found. I'm also going through the generic categories after the fact for any bird's eye corrections. This page and Commons talk:Flickr files can serve as project page. Nemo 15:38, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
        I didn't mean categorization. Just service category which indicate that file was not reviewed by human. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:56, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
        I can do that, but what such categories are available to use? If you mean for copyright/scope issues, I think I'll manage to go through the categories after the upload and mark most problematic cases for deletion myself. Nemo 17:55, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
        I meant maintenance category dedicated for this task. If bot will upload a lot of files it'll be better to ask other people help, so in this case such category is better solution. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:16, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
        I don't currently expect the bot to upload such a significant amount of files as to require an entirely new maintenance system. It will be comparable to or lesser than previous imports from Flickr.
        To be clear: I'm happy to create a new category if at least one actual person appears who actually wants to use them, but I'm weary of inventing new categories for purely hypothetical users. I prefer to use existing systems which integrate in existing workflows and "check categories" does, because it works very naturarly with people who sort files by using HotCat, cat-a-lot and related maintenance gadgets/scripts. I've yet to find people who go through Flickr files by using other ad hoc categories. Nemo 13:07, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
        Categorization and copyrights issue or project scope a little bit different problems. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:49, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
        Indeed, which is why I'm weary of inventing a new maintenance apparatus with no users which would replicate an existing system (tracking categories) already used in a different way. If someone builds it and uses it, I can adopt it. Until then, I'll stick to what exists, i.e. categories for categorisation work (through which most of the time scope and copyright issues are typically found) and manual high-level checks after the fact. Nemo 18:10, 6 January 2019 (UTC) P.s.: I'll note that slowing down this kind of bot requests only encourages people to perform imports with their main accounts (where it's easier to get upload_by_url and ratelimit excemption), which makes them less transparent.
        • @Nemo bis: Signing your posts on talk pages is required by Commons:Signatures policy. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 14:55, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
  • I don't think this should be done by a bot account, but I do think it should not be done by a bot account before approval and without autopatrol. --Krd 06:52, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
    • I could do the current uploads from my main account or from an account without "bot" in its username, as is customary on Wikimedia Commons, but I prefer to keep my contributions smaller. The absence of flags is easy to fix. Nemo 11:37, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

VysotskyBot (talk · contribs)[edit]

Operator: User:Vysotsky

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: 1. Large-scale mass licensing template changes (e.g. re Nationaal Archief images with wrong old licenses) 2. Several non-controversial categorizations (like adding categories with names of photographers).

Automatic or manually assisted: manually assisted

Edit type intermittently

Maximum edit rate (eg edits per minute): 50

Bot flag requested: Y

Programming language(s): python

Discussion[edit]

  • Appears reasonable to me. --Krd 13:53, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Please make test run for license changes. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:51, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
@EugeneZelenko: That's tough to do while blocked. Pinging @Steinsplitter as blocking Admin.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 15:46, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Unblocked. --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:53, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
@Steinsplitter: Thanks! Pinging @Vysotsky as Operator.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 15:57, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @Vysotsky: Please make a test run. --Krd 07:51, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
I will, but I need some time. I won't make any edits with VysotskyBot until that moment. Vysotsky (talk) 01:29, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
How much time will that be approximately? --Krd 07:53, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
Later this month? Vysotsky (talk) 08:44, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

RonBot 2 (talk · contribs)[edit]

Operator: Ronhjones (talk · contributions · Number of edits · recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Add a {{Flickrreview}} to all new images with a Flickr URL

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Daily

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): Expected 5 to 20 pages per day

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Yes

Programming language(s): Python

Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:13, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

Every day there are Flickr images uploaded, but the uploader does not tag them for Flickr Review. For example today - 14 files, 2 x cc-by-nc-nd-2.0, 1 x All rights reserved, 11 x cc-by-sa-4.0 (which FlickrBot changed to cc-by-2.0 after I tagged them). This set of results is not uncommon. I've been using some advanced search patterns with RonBot1 (writing to userspace only - User:RonBot/FlickrSource) to find these. But it would make sense to automatically tag them. The plan will only to do new files, there are very old files that need more manual review. Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:13, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

P.S. This is only for file pages with some CC license. PD is a different can of worms. Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Is this limited to a specific uploader? If not, then you probably need to explain a bit more about handing failure states. -- (talk) 12:22, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Is the bot going to do any testing to handle some failure cases? -- (talk) 12:22, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Are there cases where a Flickr url may be present in a new upload, but it might be incorrect to presume that is the photograph source, such as derived works? -- (talk) 12:22, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
I am only planning to add the {{flickrreview}} where an uploader has forgotten to add it (or does not know to add it), nothing more (although it might make sense to add "no permission" or "no source" if the source is just "Flickr" and no URL - that could be decided here). The code will be based on the searches for Flickr files in User:RonBot/1/Source1 which has been working well (e.g Special:Diff/334659077 - shows the 14 I mentioned above) and finding Flickr images with no review done or requested. I would usually then load up all the images at once and one by one activate my macro to add {{flickrreview}} (using User:Ronhjones/Adds.js). As for derivatives, you can't expect a bot to work that out - it would be just the same if someone uploads a Flickr derivative and adds the {{flickrreview}} themselves. Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:37, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
You may wish to think about drawing out a state machine that can pick up on these cases. For example a user who is unaware of tools to help with derivatives, may crop a Commons image and add a link back to the original. Detecting that interlinks exist in the wikitext is a trivial test. Similarly it is quite easy to check the suggested source for 404 errors, or check the account of the uploader to decide whether this is likely to be a case where automation is relevant. For example, it would probably be unproductive to automatically add flickrreview to uploads by someone with more than 100,000 edits. You do not have to work it all out in advance, but a narrowly specified automated task is far less likely to create downstream work. -- (talk) 12:12, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
@Krd: Enough test edits done to evaluate, bot stopped - summary list at User:RonBot/2/FlickrTrial Ronhjones  (Talk) 03:29, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
Looks good to me, but what about Fæ's comments above? --Krd 18:28, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
@Krd: I've no idea what a state machine is, I can't see how to check if the Flickr image has been cropped - even the Flickr review bot does not do that - any crop causes it to fail. If the user is experienced, then they have probably added the {{flickrreview}} anyway, if not - what's the problem, it will probably pass the review (and COM:LR says License reviewing is a necessary process for files from Flickr, and I'm not messaging the user (unless there is the simple "source = Flickr", and no URL - which needs fixing anyway.) Ronhjones  (Talk) 18:42, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Requests for comment[edit]

Centralized discussion

Template: View • Discuss  • Edit • Watch