Commons:Help desk/Archive/2009/07

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.


Help with license template

Hi, all. I uploaded a Public Domain file from the Open Clipart Library here: and I thought I followed the instructions for inserting a Public Domain from author on another site tag, but it doesn't seem to be showing up right. I don't know how to say that this file is Public Domain. Could someone help please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akohler (talk • contribs) 03:01, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

You can see what to do with File:Atlantic Puffin Illustration.svg by looking at other images in the Category:PD OpenClipart, for example: File:Bordered s 5.svg. The trick seems to be to put the {{PD-OpenClipart}} template into the Description field of the {{Information}} template, like I just did for you here. --Teratornis (talk) 03:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
I think that is the correct template because everything at Open Clipart is public domain, according to the home page of the site. --Teratornis (talk) 03:43, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
The license should definitely not go in the description field. It should go at least in the permission field but more preferably in its own section below the other information. --Yarnalgo (talk) 09:00, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Oops. --Teratornis (talk) 18:10, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Akohler (talk) 04:07, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Question regarding Creative Commons sharealike 3.0 license

Regarding the sharealike item -"If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same, similar or a compatible license"-:

  • Can I use an image under this license say, in the cover of a book or a movie, without having to release my book/movie/whatever under the same license? (does it affect the licensing of the whole book/movie/etc.? ; can I still protect the content of my book/movie/etc. by copyrights?)

TomasBat 02:57, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

You would need to release the cover (book, movie, etc.) that the work is used in under the same, similar or a compatible license, but that would not apply to the book/movie itself as that is seperate from the cover. Akohler (talk) 04:13, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Question regarding non-free software

I have purchased Gibson Ridge radar, which allows access to level two National Weather Service radar imagery. I sent an e-mail to the company in which they responded that Wiki projects could use my own screenshots from the program if some kind of acknowledgement is used. Since I was not sure how to make an acknowledgement to them, or what license to use, I have asked here. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 15:29, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

You would probably use {{Attribution}} but make sure you follow the process at COM:OTRS to confirm permission. Also, make sure they know that they are releasing permission for anyone to use it, not just Wikimedia/Wikipedia.--Yarnalgo (talk) 15:55, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
I have sent another e-mail to make this clear. When I receive a reply, I will then go through the OTRS procedures. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 18:54, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
If the images you are viewing come directly from the National Weather Service, then you could categorize them in Category:PD US NOAA. However, if Gibson Ridge is selling derivative works, then the {{PD-USGov-NOAA}} would not apply. Lots of companies resell public domain content from the U.S. Federal government, and not too surprisingly the resellers tend to be less than perfectly forthcoming about what other people can do with the underlying data. --Teratornis (talk) 20:42, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
They are repackaging NWS level two data, but they heavily modify the data with their own proprietary programs. NWS level two data is not free in the first place, though. I am still waiting for a reply from GR again. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 00:49, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Just after I wrote the above, I checked my e-mail and they have responded, reconfirming that I can use screenshots from GR, I am forwarding the e-amil to OTRS. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 00:51, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Do you mind if I crop out the menus, etc. for you? You will most likely get flak for showing the Windows OS which is definitely copyrighted and not something you'll get permission for anytime soon. --Yarnalgo (talk) 05:19, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I hadn't thought of that. If I had any kind of decent image editing program, I would. Thanks for the heads up, though. When I upload anymore images, I will be sure to only save the radar image. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 13:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Our friendly manual page about that is Commons:Screenshots. --Teratornis (talk) 08:48, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


Can I take pictures from google or another web page and move to commons? If the answer is ‘‘yes’’, how I do this? Cetacea pearl (talk) 13:47, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

You can do it using Commons:Upload (a link exists in the menu at the left side of the page). However you may do so ony if the pictures are in the public domain for some reason (due to old age, produced by the US military etc), or if they are available under an explicit free license. Sv1xv (talk) 14:02, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
The vast majority of images on the Web are not free. See the links under COM:EIC#Copyright for (lots) more information about what is free and what is not. Since most images you can find on Google Images are not free, it can be frustrating to search for free images that way. You may have better luck by searching within the freely licensed images on Flickr with the {{Flickr free}} template. For example, how about some free elephant photos:
  • Search Flickr for images with the keywords: elephant under these licenses: cc-by or cc-by-sa
You can see examples of how to upload freely licensed images from Flickr to Commons on User:Teratornis/Flickr examples. See the links under COM:EIC#Flickr for more information. If you tell us what type of images you care about, we can give more specific guidance on how to find free images of that type. The availability of freely licensed images is inconsistent across different types of images. Flickr only has a few million freely licensed images, so you cannot find everything there. See COM:EIC#Free. In general, it is better to focus on a range of possible images you might like to upload, rather than focusing on one specific person, object, or place. Sometimes there are no freely licensed images in existence for a specific subject. And of course be sure to use the search box to the upper left before you upload something - maybe the image you want is already here. --Teratornis (talk) 00:01, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Craig Sherman photo.jpg

Yes check.svg Resolved – ukexpat (talk) 14:03, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Would an expert please look at the copyright situation on this one. The uploader claims to be the copyright owner but the metadata identifies the author, presumably the photographer, as Wesley Hitt. Do we just assume that copyright has been assigned to the uploader? – ukexpat (talk) 21:46, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Now deleted as a copyvio.  – ukexpat (talk) 14:03, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Directory Hash Guessing

Say I have a filename, such as Karmic-Oil-155x155cm.jpg, and I want to download it from a script. I need to generate the URL 

but this is problematic, since I need to know the directory 2/21 wherein it is contained. Is there any way of calculating the directory path ("2/21" in this case) as a hash of the filename. —Preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 17:22, June 30, 2009 (UTC)

sed -n -e 's/.*href="\(http:\/\/*'$name'\)".*/\1/p'

on the"$name" file (after un-gzipping -- seriously) seems to work, but is not really optimal.

Thanks.—Preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 17:50, June 30, 2009 (UTC)

You don't need to guess. "2/21" is the first and the first two characters of the MD5 hash of the file name without the namespace prefix and blanks replaced by underscores, with hexadecimal digits in the MD5 hash converted to lower case, separated by a slash. Lupo 08:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Special:Filepath/Karmic-Oil-155x155cm.jpg helps without constructing the directory name. Raymond Disc. 10:08, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Uploading photo - uncertainty as to how to satisfy licence requirements

I would like to upload a photo to accompany a wikipedia article. I did this once before but it has been removed so presumably I somehow did not use the correct licensing category and despite having read the notes I am still unsure how to proceed. The facts are:

1. The photo was commissioned by me and taken by a friend in 1971 2. I paid for the film, the developing and the printing - there can be no doubt it is my property alone 3. The friend who took the photo gave me permission to use it at my discretion in any way. It has been used previously on an album insert and also appears on several websites.

From this information, I will be very grateful if you can you tell me how to avoid further problems in addding the photo to the article. I will supply any further information needed.

Thank you,

Mainmiguel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mainmiguel (talk • contribs) 09:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mainmiguel,
  • 1. You assure to be the copyright holder so first you should simply upload your photo under a free license or as public domain. But: the copyright owner is surely the photographer if there are no contracts or arrangement that transfer copyright in case this is possible (not in every country). So you should have your friends consent - see Commons:Permission#An extreme example.
  • 2.If you have problems that someone suspects that you claim wrong you should explain your issue as you did here, describe how this photo was created on the image description according to the above. But by the way: you must not leave anonymity, so dont give names if you dont want.
  • 3. If the case is still open and people simply dont belive you - that happens and in context of what is wrongly claimed on Commons every day it is understandable - you should follow Commons:Permission and forward an Email to OTRS, this mail is handled confidentially by Wikimedia and not open to the public, so you can leave anonymity here and finaly solve the problem - if realy needed. If you dont like to talk on Commons you can instantly use OTRS, maybe thats the faster way.
--Martin H. (talk) 12:42, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Category removal in replaced images

If I upload a superior svg to replace the original where neccesary, should I put the svg in all the original image's categories? If so, should I remove the original image from those categories so that there is only one version in these categories? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nevetsjc (talk • contribs) 04:43, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Please keep the categorization of the old files, just mark them with {{superseded}}. But two other possibilities
  • If the new files are a set created to supersede another set you can move the old set in a subcategory. e.g. "Category:Maps of x" can have a subcategory "Category:Maps of x, green colorsheme" or something like this
  • If the number of superseded files in "Category:y of x" grows you should separate the superseded files into a subcategory "Category:Superseded y of x"
I dont know of examples, especialy as the new(?) search function of this wiki is totaly useless at the moment, so you should say your case if you need more help. --Martin H. (talk) 11:51, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Uploading file

How can I upload a .doc file? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sushmagoyal9999 (talk • contribs) 11:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

You can not, .doc is not an accepted file type. Also simple text is hardly inside our project scope, except the text itself is notable enough like a famous (public domain - means old!) book or an important document. Otherwise this is the wrong project for text. If your text fits our project scope you should print it to a pdf file. --Martin H. (talk) 11:34, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Template with [[Category:my category]] does not work


I use my personal Information template on all my images and wanted to create my private user gallery by simply adding a category to this template. I have read that this works like

<includeonly>[[Category:Andreas Tille|{{PAGENAME}}]]</includeonly>

and I have success doing so in an external WikiMedia instance. Unfortunately this does not work in my images. You might like to review the history of all my tries on this page - but the category page just remains empty, except if I leave out the <includeonly> tag for testing purpose as it is currently the case on the intended category page.

Any help to get a galery page by using the template is welcome.

Andreas Tille (talk) 14:49, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Maybe you have not checked "show hidden categories" in Special:Preferences (->Appearance, last box)? User categories are hidden categories, also is Category:Andreas Tille and all images sorted into it.
One other thing: You should not include a license directly to your user template. Per Commons:User-specific galleries, templates and categories policy user templates with licenses in it must be "subst:ed". This policy is not enforced afaik, but I think it is recomanded to exclude license templates from usertemplates. If the template is once "subst:ed" the user template loses its value. --Martin H. (talk) 17:11, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
If I understand Commons:User-specific galleries, templates and categories policy right I should use the template like {{subst:User:Tillea/Template:AtilleI‎}}, right? I would prefer this single template because in case I would later decide for a license change I would decide this for all of my images and thus I want to be able to change it with one rush inside the template instead of changing more than 200 images. I realised that "subst:" works like just injecting the text if the template - so I will simply miss the advantage of changing the look of all my photos with a single change (just say changing my homepage and afterwards only change the template). So somehow I'm not happy about both methods and I wonder whether this policy is really defined. Andreas Tille (talk) 07:09, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Regarding a license change: Exactly for that reason it is not allowed to use license templates in user templates. Of course you can add licenses, but you can not change them. And yes, the subst:ing makes the user template useless. --Martin H. (talk) 11:29, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Ups, regarding your problem: The text is correct, maybe the only thing you had to do is wait - it takes some time till the server cache is refreshed (or something like this) and images are sorted to the categories via templates. --Martin H. (talk) 17:22, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Ah, that's a reasonable explanation. But good that I asked - now I learned something new. ;-) Thanks for your help Andreas Tille (talk) 06:23, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Prezesi Stowarzyszenia 2008.jpg

Pojawila sie informacja, ze jak rozumiem, nie zalaczylem opisu lub/i licencji. Nie moge znalezc opcji, gdzie moglbym te blad uzupelnic i podac odpoiwednie dane. Bede wdzieczny za pomoc. --Drużnik (talk) 20:31, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Google translation to English:
  • There was a claim that, as I understand, not attached description and / or license. I can not find the option where they could give complete and error odpoiwednie data. I should be grateful for your help.
The file is: File:Prezesi Stowarzyszenia 2008.jpg. It has no license template. Please read Commons:Licensing (Commons:Licencja) and select a license for this image. You evidently listed the source of the image as:
The About page says nothing about the site material being free content. The site displays a copyright notice at the bottom of each page. This probably means the entire site is under copyight and is not freely licensed. If so, then you will need to follow the procedure in COM:OTRS (Commons:OTRS/pl) to request and properly document permission from the image's copyright owner to release the image freely. I apologize for answering in English; if you cannot read this or make sense of a Google translation of this answer, perhaps a Polish speaker can translate for you. --Teratornis (talk) 22:16, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Posting a free image from an author who wishes to remain anonymous

I've uploaded a free image that I took myself, but I think a better photo to illustrate an object is one from a third party who has granted free, un-restricted use of the image on another site. BUT to upload a third party's pic here, don't I need authorization from that person, and don't I need to specify that here? The catch is if the person wishes to remain anonymous (that is, their identity is not published, as that would indicate ownership of a rare collectable). Sorry if this is covered in FAQs or policies here, but I couldn't find such a clause. To date, I've only updated photos that I own and grant a CC-BY-SA 3.0 license. Thanks.... -- Davidbspalding (talk) 05:48, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

If the image is published on the other site (flickr?) under a free license, you may copy it here and indicate its source using a web link. Then you may add the template which corresponds to the license on the other site. Sv1xv (talk) 06:15, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
If the image actually is on Flickr, see User:Teratornis/Flickr examples for worked-out examples of an upload procedure I have used. Also see Commons:Flickr images for more methods. You can search for freely-licensed images on Flickr with the {{Flickr free}} template, then use the {{Flinfo}} template to get a pre-filled {{Information}} template (plus suggested categories, etc.) to paste into the Simple upload form for Flickr images. If you had told us the object you have in mind, we could show you how to search for photos of it, or of similar objects. (If you like to upload photos of that object, you may also like to upload photos of similar objects. That's how many Commons users seem to operate - uploading photos of their favorite subjects.) --Teratornis (talk) 18:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

How to delete an image

how to delete an image i uploaded previously --Nyinje1 (talk) 11:20, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

See COM:FAQ#What should I do if a page or file needs deleting? --Teratornis (talk) 18:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Files of the MIME type "application/x-php" are not allowed to be uploaded.

When I upload a file, I get the following error:

Files of the MIME type "application/x-php" are not allowed to be uploaded.

Why? Autophile (talk) 17:36, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I found two instances of this question (by using Google custom search on our Help desk archives):
In neither instance did the help desk volunteers seem to solve the problem - the original posters did not reply that the suggestions helped. I wonder if anyone can solve it now? And by the way, are you using a Mac? --Teratornis (talk) 18:46, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Here is a broader search on all of Commons which finds more discussion of this problem. Let us know if that helps. --Teratornis (talk) 18:50, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
This is a know MediaWiki bug, bugzilla:16583. The PHP file type check in MediaWiki is overzealous, and will give false positives for about one in every 4000 files. Making almost any change to the file — for example, opening it in an image editor and resaving with slightly different compression settings — should be enough to avoid the bug and allow you to upload the file. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 11:19, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Question without header


I'm new here. Pardon me if this is not the appropriate section, but maybe you can help me. I want to upload a person's biography complete with pictures and videos. How can I do that? I mean where section should I go to?

Please help me. Thank you very much.

Sincerely, Cesar Dalagan—Preceding unsigned comment added by Cebradal (talk • contribs) 20:26, July 5, 2009 (UTC)

Assuming it is the biography in English of a notable person, it must be created on Wikipedia ( The pictures and videos, if they are in the public domain or available under a free license, can be uploaded here, on Commons. Media files stored on Commons can be loaded by any article on Wikipedia. Sv1xv (talk) 10:28, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Picture thumbnail not shown. Trying to re-render the thumbnail results in error message.

Yes check.svg Resolved

I have uploaded the photo but the thumbnail is missing from the picture web page. I followed the FAQ and visited the URL but it just gives me the following error:

Error generating thumbnail

Error creating thumbnail: convert: Insufficient memory (case 4) `/mnt/upload5/wikipedia/commons/a/a3/Florence_Cathedral_Facade.jpg'.

convert: missing an image filename `/mnt/upload5/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a3/Florence_Cathedral_Facade.jpg/450px-Florence_Cathedral_Facade.jpg'.

How can I solve the problem? Or in alternative, can someone else generate the thumbnail? Cosmos1972 (talk) 21:31, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Check out {{TooLarge}} which I have added to the page. In short, it is a very big picture and will probably not work well. --Yarnalgo (talk) 03:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I understand, thanks for the explanation. In any case, I noticed many of the very big pictures in have a thumbnail. Which solution do you suggest? Cosmos1972 (talk) 15:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I fixed the thumbnail by re-saving it in an image editor. As I said, large images are just sometimes hard to work with and not exactly MediaWiki's favorite. --Yarnalgo (talk) 17:49, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Some confusion over an images licence and name

What is the view on the licence of this file; File:Military macaw head closeup at Cougar Mountain Zoological Park.jpg? The same image is on flickr here. I think that on flickr the licence is confusing because it has a creative commons licence listed with official flickr icons, but the caption says; "I release all rights to this image and grant it into the public domain. Attribution is not required". How exactly should the caption should be interpreted. The uploader is a flick administrator, and I am not sure if he is also the flickr photographer. Should there be a OTIS tag on the commons image, because the licence on flickr not obviously the licence on commons. Incidentally, the administrator deleted the image I uploaded which had the least restrictive flickr licence (the flickr creative commons licence). My image also had a better name because the current file included "Military macaw" and not the correctly capitalised form with is "Military Macaw. I do not know what reasons the administrator deleted my image and what was the due process he used. My image was at File:Ara militaris -Cougar Mountain Zoological Park-8b.jpg. Can anyone check and tell me anything about why and how this image was deleted? Snowmanradio (talk) 12:50, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

(You mean a Commons administrator). I deleted the file because it was redundant (an exact duplicate of an existing file that I had already uploaded earlier), which is one of the criteria for speedy deletion. I understand the confusion around the caption, but in fact when a file is offered under two licenses simultaneously, and one of them is strictly less restrictive, it may be uploaded under the least restrictive license, not the most restrictive. I marked the image as CC-BY on Flickr only because they do not yet offer a CC0 or public domain option. It's true that the Flickr license is not identical to the license I placed on the image here - it would have been closer to put {{PD-self}} on the images here - but if I'm seriously challenged on the difference between PD-self and CC0, I'll just update the license tags to match. As I told you, I would be happy to correct the name of the image if there is an error. Perhaps in the future I can avoid this trouble by uploading images to Commons slightly sooner, rather than slightly later. Dcoetzee (talk) 17:26, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I had explained that your file had the bad name in the bad name template, so I am surprised that you deleted the good name file instead. I must say that I find it most confusing that a flickr image has a two licences - one indicated by flickr icons and an alternative written in short text as part of the caption. You should know that automated commons upload software can only see the flickr licences and not an alternative licence given in the caption. I note that you did not give my any prior notice that the good name file was about to be deleted by you. Snowmanradio (talk) 19:13, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I could have deleted either one - I only chose to delete the one you uploaded because it was uploaded later and had the wrong license, and because I prefer to upload my own photos under my own account. Please just tell me what name you prefer and I'll rename the file for you. I didn't like your name because it had a weird unnecessary alphanumeric suffix. I didn't mean to alarm you with the deletion. I'm currently automatically updating all my images on Flickr to specifically refer to the same CC0 waiver I used on Commons. The present license confusion is due to Flickr's limitations and is unavoidable - I'm not saying you did anything wrong. Dcoetzee (talk) 19:17, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Actually, at the moment I see nothing to see that you are the flickr photographer; although, it is probably clear that you are. If you were not available, it is quite possible that your images would be deleted sometime in the future, because there is no OTIS banner and the flickr licences are somewhat different to the commons licences. You can avoid any problems with files by using the correct name "Military Macaw" (not "Military macaw") or using the internationally known binomial name, giving your photographs a clear licence on external websites, and giving the commons images licence consistent licence with the external website or an OTIS template. You can check the hyphenation and capitalisation of all your files yourself by checking the names on en wiki. I think that it would be best that you sorted out any inconsistencies as bots might get more sophisticated in detecting these sorts of inconsistencies, and one day when you are not watching or not available your images might be deleted, because the bot saw the official flikr licence and not the caption. Also, I doubt if your images should be shown on any of the wikis until consistencies of licences are sorted out and I think that there would be a request to remove you image because of the licence confusion when it is being shown on a wiki article that is going through the process of becoming an Good Article or a Featured Article. As it stands I think that my file (the one you deleted) had no problems that anyone could dispute and would be suitable to use on any language wiki. Did you put a speedy deletion tag on the image I uploaded and how long was it there? Actually, I think your photographs are very good, and I would like to see them last on commons. Snowmanradio (talk) 19:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I understand your concern - I have already updated the image captions on Flickr to refer to the CC0 waiver, exactly the same license tag I used on Commons, so that there won't be any inconsistency with regard to that. There will never be a bot that deletes images automatically without manual review - especially if the only concern is that the image might be CC-BY rather than CC0 - so this is not a concern. Even if I were not the same person as my Flickr user, the existing upload would be legit (only the source field would need to be updated). I don't think there's any realistic concern of a license dispute regarding my image, only the risk of confusing people who overlook the image caption on Flickr, which is quite clear. However, to help avoid any confusion, I'll check at Commons talk:Flickr images about what they think I ought to do. Also, I will keep your advice in mind when naming/renaming my images. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:18, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I think that your former licensing arrangements are unnecessarily complex, and I think that the risk of confusing people is real. I think that there was a real chance that the inconsistency between CCO waiver (on commons) and CC (on flikr icons) could have lead to deletion from commons, and this could have happened in the future when you were not watching. Alternatively, you would have left others to tidy up after you. Where does it say that if there are two licences, then use the least restrictive? You may be right, but I am sure many people would be inclined to use the most restrictive licence to make sure that the licence is not misused to respect the author. How do we know that you did not make a mistake with the caption (perhaps by bulk editing) and actually want the flickr CC licence that you had selected on upload? Snowmanradio (talk) 20:43, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Technically, a multilicensed image is licensed for use under multiple distinct sets of terms, and the reuser may choose which they would prefer to use; for example this is how GFDL/CC-BY-SA multilicensing works. However, in this case the CC-BY license is entirely subsumed by the strictly less restrictive CC0 waiver, so that there is never any reason to prefer the CC-BY license. License inconsistency never leads to deletion, except possibly in the case where at least one license is unacceptable for Commons, which is not the case here. My licensing arrangement is only complex due to the frustrating refusal of Flickr to provide this licensing option or any reasonable equivalent - I absolutely refuse to demand attribution for my images, as it's completely counter to my principles. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:56, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I see that the flick captions have changed and are now linked to the CCO document. I can now update the commons licences. To respect your wishes for the licences on your work, I have added to the commons image details and now both licences are now on commons as on flickr. This probably does not cause any problems for flickr licence checking bots that operate on commons. Snowmanradio (talk) 22:03, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Okay, sorry for all the trouble - I appreciate the compliment earlier and I'm really glad you found the images helpful! Dcoetzee (talk) 06:55, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
A thoughtful uninvolved administrator has recently checked all the relevant licences and modified the flickrreview templates appropriately to show that the CCO licence applies, as indicated after your re-editing of your captions on flickr. I thought about changing the flickrreview template myself, but I am not authorised to modify the template. As far as I am aware, everyone is now happy with the consistent licensing. I have used two of your parrot photographs on en wiki; the Tres Marias Amazon (on the Yellow-headed Amazon article) and the macaw. Thank you for showing your zoo photographs on flickr. Snowmanradio (talk) 09:34, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

sockpuppet report


i need help

my question in short form:

how do you report/deal with suspected sockpuppeting on wmc?"

this user:

turned up today

their total contributions as of now are:

1. redirect userpage to talkpage

2. 3 pointy csd requests, with cut & paste duplicated rationale, not supported by any detailed explanations, the user added no comments for discussion. In my opinion, the csds amount to a backdoor effort at censorship; 2 of the images are (non-pornographic) anatomy shots of males, the third is a picture of a male lower torso, clad in underwear, also not sexually explicit.

separate from the question of deletion yes/no, the user clearly demonstrates previous experience with COMMONS; you don't start out as a noob on here by redirecting your userpage & inserting csd tags.

i'm not clear on what the procedure is for reporting/dealing with sockpuppets @ wmc; the "help" pages were pretty much useless, as most of the links took me to wikipedia....

Lx 121 (talk) 18:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

You can ask administrators for help on COM:AN/UP if an user makes disruptive edits or you can request checkuser at COM:CU if the user comes back with a sockpuppet account. --Martin H. (talk) 19:55, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


How do you delete all the Image files on your profile?

Supportstorm—Preceding unsigned comment added by Supportstorm (talk • contribs) 15:21, July 6, 2009 (UTC)

Can you explain what you are aiming to do in a bit more detail? Snowmanradio (talk) 22:29, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
See COM:FAQ#What should I do if a page or file needs deleting? for information on deleting files. Also you can use four tildes (~~~~) to automatically sign a page. --Yarnalgo (talk) 22:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Process for Changing Source of Images

I have uploaded four images for which I incorrectly listed myself as the author. I would appreciate help on correcting this situation. I have two different groupings of photos; Masur has indicated that {{PD-heirs}} template may help and I have changed licensing on one accordingly: File:1930UshuaiaCrop.jpg - however how do I change the source? This photo was taken on my mother's camera, and the photo shows my mother, Dorothy Marita Forrant, reclined in the foreground. Do I list her as source? How do I qualify to remove the Delete in 7 days tag on this photo?

The other photos are different in that they were almost surely NOT taken by my mother or on her camera:

Yet they were all taken during the period 22-25 January 1930. Any way I can claim that these should now be in the public domain? I don't want to use PD-heirs here, so what would you suggest?--WikiBlackledge (talk) 14:55, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Assuming you're in the United States, and that these works were never published, you're unfortunately out of luck. Unless you can show that the author died before 1939 (unlikely), or track down the heirs to release them, these pictures are in copyright (see {{PD-US-unpublished}}). This is another case of the unfortunate problem of orphaned works. I've removed the no source tag and updated the source field on the one image that is okay. If the works were published before 1978, you may be able to use either {{PD-US-no notice}} or {{PD-US-not renewed}}. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:41, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Contacting someone

I would like to ask a contributor to get in touch with me about some items whose photographs he has posted. How should I do this please?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Pmmunro (talk • contribs) 09:11, July 8, 2009 (UTC)

You should leave a message on his user talk page. To do this, visit the image description page for one of the photographs in question, scroll down to the file history, and click the blue "Talk" link in the "User" column (if there's more than one, you probably want the one in the last row). You can then edit this page and leave a message. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:08, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Logo license.

I would appreciate some help with copyright licenses. I am currently creating an article on the Australian company T2, and would like to add a logo. Its logo is the letters "T2" on an orange background, and can be viewed here.
I am not completely certain about its availability, however I believe it to be available for upload after reading the Simple Design paragraph in the Commons Licensing article.
Any assistance would be welcome.—Preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 00:09, July 9, 2009 (UTC)

You are correct, that logo is ineligible for copyright and you should use the license tag {{PD-textlogo}} when you upload it.

--Yarnalgo (talk) 07:47, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Aegosoma scabricorne

I have come accross what appears to be the above insect attached to my shirt having completed some gardening here at my home in Ste Catherine, nr Rouillac in the Charante France. My question is that you do not show the underside of the insect which in my case is a most decorative pale blue/grey with black spots of differing sizes (6) in number in pairs just inside the legs (6) the antenae are about 1 1/2 inches long and have the same colouring,pale grey with again 10 small black spots.I would be most interested to learn more about this colourful creature. Regards Rony Bexter.—Preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 03:10, July 8, 2009 (UTC)

You could ask on en:Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. If you photographed the insect, you could upload an image and add it to our Aegosoma scabricorne gallery page. To find articles in the various language Wikipedias about this insect, check the usage for one of the photos. For example, de:Körnerbock and fr:Aegosomatini. I'm curious to know how you determined the scientific name of this insect, and yet you request more information about it. Usually the scientific name is the key to retrieving whatever has been published about it. --Teratornis (talk) 04:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Copyright Expired


I'm trying to upload this image, on which the copyright has expired, but it isn't one of the options on the licensing drop-down list when you upload it. What should I select? Thanks --Daviessimo (talk) 13:35, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

It's not one of the options, because it's not very descriptive. We need to know who was the author and where and when was it published. For it to be public domain in the US, it needs to have been published before 1923; if it's a work of the UK, it also needs to have an author who died more than 70 years ago, or be a truly anonymous work more than 70 years old. claiming that the copyright expired is not sufficient.--Prosfilaes (talk) 13:58, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
I think you can trust the content on the site. The website in question is backed by the National Trust and English Heritage who are the two largest historical presevation societies in England, and National Museums Liverpool and Liverpool City Council. The website (Mersey Gateway) simply acts as a host for the E Chambre Hardman Trust archives which draws together resources from all of these groups and beyond to provide a pictorial history of the city. The picture in question was taken sometime between 1907 (the date of completion) and 1914 (the Cunard Building is not visible and work began on this in 1914). I'll have to be honest but the licensing options seem to be US-centric. What does a user from Germany or Australia do? --Daviessimo (talk) 14:38, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Select "Reproduction of a painting that is in the public domain because of age" ({{PD-Art}}). The description is somewhat misleading, that also applies to other two-dimensional artworks such as this image. Lupo 16:07, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks :) --Daviessimo (talk) 16:47, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
We can't trust the copyright tags on that site, for two reasons. First place, there's a lot of major organizations that are not concerned at all with proper copyright of the images in their collection, as long as they won't get sued over it. The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum is one major example, marking a bunch of photos with copyright USHMM no matter what their legal status is in the US or in the EU, even for a huge set almost certainly under copyright to German authors and not the USHMM. Secondly, even if they do care to get the copyright right, there's nothing to say that they concerned themselves with the US copyright on the work, which frequently exists where an EU copyright doesn't, due to the lack of the US rule of the shorter term and non-life of the author based copyright durations in practice. The licensing options have to be US-centric, as the servers and Wikimedia are in the US, so that's where any copyright infringement suits are most likely to be served and accepted as falling under the jurisdiction of the court.--Prosfilaes (talk) 22:58, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Old Photo

Good afternoon! I am new in this, I have seen two photos wich are 80 years old, so her copyright is free in Argentine. How can I upload them? Thank you very much!--MelFlag of Asturias.svg Parlez 18:26, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

The photos must either be published before 1923 or the author must have died over 70 years ago. If this is the case, either add {{PD-Old}} if the author died over 70 years ago or check COM:CT#Argentina for the correct license tag and then also add {{PD-1923}}. --Yarnalgo (talk) 23:08, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

templated calls for help

Helpers please see Commons:Village_pump#templated_calls_for_help --Tony Wills (talk) 10:26, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

SVG files

I'm trying to upload two svg files (File:Beef_cuts_Portugal.svg and File:Beef_cuts_Brazil.svg) but figures/captions are not being displayed. Will someone help me with this please?MarioM (talk) 16:13, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I see the problem but I dont know much about inkscape or svg, but maybe Help:SVG can help you. It says:
Text in Inkscape by default uses a Flowed Text box which can result in problems (it will likely not render at all or render as a large black rectangle). To fix this, simply use the Convert To Text command in the Inkscape Text menu.
Maybe thats it already. --Martin H. (talk) 16:36, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Martin. I tried to do the same with File:Beef_cuts_Brazil.svg with no success... I've clicked on each box and clicked on Convert to Text. What am I doing wrong?MarioM (talk) 18:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I fixed the rest of it by digging around in the code. For some reason you had just missed a few of the flowed boxes. --Yarnalgo (talk) 18:18, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.MarioM (talk) 18:23, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Bulk downloading

Hi ! I work in the image retrieval (CBIR) community, which is always in need of large image databases to validate scientific experiments. Wikicommons images have several advantages --- for example, many images have fairly liberal distribution rights, which allow researchers to share data, and the images are rich in metadata and contextual annotations, which is important for some techniques.

I've used a small subset of the images before (see, for example,, which uses the 10k images of the Yorck Collection), but now I'm interested in composing a more ambitious database, using all images in the collection, or perhaps, all images with Public Domain, GFDL or Creative Commons licenses, etc. The idea is to have a "snapshot" of the collection on which the image retrieval community could work.

Do you have any advice on how could I harvest those ? Can I download the commons .xml dump, pre-process it to select the images with desired rights and then use Wikix ? EduardoValle (talk) 18:23, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

This sounds like a great idea. I'm aware of the CBIR community's need for a large image database. First of all: you can download all the image description pages (including descriptions and categories, but not including the image files themselves or EXIF metadata), from the Wikimedia Download site, see Commons dumps and the current most recent dump. Unfortunately, WMF no longer distributes the complete image database due to its size. However, I think you could probably work something out with the developers where they'll make you a copy of all the images on hard disks for a fee and then mail them. Let me know if you want to pursue this and I'll talk to some people. Keep in mind that many of these images are quite high-resolution, 10 megapixels or more, which may (or may not) be overkill for CBIR applications. There's no need to worry about filtering by license, as all images on Commons are (or should be) free media suitable for commercial and derivative use, per Commons:Licensing. Dcoetzee (talk) 20:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
It could help to have an idea on how big the collection is (in terms of Gigabytes) --- then we could study if it makes more sense to transfer it by wire or by physical media (they say never to underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes ;). This information on licensing greatly simplify the matters. As for the size of the images, I thought of keeping an "intact, untouched" version of everything (for archival purposes) and then a (batch) pre-processed version more suitable for experimenting and sharing. EduardoValle (talk) 23:36, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
...although you may want to filter out files in subcategories of Category:Unknown and some other subcategories of Category:Candidates for deletion (but not necessarily all; most of the files in Category:PD tag needs updating are probably fine, for example). —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 22:29, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
...and maybe files using the {{Copyright by Wikimedia}} and redirected templates. --Martin H. (talk) 22:56, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm taking note of all that EduardoValle (talk) 23:36, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Oddly enough, I have no idea how large the complete collection is. File size is highly variable, so I can't really even make a decent estimate. I'd expect it to be measured in terabytes, I'll say that much. I'm uploading a subcollection right now that's about 500GB all by itself. Deutsche Fotothek has contributed 350,000 images, each about 200KB, which is about 70 GB - and that's like 7.5% of our files. (There are probably also a few other categories you'd want to filter out, but no need to get into that yet.) I can contact the devs for a better estimate. I agree that keeping an archival and a "processed" collection for CBIR corpus purposes makes a lot of sense. I'll try to obtain this info from the devs... Dcoetzee (talk) 00:45, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
According to Commons:MIME type statistics, the current total size of all files on Commons (latest revisions only) is about 3.5 TiB. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 01:42, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
That sounds about right. The devs say they've done this sort of thing before by remote transfer and expect it to take "days to a couple weeks depending on your available connection speed," which is probably reasonable for you. If you get me your e-mail I can loop you in (if you don't want to disclose it publically you can e-mail me on my user page). Dcoetzee (talk) 03:32, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I dare to hope that, without the sound and video files, the collection will be somewhat smaller. I've put my e-mail in your talk page. Than you for your help. EduardoValle (talk) 04:45, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
According to the same page, 90.5% of the total byte size consists of JPEG images. PNG images make up a further 4.4%, SVG images 1.0% and GIF images 0.3%. Audio files make up only 1.6% and video files only 0.7% of the total byte size of Commons. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 05:04, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Indeed! So much for trying to put the blame on the videos. ;-) EduardoValle (talk) 03:52, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

(undent) You might also find something useful in the links under w:WP:EIW#Research. Most of the research probably focuses on the text portion of Wikipedia, but maybe you'll learn about others who are researching with the images. --Teratornis (talk) 04:08, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. That's a lot of research ! I've bookmarked the page so I can browse it more carefully next week. EduardoValle (talk) 04:45, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

San Miguel

Could anyone have a look at File:San Miguel.jpg? It originally showed a bottle of beer of the San Miguel brewery, but was recently replaced with another picture. I don't know how to undo this last upload, but perhaps someone else does?

The original picture was used on the page of the San Miguel Brewery on the Dutch wikipedia, as well as on the user talk page of the original uploader.

With regards, Den Hieperboree (talk) 17:59, 11 July 2009 (UTC).

Scroll down to the History section on the image page. The first revision of the image appears at the bottom. There is a "revert" link to the left of the image. I've never actually tried clicking on a revert link before, but I hope it should revert the image to that revision. --Teratornis (talk) 18:07, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
OK, I found the instructions: Commons:Vandalism. --Teratornis (talk) 18:10, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your support, Teratornis. I've restored the original image. With regards, Den Hieperboree (talk) 18:37, 11 July 2009 (UTC).

Bilder aus U.S. Patentschrift von 1881

Sind Zeichnungen aus einer U.S. Patentschrift von 1881 erlaubt hochzuladen? Am liebsten nach Commons. Die Zeichnungen selbst sind ja alt genug, schränkt aber evtl. die Einbindung in eine Patentschrift ein? Siehe auch hier. -- Хрюша ?? 05:47, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Wenn die Zeichnung selber von 1881 ist, ist sie alt genug wahrscheinlich sogar für {{PD-old}} (70 Jahre p.m.a.), in den USA zumindest für {{PD-US}}. Zudem haben wir für Patente {{patent}} - speziell für US-Patente {{PD-US-patent}}. Wenn also auf die fragliche Zeichnung auf dem Patent kein Urheberrecht beanschlagt wird, dessen Gültigkeit wegen des Alters schwer denkbar ist, kannst du die Zeichnung mit PD-US-Patent hochladen. --Martin H. (talk) 14:15, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Danke, habe die mal mit {{PD-US-patent}} hochgeladen. --Хрюша ?? 20:48, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Form Needed for Permission

What form do I need to send to a photographer who is giving me permission to use a photo? I am still new to Wikipedia and I know I saw a link somewhere for a form? He has sent me an email giving me permission to do whatever I want with the photo.DianeRR (talk) 03:56, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

See Commons:OTRS and Commons:Email templates, the second page contains a standard form letter. Sv1xv (talk) 05:40, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Freeware game?

I'd like to upload an image of Starsiege: Tribes. The game is currently available as freeware, however, just recently GarageGames acquired the IP and sourcecode. Since it's still available as freeware, can I upload it to wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) 04:02, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

See Commons:Screenshots. According to Starsiege: Tribes, the program is Freeware, which is not Free software. If true, that means Commons cannot accept screen shots of this program, unless you get permission from the copyright holder and follow the procedure in COM:OTRS. --Teratornis (talk) 07:16, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

How to archive talk pages on Commons?

Is it possible to set up auto archiving of talk pages here, as it is for User talk pages on English Wikipedia? Can someone suggest a handy navbox of commonly referred to pages, to add to my User page? Thank you! Newportm (talk) 05:59, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

See User:MiszaBot. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:56, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Note: apparently to invoke MiszaBot for "User talk:Example," on Commons, do not call MiszaBot III as you would for your Wikipedia User talk page. Also, HBC Archive Indexerbot does not appear to be available for Commons User talk archives. Newportm (talk) 17:51, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
To answer the second question: you could put a link to COM:EIC on your user page. We are trying to make that page the most comprehensive index to the internal workings of Commons. The only template I am aware of on Commons that summarizes the online help is {{Welcome}}, and you have a copy on your user talk page already. Category:Message templates doesn't seem to list any others. There might be something that I'm not aware of. If you're motivated, you could scroll through Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Navbox, but the vast majority of those templates seem to be about media content rather than the internal manuals. You could always make a template containing whatever links you refer to often. Or just list your favorite links on your user page. --Teratornis (talk) 17:58, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks very much! Newportm (talk) 17:51, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

My first day (night) here

Hallo my friends
I´m first time here an testing my possibilities. Unfortunately one picture has a bad name. Reading somewhat above, I´ve uploaded it again with the correct name. In the old file I placed the "badname" - tag:
The correct file is:Églantine_01.gif

Apart from them, I want know whether all I did is ok? Other experiments are:évolutions_de_Paris01.jpgévolutions_de_Paris83.jpg

I want like going on in a similar way, means uploading scans from old newspapers or books, scans from internet and in future own scans from old books.
thanks for answers and help
--Onkel Karlchen (talk) 23:37, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

  • You are doing fine, but the {{badname}} template needs the correct version of the file as a parameter eg {{badname|File:Fabre d'Églantine 01.gif}} so that whoever deletes the original can easily check the new version. For the source of that image you can put [[:File:Eglantine.gif]] which will show as a link to the original images description page on WikimediaCommons.
  • All the images you uploaded need categories added so that people can find them, one easy way is to search for other similar images on commons and copy the categories, in the case of your first image just copy the categories from the uncropped image page File:Eglantine.gif, eg edit your image page and add the text [[Category:Fabre d'Églantine]] to the bottom of the page. Have a read through Commons:Categories, even if you don't remember everything, it will help :-).
  • The items that you have selected to upload are relatively safe bets as far as copyright status is concerned, because they are so old. BUT still be careful, just because the original work is out of copyright, a reproduction that you find on the internet or even a book may not be out of copyright. In the US a court case (insert link here :-) ruled that exact copies or reproductions of a work do not create a new copyright, but this isn't necessarily the case elsewhere in the world. If you can get hold of the original documents or paintings etc and scan them yourself then you are pretty safe :-). Citing a source as 'from the internet' is not really sufficient, and is a good way to get stuff deleted quickly :-). You are meant to cite the place you actually downloaded it from. It would be really good if you could track down where the original digitised version came from (sometimes sites will link back to their source), a bit of detective work might be involved. You might also find better versions of the same image, so it is worth a bit of detective work. Tineye may help you there.
  • Finally, licensing them as just {{PD-self}} is not correct, that is only appropriate for works that you have created entirely from scratch (eg photographing a butterfly) and not for where you have scanned or photographed an older work, or downloaded it from the internet etc. {{PD-old}} or {{PD-art}} may be appropriate for instance. Anyway read Commons:Licensing, again you probably won't remember it all, but it will give you an idea of what it's all about :-). Ask at the help desk or maybe Commons_talk:Licensing about specific instances, and don't be surprised if things get rapidly deleted if there is not correct copyright info (this is to protect Commons from legal action).
  • Don't be put off by all that :-). You are off to a good start, good luck :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 01:18, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Thank you very much, a great help! The "badname" I´ve correkted. Its clear. And I have just found one Categori. The remaining thinks would be done next days. Thank you! --Onkel Karlchen (talk) 01:57, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

LES HONNÊTES BÉNÉVOLES en les décourageant d'oeuvrer à l'avenir à l'édition
numérique de nouvelles oeuvres du domaine public."
    • I understand: wiki-bandits/cadgers cause a great prejudice to "owner" of public domain things. So the "non-profit-professor". In short: I want to delete two pictures (better would be to delete such "non-profit organisations"!)--Onkel Karlchen (talk) 10:13, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes it is difficult, organisations that preserve (and restore) old documents feel they have rights over the distribution of copies. In this case they are making them available for free use for individuals, but not commercial use. Under US law they may not be able to impose that restriction, under Canadian law I do not know. If you did want to delete them, you would click on the "Nominate for deletion" link on the left panel of the image page. You would have to give a reason ("questionable license" perhaps), but others will make the decision as to whether they need to go. --Tony Wills (talk) 11:09, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Infamy for some [1] --Tony Wills (talk) 11:23, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
  • For heaven's sake! I can´t believe it. Their arduous work must be put in every blog and wiki round the world. Is´n it a defamation against thousands other volunteers calling them Wiki-prédateurs! (wiki-Bandits/cadger). This professor and others really deem "us". Yann Forget et Consorts is a wikipedean: . As a specialist in French Revolution, I think French Revolution is still going on... But many books are buyable and not expensive. For excample I´ve buyed five books about "French Revolution", autor is Jules Michelet. The books are from cirka 1920 and there are many pictures. Price was about 25 euro. And some weeks ago I´ve found "Revolutions des Paris" from 1791 for 35 Euro. (A collection of some newspapers in a big book). The only problem was (for me): I´m in Berlin and the seller in France. "We" can call "normal" owners of such books, to make some pictures. (If "" is too difficult, they can send "us" pictures and we put them in the wiki). In short, "we" are not dependent on such people. Thank you very much for help and efforts. Now my "day two" is going on and I´ve learned many new things. But actually I want write my articles.--Onkel Karlchen (talk) 22:34, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
  • I`ve mailed the "donators" of this "volunteers". I think in some days, the site (with email-adresses) will disappear: (My mail: dear friend of, do you kwow, that this people fight against thousand and thousands peaceful volunteers round the world... a list of some wikis... take a look at the defamation... and so on)--Onkel Karlchen (talk) 22:46, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Haskell USP241978 1881 01 09.jpg

Was ist mit diesem Bild los? Es wird trotz purgen und Null-Edit nicht richtig dargestellt, weder im thumb noch in der Vorschau, erst in der Vollbilddarstellung erscheint es richtig. Habe es gestern hochgeladen, als alles etwas hakte. Andere, gleichzeitig hochgeladene Bilder werden in der Vorschau korrekt dargestellt, thumbs ebenfalls nicht. Serverproblem? -- Хрюша ?? 09:09, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Looks ok now --Tony Wills (talk) 10:25, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Scheint im Zusammenhang mit generellen Hochlade- und Darstellungsproblemen bei Commons in diesen Tagen gewesen zu sein. -- Хрюша ?? 06:03, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Categorization notices

Last week I got a request to add categories to images I uploaded. I solved this by adding the category label to the file at the end as suggested: for example: This week I got the same request again, what did I do wrong? The images involved are:

thanks for your help.

Leonum (talk) 06:35, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

The bot that adds those notifications won't remove its old messages, it just adds new ones. The latest notification was only about File:Early years.jpg. If you like, you're free to remove the notifications from your talk page yourself (preferably after adding some categories to the files, of course). —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 07:39, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Licensing of a photo with permission from photographer to use- disregard, already answered, sorry

Yes check.svg Resolvedapparently. --Teratornis (talk) 01:05, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I have received an email from the photographer of a photograph I am interested in using, giving me permission to use it. I have not yet uploaded it as I'm waiting to resolve copyright issues with Wikipedia. He has given me permission to do "whatever I want with the photo" as it was taken years ago and he has no further use of the picture. I would like to use it in the article that I have under construction and soon to go live. Is there something I need to send to this photographer? DianeRR (talk) 18:13, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

The procedure to follow is in COM:OTRS. --Teratornis (talk) 01:05, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

License for a photograph of a copyrighted book, for use on Wikipedia?

I photographed a book - its cover, and one of the interior pages showing an example page layout. I would like to use these photos in the article on this book in Wikipedia.

The book is new and copyrighted, but I made an original photo of it for use in Wikipedia (and elsewhere, I suppose.) What license should I use when uploading these photos? RK2 (talk) 01:14, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

You cannot upload copyrighted photos to the Commons. Even if you took the photograph yourself, it is considered a "derivative work", and therefore the original copyright of the work stands. You may be able to locally upload the image at the English Wikipedia under a claim of fair use, but make sure the image meets the strict. -Andrew c (talk) 14:19, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
If the cover is very plain, Commons:De minimis might apply. Does the cover contain any copyrightable artworks? If it does, then you could request permission from the copyright holder and follow the procedure in COM:OTRS if they agree to release your images under a free license. --Teratornis (talk) 01:08, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Bad filename(?)

s_Thee_%26_Koffie_bovenal.jpg (see edit, link does not work) cannot be made visible, I think it is because of the double apostrophe, which makes the wiki think it should make italics. Can you remove the second apostrophe? Tekstman (talk) 16:50, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Here it is. Looks indeed like some error somewhere. Either a parser error, or the title should have been rejected at upload already. I fear you'll have to re-upload it under a less parser-confusing name if you want to link it in a Wikipedia article. Lupo 17:08, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
(ec) It works if you replace the apostrophes with either HTML character entities (&#39;) or URL escape codes (%27), like this: File:Amsterdam Groningen, K. Tiktak''s Thee & Koffie bovenal.jpg. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 17:11, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
See bugzilla:8932. The problem is that the parser first handles all sequences of more than one quote without even looking whether they're inside a link, and then goes on to handle links. Lupo 08:14, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


I am very confused, because of source, and licensing, i really dont know what to do. I want to upload an image, that i found on google images. I dont know what to put for licensing, and i dont know what to put for sources. Im new at this, and help would be very much appreciated. This is the picture i wanted to upload

If this is a screenshot from a game, then the copyright would be owned by the company that made the game. Unless you can get them to license it freely (permission for Wikipedia use is not enough), you may not upload it here. --rimshottalk 06:25, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

File missing original version

Apologies if this is a stupid question, but the recent WMF errors are persisting and have screwed up more than one of my uploads. This one, unfortunately, appears to have discarded my initial upload. I uploaded it yesterday, then uploaded a rotated and cropped version today, but now there is no record of the original. Should I request to have it deleted and try again? Is there a way for an admin to restore the original? Does it matter? Maedin\talk 09:49, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

That looks weird. Are you sure you actually succeeded in uploading the file the first time? (As in, did you actually see the original version of the image on the page?) I can't find any trace of the "original upload" anywhere — what it looks like is as if you'd created an image description page for a nonexistent image on 20:10, 11 July 2009 and only later uploaded an actual image at that title on 09:17, 12 July 2009. There's no record in the upload log of any earlier upload, it doesn't appear in the file history, and the first entry in the page history is your edit with the summary "+add information missed from upload (wiki error)". I could believe in a software error causing any one (or even two) of these to be missing, but if all three are absent, then, in effect, it's as if the upload never happened (and I'd be quite surprised if you were able to see the image on that page before you reuploaded it). —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 17:06, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
I saw strange behavior last night when I was uploading images from Flickr. I had to reupload a couple of photos too. --Teratornis (talk) 18:12, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I know, it does seem strange, but I swear that the image was there! In fact, it was only until I saw it on wiki that I realised how badly it needed to be rotated. I use the automated upload form which automatically enters the default upload log, and, as you can see, the original file upload summary is missing. Bizarre, but I guess it isn't really an issue. Would probably be a problem if I had "overwritten" someone else's image though! Maedin\talk 09:40, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Change from bad name to correct name

Will some one please help to resolve the problem of change of the following file name from bad to good? I tried twice to change but it is not working. The same old file name is coming. I want to change the word "twater" to 'water'.--Nvvchar (talk) 11:04, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

To rename a file, either tag it with {{rename|correct file name.ext}} or (easier in this case) just reupload it under the correct name and tag the incorrectly named version with {{bad name|correct file name.ext}}. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 12:24, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Edit this file using an external application

1. created new version of 2. managed to get running "Edit this file using an external application" with java software 3. does not let me save, aparently I'm to new

1. Will it save as new version (not owerwrite), when I will not be to new any more ? 2. Will then my file appear at file history section ?

anyway my file is at:

Regards.— Preceding unsigned comment added by BubikolRamios (talk • contribs) 03:40, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

See Commons:Autoconfirmed users. --Teratornis (talk) 01:39, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, now that I'm 'older' than 4 days: 'Upload a new version of this file' appeared.

False Photo of a exoplanet, False NASA reference
This person made an image of a planet that appears to be a photo of a planet no one has yet seen, visually that is, so it is false.
Also they refer to NASA for credibility without any link to backup that referencing, so that is also false.
Doesn't this warrant a deletion or some sort of corrective attention??
GabrielVelasquez (talk) 11:57, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

It is described as "impresión artística" which I assume translates as "artists impression". I think most people on Commons like to encourage that sort of artwork (assuming it is public domain or a free license). There are even artist's impressions of Harry Potter here. However it should not be used in a misleading way in a wikipedia - and I suggest you discuss corrective action with any wikipedia where you are unhappy with its use. There is more of this sort of thing at Category:Gliese 581. --InfantGorilla (talk) 14:35, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Unseen categories?

In January 2009 I uploaded a picture, with all appropriate categories noted, but the wikibot claims that it remains uncategorized. The entry in my gallery, for the filker Juanita Coulson, has: "Categories: 1933 births, CC-BY-3.0, Filkers, Living people, People from Indiana, Science fiction writers from the United States, Singer-songwriters from the United States"

Is there yet something else needed? Thanx... Silverhill (talk) 20:12, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Nope. The bot notified you once back in January, but it doesn't go 'round checking that you actually did add categories and then removing its notifications. You don't need to do anything. It's just a stale notification. You acted upon it, and that's it. Thanks for categorizing the image! Lupo 20:33, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
OK, thanx for the clarification.Silverhill (talk) 07:34, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Uploaded picture cannot be inserted in wiki / commons gallery

I uploaded the following picture Hauserdesign.JPG and it shows when clicked, but it cannot be inserted into my gallery and it does not open in its category Erich Hauser --Hans555 (talk) 08:00, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Displays fine for me. Lupo 08:11, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Meanwhile for me, too. OK. --Hans555 (talk) 06:25, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
See the Wikimedia Technical Blog for notes about thumbnail problems. --Teratornis (talk) 18:54, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


What does this mean:

Pictogram voting info.svg When updating this map, please use the CSS section and not SVG fill instructions.

on File:H1N1 Canada human swine flu - deaths - CSS map.svg ? --SpaceFlight89 (talk) 09:07, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

You could ask the user who added that mysterious instruction. The history of that image shows a link to:
which displays the following excerpt which looks suspiciously like what the info notice alludes to:
* Below are Cascading Style Sheet (CSS) definitions in use in this file,
* which allow easily changing how states are displayed.
* Modified from the world version of this map.
If that is not enough to let you figure out what this means, you might ask some of the other users who have edited the file. --Teratornis (talk) 20:21, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Hochladen eines offiziellen Logos

Ich möchte gerne wissen, welche Angaben ich machen muss, wenn ich ein offizielles Firmenlogo hochladen möchte, das von der Firma selbnst zu Download angeboten wird. Danke — Preceding unsigned comment added by TruePu (talk • contribs) 15:28, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Du musst die Quelle angeben, in dem Fall einen Link zu dem Dowmload, wenn bekannt soll der Autor angegeben werden und wir brauchen eine schriftliche Erlaubnis im Sinne von Commons:Emailvorlagen#Einverständniserklärung für alle Anfragen dass der Urheber das Bild/Logo zu jedem Zweck einschließlich kommerzieller Zwecke und Bildbearbeitung freigibt. Entweder schriftlich per Email an OTRS, wobei alle Daten vertraulich behandelt werden, oder direkt als Text auf der Webseite oder in deren Impressum/Nutzungsbedingungen. --Martin H. (talk) 15:35, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Preview button disappeared, why?

Hi, I've found that the preview button which had been shown when uploading a flikr image via Flinfo tool is no longer available. Why is this inconvenience? Is this something to do with the FireFox update (to ver 3.5)? --トトト (talk) 18:45, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

You'll probably have to ask on User talk:Flominator/Flinfo. You may or may not get a speedy answer. Flinfo is a tool written by (evidently) just one user. So it does whatever that user wants it to do. I might like to customize my own version of Flinfo to facilitate the uploading of the specific kinds of images I specialize in. For example, I could code in clues about how to choose better categories, since I know what kinds of images I upload. --Teratornis (talk) 20:26, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Another way to preview is to use the simple upload form. I put a link to this into a {{Flinfo}} template. Unfortunately, the template merely links to a blank upload form, so you have to manually copy and paste the wikitext output from Flinfo into the form (Flinfo has an option to copy it automatically, which you may prefer if that works for you). See User:Teratornis/Flickr examples for details on the procedure I have been using lately. For example, here is a recent upload I did:
My basic procedure:
  1. Browse through some Flickr search results from {{Flickr free}} (a template that generates a link to search for freely licensed photos on Flickr).
  2. When I find a photo I want to upload to Commons, I copy its URL to my user subpage.
  3. Copy the Flickr ID number from the URL, and put it into a {{Flinfo}} call to generate the links in the second line above.
  4. Make a filename for the photo. I like to put the Flickr ID into the filename after some descriptive text; this way I can distinguish multiple photos of the same subject, which are common on Flickr.
  5. Save the file from Flickr to my local disk under this name.
  6. Right-click the Flinfo link in the second line to open Flinfo's output in a new browser tab.
  7. Right-click the simple upload form link to open that in another tab.
  8. Copy the Flinfo output to the simple upload form, and select my saved file to upload.
  9. Edit the Flinfo output in the simple upload form, preview, then upload.
This is a bit awkward, but it gives me complete control. Invariably I need to edit the categories that Flinfo suggests, and usually I also need to edit the description that Flinfo scraped from Flickr (if nothing else, to put it in a language template such as {{en}}). I also don't usually like the filename that Flinfo suggests when I click its link to open the simple upload form. By saving my working links in my user subpage of notes, I keep a record of all my uploads and how I did them.
I haven't yet found a method for uploading photos from Flickr to Commons that is as efficient and reliable as I would like. The inefficiency becomes more noticeable when one uploads every photo from a Flickr photoset - then there is a lot of tedious repetition with my method above. It cries out for automation. (I am working out some sed commands to help create the above three links for each photo in a photoset by parsing a line of HTML code from the Flickr photoset page.) I tried one of the bot methods but it only uploaded one of five photos I tried. Documentation on the various tools is also a bit thin. But we can collectively improve that. --Teratornis (talk) 17:42, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I figured out a sed command to generate the wikitext I need for every photo in a Flickr photoset. See the example in User:Teratornis/Notes#sed command for a Flickr photoset. This does not automate the subsequent process but it removes a considerable chunk of the agony getting to that point. --Teratornis (talk) 23:52, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Teratornis, thank you for your very detailed reply. However, the problem seems to be that the preview button will not appear at all on the simle Commons upload form itself using FireFox 3.5 and 3.5.1. I've found that it is OK with IE7, but recently updated FireFox would make it disappear. I think anybody using FireFox is experiencing the same problem. Any solutions? --トトト (talk) 02:36, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I see the Preview button with Firefox 3.0.11 under Windows Vista. I can check on Ubuntu Linux later when I turn on my other computer. If this problem were widespread, I'd expect to see a report on Commons:Village pump. You could try looking at the HTML source of the simple upload form in your browser, and look for a line of code like this:
<div class="wpUploadFormPreviewButton"><span>Preview</span><span>Preview the final image page. Does not upload yet!</span></div>
I think that is the code that displays the Preview button. --Teratornis (talk) 03:47, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
It is not the code that displays it, it's just the definition of that button from MediaWiki:UploadFormPreviewButton, which the script then uses to create and display the button. Anyway, the problem can be fixed easily enough by going to the upload form and then reloading the browser's cache. There was, unfortunately, for a few days a typo in that script which inadvertently turned off all the nice goodies that are normally added. One of these goodies is the preview capability. Mea culpa. Lupo 14:32, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Train station of Bad Kissingen – A775.jpg

As I noticed, the above mentioned file I recently uploaded is missinge license information. I already tried to add it but I can't find out where do it (I don't know, why). Could you help me please? Thx in advance and greetings, --Darev (talk) 18:58, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Meanwhile, I tried it myself. it is ok, this way? --Darev (talk) 19:02, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Nah dran, Lizenzbausteine bitte nicht mit "subst:" verwenden oder von der Template:GFDL-Seite kopieren sondern einfach die gewählte Commons:Lizenzvorlagen der Bildbeschreibungsseite hinzufügen, du hattest dir {{GFDL}} ausgesucht. Geschieht normalerweise automatisch wenn du beim Upload eine Lizenz aus dem drop-down Menü auswählst. --Martin H. (talk) 20:00, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Hat sont eigentlich auch immer geklappt, nur aus irgendeinem Grunde diesmal nicht, vielleicht habe ich beim Uploaden es einfach nur übersehen ;-). Danke für die Hilfe und Gruß, --Darev (talk) 13:54, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

How to get a non PD image reviewed without presuming deletion?

Recently, I seem to be getting something wrong in trying to get assistance with some older images I moved from enwiki, but am now less confident about in respect of Commons policy..

I've already been reffered to one possible process, but that only covers PD images.

So, Is there a process on Commons, whereby any image (not just PD) can be flagged for review WITHOUT presuming that there are for deletion?

If such a process does not exist, WHY NOT? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:31, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

For what purpose? If you ask for review - regarding the copyrigth i think - and the review fails the image will be speedydeleted because of copyright violation or marked as {{no source since}}/{{no permission since}} or nominated for deletion to have the issue discussed. The deletion request is the most conservative form of this options. --Martin H. (talk) 20:46, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Please see the comments made my those in response to some of my recent ones as to why I would prefer to have a

'review but not presume delete' process. Putting requests at the admin noticeboard clearly isn't appropriate as you told me to stop. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:41, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether I understand the question, but if you want advice on the copyright status of some files, you can ask at en:Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --Teratornis (talk) 05:46, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Or CT:L. Teofilo (talk) 06:58, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Both alternatives not change the fact, that an image with a failed review should be marked for deletion or deletion discussion in any way. --Martin H. (talk) 14:28, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Picture vandelism

Could someone have a look at this picture and see what happened, it was changed, it should be tony blair. [[2]] (Off2riorob (talk) 11:47, 18 July 2009 (UTC))

I already asked at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard, I cant explain how the version changed without any log or version entry. --Martin H. (talk) 13:48, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
done here, see w:en:Wikipedia:Help desk#Picture vandalism and COM:AN#File:Tony Blair WEF 2008 cropped.jpg if you can explain the issue. --Martin H. (talk) 14:26, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

problem with video playing

hi dear administrator, there's a problem with video playing,I've downloaded VLC player and that player related to Quick time,and installed both,but when I clicked to play a video a message popped up and said it appears to that you don't have the related player you should download the good one. is it possible to change the default and exchange Quick time player with VLC one? also there is another problem I can't download java from the site.

thanks for your helping, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gomnaam (talk • contribs) 00:09, June 23, 2009 (UTC)

This is a tad outside of the scope of commons, but this website might help: - it talks about Windows Media Player, but the procedure is similar. Alternatively, you an try uninstalling VLC and reinstalling it. It should give you the option to be the default player when your installing it. --J.smith (talk) 00:33, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Svg file rendering

Some time ago I uploaded File:Cassino2nd en.svg. I've noticed that this map looks fine in its native state (or when you click on the blue text file name below the image) but when you click on one of the "SVG rendered as PNG images in different resolutions: 200px, 500px, 1000px, 2000px." options it's awful with text misplaced/ overlapping etc.. By the same token, where the map is used in an article, it displays in this unsatisfactory manner (see Battle of Monte Cassino in en_Wikipedia). I use Firefox but it seems just as bad in IE. I suspect it's something to do with the wiki rendering engine - any idea how to fix it? P.S. File:Cassino1stNorth en.svg and File:Cassino3rdS en.svg have the same problem. Stephen Kirrage talk - contribs 09:02, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I guess nobody here can answer. You could try asking on Commons:Graphics village pump. It helps if you link to the images you mention, so people can see them without having to exert themselves. File:Cassino2nd en.svg is the file page, this is the 500px PNG. Maybe the problem has something to do with the tiny nominal size of the image ("SVG file, nominally 183 × 271 pixels, file size: 93 KB"). If the nominal size is under your control, you might try uploading a larger version and see if that improves the text layout. Read all the pages linked from COM:EIC#Inkscape; you might find something helpful there. --Teratornis (talk) 04:38, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Common's SVC render does a poor job of matching the render in Firefox/IE. It's just how it is, unfortunately. --J.smith (talk) 00:36, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Sick of copyright laws

I'm sick and tired of all the copyright laws about uploading pictures, and I don't understand any of them anyways. I'm a writer, not a lawyer. I'm trying to find a way to upload a picture of a book cover for my article, but I don't know what to do. How do articles in similar situations (ex. articles about books in the same series) get pictures on their articles? If I can't figure this out, I'll ask other people to put it on. This is my last try. PLEASE HELP!!! Melkittycat (talk) 22:17, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

You maybe know this sentence: Every file on Commons must be free so that everyone can use it for every purpose including commercial use.
If you are the holder of copyrights of the book cover you can license it as you want and grant this permission. If not you will need the holder of copyrights written permission. Probably the publisher is the holder of copyrights. If you are not the holder of copyrights and you don't have their permission you can not upload an image here under the required free license, simply because the holder of copyrights must agree to this license. Regrettably in this case the article will have no image. You are working on the English Wikipedia, so your local Wiki accepts w:en:Wikipedia:Fair use. You can consider uploading you book cover under fair use for educational, non-commercial purposes on en.wp. Commons don't have this Commons:Fair use because it is unfree and against my initial sentence. --Martin H. (talk) 23:01, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Ok, we had "own copyright", "permission from the copyright holder/publisher" and "fair use on en.wp". A fourth option is, that the cover is "not creative enough" to enjoy copyright, File:IQ AND THE WEALTH NATIONS.jpg is an example - but the level of creativity must be really low. --Martin H. (talk) 23:09, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
If you are sick of copyright laws, remember that the next time you vote. If enough people get sick of copyright laws, we can vote for reasonable ones. --Teratornis (talk) 23:54, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
One way to recuperate from copyright sickness is to read all the links under COM:EIC#Copyright. The legalese is fairly understandable once you plow through it. --Teratornis (talk) 23:56, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! And I'll check out that link. But would it be ok if I email them for permission? Would that count as the written permission? And when Teratornis says vote, do you mean Wikipedia voting, or what? Melkittycat (talk) 22:27, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

  • To get permission from the owner of the copyright for the book, follow the procedure in COM:OTRS. That does involve sending them an e-mail.
  • By "vote" I mean in general elections. Politicians make the copyright laws which are falling decades behind the reality of computers. Copyright laws generally presuppose the "industrial production of information", which was somewhat valid after the invention of the printing press until the invention of the personal computer. Back then, the equipment for creating and publishing information was often beyond the means of the individual. To protect their investment, publishing corporations needed (and still need) to control who could publish information. Computers are changing that, so we have a new model of Commons-based peer production which the existing copyright laws do not account for very well.
--Teratornis (talk) 00:05, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:PELELIUUSMC97190.jpg

Please see the following for a running conversation between me and an editor named "High Contrast." He seems dedicated to the idea that some kind of link is required for a file I have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I do not understand the requirement for a web link. The media is clearly cited, including all required elements as outlined in nearly every major citation guide. There is no other web site which hosts this file as it is not from a web site. Please help!: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wvosborne (talk • contribs) 16:09, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

The exchange in question is here:
--Teratornis (talk) 23:49, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Lost File.

Hi, I transfered a picture from en wikipedia, it was originally called.. 2008botswana.JPG .. I am pretty sure I remamed it and didn't check it at commons , so I can't find it anymore. Could anyone either show me where it is or let me know how to find it. Thanks (Off2riorob (talk) 23:45, 19 July 2009 (UTC))

If you refer to en:File:2008botswana.JPG, it has a template that says the same photo is available on Commons at File:Miss Earth Rep of CongoJPG (sic) which does not exist. Perhaps the transfer did not work because you left the period character out of the destination file name before the file extension. You probably wanted: File:Miss Earth Rep of Congo.JPG, which isn't there either. I suggest trying again with CommonsHelper. --Teratornis (talk) 00:04, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
I suggest taking notes of the images you move to Commons. For example, see my notes under en:User:Teratornis/Notes#Move some images to Commons. Then you won't lose track of the images you move. --Teratornis (talk) 00:08, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Right thank you, I will read the notes tomorrow. (Off2riorob (talk) 00:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC))

i'm confused

how do you upload a picture to a page you are trying to create? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) 17:51, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

The procedure varies depending on many factors. Tell us more about the picture and the page. Who created the picture, and when? What is in the picture? --Teratornis (talk) 18:46, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Autotranslating templates with parameters

What has always wondered me is the question how autotranslatable templates with parameters work? I've recently tried to autotranslate {{Move}}, prepared everything, but after testing, the template didn't work, because it hadn't shown me the result of the parameter. Can someone explain me what I've made wrong, and how to do it better? Thank you. --The Evil IP address (talk) 18:23, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I replaced the page Template:Move with the autotranslate and removed the parameter 5 because I found it unneccessary to have a parameter for {{PAGENAME}}. Now it works for me.
--Martin H. (talk) 19:22, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
p.s.: I also removed the <big> because it is ugly big text. Also the bold text should be normal in my eyes. --Martin H. (talk) 19:34, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Hope I can remember that formatting for future translations. However, I have to admit that I also wondered what parameter 5 was useful for... --The Evil IP address (talk) 20:03, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

License Verification Request

I uploaded the file File:Aziz_Bhatti.jpg a few days ago. The image is from Flickr and the author originally uploaded the image with "All rights reserved". This is a rare image of one of Pakistan's national heroes and the Flickr uploader is a family member of this hero. I requested her to allow using the file on Wikipedia and I was given permission specifically by her to do so.

I am not sure how to attach correct license tag with this image and who will need to verify the license so that this image does not get deleted by a bot.

Thanks for help, --Kashif.aqeel (talk) 19:27, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

If the author agreed to license the image under a free license, you must contact the OTRS, so that this can be verified. --The Evil IP address (talk) 20:04, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Hogwards picture made with 3d software Blender

dear administrator, I have uploaded a picture of Hogward school (Harry Potter). This picture was made by a user who workes with Blender, a free opensource 3d programm. The whole scene was modeled and rendered in Blender. The author gave me the picture with permission to illustrate an article for the german wiki-blenderbook. Now this picture was deleted because of a copyright violation. What can I do to use this picture without violating any copyright? Thanks in advance. --Toni Grappa (talk) 11:48, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Got any filename? I see only one deleted upload in your upload log, and that doesn't relate to Hogwarts at all. Just guessing: the file was deleted as a derivative work of the depiction of the castle shown in the movies. Re-modelling that in Blender doesn't make it copyright-free. Lupo 11:57, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Problem with file preview

Hi. I have a problem with this file: - recently I uploaded an improved version of this file, but the preview image still show an older file version. Then I uploaded new file version again, but preview image still does not show it. So, what might be problem here? PANONIAN (talk) 04:46, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

It works fine now, seems that problem repaired itself. PANONIAN (talk) 22:47, 21 July 2009 (UTC)


I've uploaded the file File:Chavin-small-he.svg which I devirated from file:Chavin-small.png but it seems to be a problem with the new file. The server can't reach the file. Someone know what's the problem or what to do? Thanks GilCahana (talk) 15:35, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

See Help:SVG. --InfantGorilla (talk) 16:27, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Your file is uploaded: I could download it,[3] though when I viewed it with rsvg-view, I saw what looked like Hebrew text. It doesn't show up on the description page, as the server has somehow failed to make a "PNG" version. When I asked the mediawiki software at Commons to generate a thumbnail with this request:
it failed with this error message:
Error creating thumbnail:
librsvg-ERROR **: _rsvg_acquire_xlink_href_resource called for external resource: Chavin-small.bmp base: (null)
I am afraid I don't know what that message means, though it suggests to me some incompatibility between your Inkscape output, and the version of librsvg used at Commons. I hope someone more knowledgeable can advise.
--InfantGorilla (talk) 17:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
I see that it writes Chavin-small.bmp. Well when I uploaded the file I picked a file in this name in the begining by mistake then changed to the correct name. Maybe that made the problem. GilCahana (talk) 17:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Your SVG file appears to include a reference to an external bitmap file which is not available. Referenced files are not uploaded with the calling file. However, your file appears to have been edited with Inkscape, which, I think, has a mechanism for integrating the bitmap into the SVG. On the other hand, putting bitmaps inside SVG files rather defeats the point of SVG. See Help:SVG and Commons:Transition to SVG Globbet (talk) 23:43, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
From the Inkscape menu, select "Effects" → "Images" → "Embed All Images…". But as Globbet notes, embedding a bitmap image into an SVG file often rather defeats the purpose of using SVG in the first place. (That said, they can be useful sometimes, as for example in File:Compact disc.svg.) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 13:48, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I removed the external image link and re-uploaded it, and what was in the file (i.e. the Hebrew-language captions) now displays fine. The underlying map was never actually in the file itself... AnonMoos (talk) 17:46, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Inserting Photos

I successfully uploaded five photos to Commons but do not understand how to reduce them or how to insert them into,_New_York

-- Max843 (talk) 13:25, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Have you already taken a look at Wikipedia:Picture tutorial? Anyway, I've added the pictures to the article for you. If I made any mistakes, please let me know (or just fix them yourself). —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 13:35, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Problems with Vanishing Race.tif

Yes check.svg Resolved

I uploaded File:Vanishing Race.tif. It won't show, but when I download it, it looks fine. Can anyone help resolve this? In the meantime, File:Vanishing Race.png is available and works fine. I left the TIF up because it is the "straight from the source" file format. See File_talk:Vanishing_Race.tif for further information. Davidwr (talk) 18:54, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

There are currently no thumbnails or previews for TIFF files (see Commons:File types)...‎ AnonMoos (talk) 19:06, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


I don't know what to do with this picture: Fişier:Macke01.jpg. I must delete it from ro.wp because of license lack, but I ask myself if it could be transferred here. What do you think? --Gikü (talk) 16:59, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

It is a photographic reproduction of 2D artwork. August Macke died in 1914, so the painting is public domain and the photograph is not creative enough to give the photographer copyright. The image is ok on Commons, the license is {{PD-art}}, see also Category:August Macke. --Martin H. (talk) 17:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
File:Macke - Reflection In The Shop Window.jpg. Is everything alright? --Gikü (talk) 12:03, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, good work. --Martin H. (talk) 08:01, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Changing the licence on an image

This licence on a file i've uploaded is is incorrect, and I wish to change it. I cannot seem to get to the editing page. I would upload a new version of it, but I don't want to double up. How do i edit the permissions line to be - GFDL ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doorsnake (talk • contribs) 21:46, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

You should be able to just click the "edit" tab at the top of the page. Does that not work for you? —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 22:38, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

This has worked, My question was badly phrased also, There was a delete request put in for the image because of the incorrect licence.

What do I need to do to remove this delete request. see here:

Obviously I can manually remove this, but i don't want to mess up a process

Join the deletion discussion at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sidux-2009-02-logo.png and explain why the Logo is not protected as claimed there. If you use a discussion page on Commons or any Wiki project you should sign your posting with ~~~~. --Martin H. (talk) 23:38, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Modifying an image

When modifying an image, eg File:Government House Canberra.JPG altering brightness/contrast, what is the best way to to preserve (or find) the original metadata --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:19, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

If your image editor doesn't automatically preserve the metadata, you can copy it from the original file using "jhead -te original.jpg target.jpg" or "exiftool -tagsfromfile original.jpg target.jpg". You may also want to either delete ("jhead -dt" or "exiftool -ThumbnailImage=") or regenerate ("jhead -rgt" or "exiftran -ig") any thumbnail images that might be present in the Exif data. (All of these are free software command line tools that should be available as standard packages on most Linux distributions. You can probably find precompiled Windows binaries for them, too, but I've never had any reason to look for such.) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 01:29, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
There is an exif package for Cygwin if you use Windows. Also see Commons:Manipulating meta data. --Teratornis (talk) 03:29, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

login problem

I want to upload an image thru W. Commons, but am being prompted for a login even though I am already logged in. I try to log in again, and get a message that my username does not exist. Wha? 01:37, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, at this moment you are not logged in, as you signed your message with an IP-address, which is common for not-logged-in users. If you have a username on the English Wiki (or some other local Wiki) you do not auto-login to Commons, you'll have to login seperately. Normally, the username you have at en-wiki would be valid on Commons as well, but this isn't always the case: for example when you have an old useraccount or if your username was taken already on Commons. Try recreating your username at Wikimedia Commons, or visit en:Special:MergeAccount to see if something else is wrong. Best regards, m:Mark W (Mwpnl) ¦ talk 02:37, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, thanks, that's it. Ian mckenzie (talk) 16:43, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

1906 picture

I would like to know if I am free to upload a picture taken in 1906.

Thanks, --Nanosanchez (talk) 10:46, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

It's depend on author and country of origin. Please provide more details. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:51, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

The picture was taken in Spain in 1906. I have no idea of who was the author. --Nanosanchez (talk) 16:05, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

See Help:Public domain#Copyright terms by country. --Teratornis (talk) 17:35, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Image modification help

I just uploaded File:Exploding cigar comic.png for use in a Wikipedia article but it's showing up so poorly. It looks gray and washed out and the black lines in the drawing are just not showing up sharply when at any type of small size. I have been working with but I am a true novice and I just can't figure out how to make this image better. Can someone fix it (if that's possible) and upload a better version? Thanks in advance.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:24, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

That's just what happens when you scale down a line drawing to a small size. It's possible to "fix" it by increasing the line thickness, but then the drawing will no longer be as faithful a reproduction of the original. I've uploaded such a modified version of your image as File:Exploding cigar comic (darkened).png. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 06:06, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
I agree, the file is fine as a reproduction of the original. If you really want to be able to display it well at all scales consider converting it to a vector drawing format (eg SVG), which records the image as a series of brush strokes rather than a bit-map image that paint programs use. Then it can be automatically scaled nicely. --Tony Wills (talk) 06:41, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice both of you, and especially for the darkened upload Ilmari. The only way I would know how to convert to SVG is to open the image in then save as a different file type, but SVG is not one of the options provided. Can you suggest another free program that this can be done through (or are any of the file extensions allows one to save as, vector formats? [I did say I was a novice at this stuff, right?]). By the way, if you want to see the use to which the the image is being put, visit w:exploding cigar. Thanks again.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Inkscape is a good program for converting images to SVG. However, that would not actually help in this case: line drawings, whether in vector or bitmap format, will still appear gray if scaled to a size where the lines would be narrower than one pixel. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 12:32, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh well. It'll do, and I just found another image to use and about to upload. Now if I could just find some better sources for the article, with manufacturing and decline information, I could easily get this to at least good article status.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:19, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


Hi! I am writing to ask you help in order to confirm that the pictures I submitted at wiki commons are perfectly legal and do not infringe any copyrights. The pictures are:

File:Wooden Ships AH.jpg
File:ArabIsraeli Wars AH.jpg
File:Bismarck AH.jpg
File:Afrika Korps AH.jpg
File:Panzer Leader AH.jpg
File:Richtofens War AH.jpg
File:Panzerkrieg AH.jpg
File:Squad Leader AH.jpg
File:Third Reich AH.JPG

Best regards Ricardo Ricardo Ferreira de Oliveira (talk) 14:18, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

They're probably fine on a Wikipedia that allows fair use, but given that there's substantial copyrighted material in the picture, and it's the focus of the picture, no matter how arranged, I'd have to say they aren't okay here. You'd need Avalon Hill Hasbro's permission to upload them to Commons under a free license.--Prosfilaes (talk) 18:54, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Since the Wikimedia Foundation exists to promote free content, you might focus your photographic talents on works from the open source video game and open gaming communities, insofar as you can find games released under free licenses. --Teratornis (talk) 01:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Can someone check the OTRS permission? Diti the penguin 01:41, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Note that open gaming systems for the most part still have non-open graphics. Your best bet is {{tl:PD-1923}} and {{tl:PD-no-renewal}}, though unfortunately that's a poor substitute when what you want to photograph is these games.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:54, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
In this case, I ask please to some administrator to remove the pictures from wikicommons file. I want to do only things okay. Thank you for help. Best regards. Ricardo Ferreira de Oliveira (talk) 11:41, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
I would really consider looking at the Wikipedia articles (for English, and any other language that accepts fair use images that you feel comfortable working with) and uploading the images there. They are nice pictures, and would qualify for fair use in the articles on the games.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:54, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

How do I find only public domain images withing Wikimedia commons?

How do I find only public domain images within Wikimedia Commons?

I am VERY confused about how Wikimedia describes all the various licences. Many terms don't seem to be defined, or are hard to find the definition of.

Example: copyleft

So I thought I would simply search for all images in Wikimedia Commons but I dont see how to do that..... 18:21, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Google image search has options for searching images from particular sites and under particular kinds of licenses. It's not guaranteed to be comprensive but you could try it. On Commons you could look at Special:WhatLinksHere for a particular license, but there are many different public domain licenses. See COM:EIC#Copyright for definitions of many copyright-related terms. It's a complex topic. See also User:Teratornis/Why is Commons so complicated? for a mild attempt at humor. --Teratornis (talk) 23:37, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Also, the English Wikipedia has articles describing many copyright-related terms, for example: Copyleft, Free content, Open source, GFDL, Creative Commons, etc. --Teratornis (talk) 19:55, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Commons needs a Glossary. --Teratornis (talk) 19:56, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Unidentified insect

I made a few photos of some insect. Unfortunately I am not a specialist and I don't know what species it is - so I can't check, if there are already any photos of it in Commons. What should I do? Are there at Commons any specialists, who could help me to identify this insect so that I know if there is a point in uploading these pictures, and if so, in what category should I upload it? Quolav (talk) 13:37, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

You could add your photos to unidentified insect of particular order, for example, Category:Unidentified Lepidoptera for butterflies and moths.
Unfortunately, such sections is not very active. Please consider other places too. If you made your photos in USA, I highly recommend you to use
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:38, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Many questions on the Help desk are about computer bugs. You are asking about real bugs. If Commons already has photos of the insect you found, feel free to upload more. On Commons we like to have multiple photos of individual subjects, to give Wikipedia editors more choice of photos. You can upload your photos to Commons, and then ask on Reference desk/Science for volunteers to identify the species. You can help by giving complete information about where and when you photographed it (did you geocode your photos?), what it seemed to be doing at the time, what plants were in the area, the size of the insect if this is not obvious from the photos, and so on. (When taking specimen photos, it helps to include an object of known size in the photo for comparison, such as a coin or a ruler.) You could also ask on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Arthropods, where you will probably find some entomologists and/or knowledgeable amateurs. If you don't get any help on Wikipedia, you could contact your nearest university biology department or zoological society. --Teratornis (talk) 19:29, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
See {{NoCoins}} - it seems Commons advises against using coins in photographs for scale, and rulers are preferable. However, I'd think a coin is better than having no scale reference whatsoever for an unknown object. --Teratornis (talk) 20:03, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Why is soil red

Kids are traveling thru North Caroline and called back want to know WHY THE SOIL IS RED what makes it that way ? Is it accually a clay thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) 14:41, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Rocks and soils get their colors from the minerals they contain. The color red often indicates the presence of iron oxide i.e. rust. See for example the famous red dunes of the Namib desert (and see Namib-Naukluft National Park). Incidentally, you should ask questions like this on Reference desk/Science. --Teratornis (talk) 19:16, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Setting up my user profile

Well for starters I'd like my full name to be listed under the images instead of my username. I can't find anything on this in FAQs I've been reading. Any tips regarding editing of my profile are also welcome but not necessary, the name is the main issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vladanr (talk • contribs) 09:49, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Try the steps explained here. Don't forget to reload your browser's cache after having edited your monobook.js. Lupo 09:58, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Much obliged Vladanr (talk) 09:59, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Uploading an image to an article

Hi there, please can you help. I am new to Wikipedia. I'm trying to upload a picture onto a new article that I am creating but am having very little success.

I've uploaded the picture (It's called NRFC Pack) onto Wikipedia Commons, but I don't know how to upload it onto my article.

Please can somebody tell me how.

Kind regards,

Physio1234 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Physio1234 (talk • contribs) 14:59, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Picture tutorial. In short: Add [[File:NRFC Pack.JPG|thumb]] to the article at the place where you want the photo to appear. Lupo 15:19, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Trouble uploading

Dear help desk staff:

I've uploaded over 200 Flickr images over the last few months through Bryan's service, and with no trouble at all. Lately, though, I've been unable to upload anything through ANY of the tools provided (the Manske thing never worked, and the others are full of glitches - such as not being able to add anything to the url box).

Could you please look into any possible problems with Bryan's upload tool? It was the only reliable one.

Thank you.

Sherlock4000 (talk) 05:37, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

The {{Flinfo}} tool worked for me last weekend. However, it does not automatically upload the file from Flickr. You have to manually download the file and then upload it into the simple upload form. See User:Teratornis/Flickr examples for notes on the various methods I have tried. The Flinfo method is OK if you only want to upload a few photos. If you want to upload many photos from a Flickr photoset, then it becomes very tedious. I'm thinking about writing a Perl script to automate most of the process of getting to the properly filled-out simple upload form, but I don't know whether I would end up with a tool that anybody else would want to use. (Preference in tools tends to be an individual thing - it's hard to write and document a tool that many people will find useful.) --Teratornis (talk) 17:30, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for trying, but I had already used Flinfo. The problem is that I can't type anything in the "Source filename" box (in the Commons upload page), so that when I try uploading anything, the file is empty. It's a shame becamuse the Bryan's upload tool worked perfectly, and was ridiculously easy to use (I guess he's not maintaining it anymore).
If you can write a similar program, go for it!
Thanks again,
Sherlock4000 (talk) 23:46, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
On this upload page, do you see a "Browse" button next to the "Local filename" field? What happens if you click it? You should get a file selector from which you can select the local file you want to upload. If you use the {{Flinfo}} template, it will display both links that you need, for example these are the links I used to upload a photo earlier:
The first line is a link to the Flickr image page. From there a couple of annoying clicks gets to the original image page from which I downloaded the image. The second line is the {{Flinfo}} call, with two links. The first link opens the Flinfo tool. The second link opens the simple upload form. This method is not very automatic but it is pretty reliable, except when the Flinfo tool goes offline or image uploading is broken in general. --Teratornis (talk) 01:01, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks again for all your help - but it doesn't work. Clicking the browser button (with or without Flinfo) does not make the file available at all - all it does is bring up my own computer's Documents folder, and it won't let me select anything from it (or just type in the url).
Is it possible that someone I've had problems with on Wikipedia in the past is messing with my commons account to block me? Trust me, the last thing I want to be doing is bothering anyone with this. I wish someone could just repair Bryan's upload tool.
Thanks, Sherlock4000 (talk) 06:41, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
What do you mean by "bring up my own computer's Documents folder"? The window that opens should be a file selector. Are you saying you cannot navigate to a different directory on it? You do not type in the Flickr URL on the file selector, but the local pathname to which you previously downloaded the file. I can't tell whether you saying that you don't know how to navigate in a file selector to find the file you downloaded to your hard disk, or whether the file selector actually does not let you navigate. Since you mentioned "URL" instead of local pathname, it sounds like you don't understand the procedure. The {{Flinfo}} method requires you to download a copy of the Flickr file to your hard disk. The manual download procedure is like this, using the example I gave above:
  • Start with the Flickr image page: yamagata tohoku 東北 SAKATA wind farm
  • Navigate to the original (largest) image size:
  • Right-click the image and select "Save image as" from the context menu. Effectively you are right-clicking on a link like this:
  • Save the image file to any pathname you can remember, for example if you are using Windows you might use this (pick any directory you know to exist on your hard disk):
    • C:\JUNK\Sakata wind farm 489702459.jpg
  • Then when you click the "Browse" button in the simple upload form, navigate in the file selector to the directory you used in the above step to save the file, or simply paste in the complete pathname from the previous step. Virtually every Windows application uses the same kind of file selector - surely you have opened a file in Windows before? Can you open the Flickr image file you downloaded in another Windows application?
The steps are easier to follow if you write what you are doing on a user subpage, like I did here. --Teratornis (talk) 17:23, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

You may want to log out, then clear your browser cache. (It may even be helpful to delete all your browser cookies, though of course other websites may not remember your settings if you delete their cookies.) Then shutdown your browser, restart it, log in and try again. --InfantGorilla (talk) 11:11, 28 July 2009 (UTC)


Das Bild "File:InfRgt 120 Weingarten.jpg" zeigt das Denkmal des Regiments 124 und müsste daher umbenannt werden. Wie mache ich das? --Milgesch (talk) 07:47, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Einfache Lösung: Komplette Bildbeschreibung samt Kategorien kopieren und das Bild mit dem basic uploadform unter richtigem Namen neu hochladen, das falsch benannte Bild mit {{badname|neuername.jpg}} markieren damit es ersetzt und gelöscht wird.
Die schlechtere Lösung ist {{rename|neuername.jpg}}, dann erledigt ein Bot den reuplod für dich wodurch das Bild allerdings aus deiner Gallery und aus deinem Upload log verschwindet.
Grüße, --Martin H. (talk) 15:33, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Danke. Dachte, es gäbe eine einfachere Lösung. --Milgesch (talk) 07:49, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Ich hätte da auch noch einen Kandidaten, nicht von mir hochgeladen und einfach mit einem lustig-peinlichen Vertipper im Namen. Wie wäre hier sinnvoll vorzugehen, damit die Upload-History mitgeht? Da das Bild nur einmal verwendet wird, wäre die händische Korrektur des Filenamens in dem aufrufenden Lemma Langer Max dann kein Problem. -- Хрюша ?? 06:33, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Der vertipper ist ein :D wert. Meine persönliche Meinung: Da es keine Aufnahme ist die ein Benutzer selber erstellt hat und vermissen könnte würde ich {{rename}} verwenden. Für die Admins ist es der gleiche Aufwand (global ersetzen, prüfen, löschen), du sparst dir aber das hochladen. --Martin H. (talk) 07:58, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
p.s.: bezüglich der einfacheren Lösung: Das verschieben von Bildern entsprechend des verschiebens von Artikeln in Wikipedia, wurde leider wieder deaktiviert. --Martin H. (talk) 08:00, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Danke. Es geht mir nicht um Minderaufwand sondern um Erhalt der vorhandenen History. -- Хрюша ?? 22:00, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Save favorite pictures to gallery-how?

Hi, I like to save a picture I like onto my gallery but It's not mine. How do I make it happen? Please respond on my talkpage. Secret Saturdays (talk) 23:04, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Your "gallery" is just a site-generated listing of the photos you have uploaded so you can't change its content. If you want, you can make a gallery as a user subpage—something like User:Secret Saturdays/Gallery or User:Secret Saturdays/Photos I like—and then add images to that. --Yarnalgo (talk) 23:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
I think the user's talking about his own, self-hosted gallery, and doesn't know how to reuse the picture. Diti the penguin 00:02, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Apparently not because he just created the subpage I suggested. --Yarnalgo (talk) 00:39, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Assistance with ~1000 Vietnam photographs

Hi. I found this thread, en:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Vietnam#Help uploading my photos of Vietnam, and am completely unsure as to whom to ask for help. We don't seem to have an image-specific helpdesk at En:wp, and I somehow found my way here. Could someone assist/advise that user, at that thread or at his talkpage? Much thanks :) Quiddity (talk) 18:35, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

The photographer could upload the photos to a photoset on Flickr and license them all with CC-BY-SA which makes them suitable for uploading to Commons. (We have several tools for uploading photos from Flickr to Commons more or less efficiently.) A much larger number of people upload photos to Flickr than to Commons so I assume Flickr must be easier. I don't know for sure because I have never uploaded to Flickr, only uploaded from Flickr to Commons. But Flickr has over 3 billion photos compared to about 4 million on Commons, so Flickr must be about as easy as it could be. --Teratornis (talk) 19:36, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
In case that wasn't clear, I'm suggesting it should be fairly easy for the photographer to bulk-upload photos to Flickr. Once they are on Flickr (preferably in a photoset or photostream), then any number of other Commons users can upload the photos from Flickr to Commons, categorizing them as they go. --Teratornis (talk) 19:38, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately, Flickr only allows[4] 100mb/month upload, and only displays the most recent 200 images. (For free accounts).
Hmm. I'll try to get back to this later, but have no time this week. Quiddity (talk) 20:43, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
It is in fact somewhat easier to upload photos to Flickr with batch upload tools, but you need a paid account to do that. I suggest they try Commonist, and if they can't figure that out, try zipping them all up into one large archive file, then send that to a Commons user using a service like YouSendIt or TransferBigFiles. Dcoetzee (talk) 06:14, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

photo of a photo

To anyone who can help, I have a digital photo of an old photo of my Grandfather, I want to upload for his Wikipedia article. The original photo is in his house in Japan, and I do not know who took the photo approximately 50 years ago. Is it OK to upload this photo and what tags do I need to add? thank you for your time.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Shoeuntied (talk • contribs) 19:12, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

If you cannot identify the photographer to get permission, then you have to wait for the photo to come into the public domain. See Help:Public domain. For Japan, that looks like life + 50 years. --Teratornis (talk) 19:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
This may seem like an oppressive rule, but Commons is a repository of media files which are provably free content. If we cannot prove something is free content, we have to assume it is not. The easiest cases to resolve are new and very old images. Very old images are in the public domain, as we can be confident enough time has passed. If an image is new, it's often straightforward to track down the creator, who is likely to still be alive. Plus the knowledge of free content has spread recently, increasing the number of recent images which explicitly declare their licensing. In the large gray middle area are photographs such as the one you mention, which are not old enough to be certainly in the public domain, but are old enough to make it nearly impossible to track down the photographer and get permission. Back then, many photographers gave little thought to copyright, if they did not plan to publish the photo at the time. They did not predict the modern explosion in computers which has made everybody into a publisher. What do you want to do with this photo? If you just want to have it online somewhere, you could upload it to a photo-sharing service such as Flickr, which might not police the copyright as vigorously as Commons does. --Teratornis (talk) 20:16, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Actually — this photo might be {{PD-Japan-oldphoto}}, which would make it already public domain. Dcoetzee (talk) 23:59, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

thumbnail of old revisions

If I do not remember wrongly, Commons used to show thumbnails of previous revisions of an image. Didn't it? How can I restore this option? --ALE! ¿…? 08:38, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

You can't. They've been switched off server-side due to performance problems. But now that these performance problems appear to have been worked around, we might try asking Tim Starling to re-enable them. Lupo 08:57, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes please, do so. --ALE! ¿…? 10:49, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

problems with first photo upload


I am trying to do my first upload. I am clueless. I have several questions:

  • I got permission from the image owner to use their images. They filled out the license agreement and I just emailed it to wikimedia commons. They want to use GNU Free Doc. So, under the license category of the upload form, do I put "GNU Free Documentation License," the permission in pogress bit, or GFDL?
  • I am unable to upload the images. I get an error message saying I have not provided: a source, authors, or license. I understand why I may fail the license bit at this stage, but I filled in both the source and the author categories with very specific information. Why is it failing?
  • Do I need to write the entries in the upload page in normal wiki markup/code format, for example a URL between brackets [], etc.?

Thanks, EDS4 (talk) 22:40, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

See Commons:OTRS. The standard process is to upload the images first with the desired license, mark it with {{OTRS pending}}, and mail your permission letter to Dcoetzee (talk) 23:56, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply, but it only partially answered my question and I'm still getting the same error message of "You must give the original source of the file, the author of the work, and a license."
I'm new to putting stuff online and am really frustrated with how seeimingly easy it looks, but then nothing is working. Please understand I am a novice.
I try filling those areas, "source," "author," and "license," in with text and I've tried with the first two doing URL [] links. Nothing works.
As a source I'm putting all the information I know: ABADÁ-Capoeira SF. Image Published in article by Treidler, Márcia, "Mestranda Cigarra" and Jennifer Walsh, "Instructora Sereia". (April 2008). Images by Jennifer Hobbs "Graduada Agua Viva." "From the Directors: Cord Levels in ABADÁ." Gingada do mês. ABADÁ-Capoeira SF. Retrieved 27 July 2009. Pgs. 3-4.
But That doesn't work. So I just try the URL alone. That doesn't work. So what exactly do I need to put in the "source box" and in what format? In the descriptions of what should go there it says any any information about the source and links to the page it originally appeared and the direct link the URL image is coming from. What does this last part mean? The image is being uploaded from my computer, there is no direct link to the image URL, just to the PDF file where it org. appeared (I'm confused). The author and publisher sent me copies of the images to upload. And what exactly do I need to put in the "author" box? I put the name of the organization that published the newsletter/created the images, gave me the rights, and sent me the images and that fails. I put the {{OTRS pending}} in for the "license" and it fails. What am I doing wrong? I'm sorry I don't have someone to walk me through the process.
It would be helpful if there was a sample form filled out for the different uploads. I can look at the finished product as it appears with people's images, but because of the format of the upload form it doesn't help me understand the way they entered that data in using wikicode.
Thanks EDS4 (talk) 05:04, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
You're overcomplicating things. Which upload form are you using? If the "Original source" and "Author" fields are nonempty, it should just work. You need to insert the {{OTRS pending}} template in the Permission field. You can leave "Licensing" set to "None selected". Dcoetzee (talk) 06:12, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok, so you were right. The problem was simple I was putting the license tag in the wrong box. It said "box above" and I thought, "The permissions box," but it means the Additional Info. Box. Thanks, EDS4 (talk) 22:42, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Picture request

How can I request for a picture? Secret Saturdays (talk) 23:42, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

It depends on what kind of picture you want to be made. Photography, diagram? I think you should get better replies if you post on the Village Pump, or its equivalent for graphics. Diti the penguin 23:46, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Well my picture request concerns Wikipe-tan. So where do I go to make a request about her? Secret Saturdays (talk) 03:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

You already asked on Wikipedia talk:Wikipe-tan. Your question is vague because you did not specify the type of your request. Do you want someone to draw another version of this cartoon? Do you want to request that the file be deleted? There are many possible things you might be requesting, and some actions have their own places to ask. The odds are low that anyone who is reading this Help desk would have any special knowledge about a particular image. Commons has more than 4 million media files. --Teratornis (talk) 04:58, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Photos of media merchandise on store shelves

Are photos of books/DVDs/video games on store shelves OK? I think de minimis applies here since the focus is on the shelves as a whole and not on a particular item. I also have a photo of a Harry Potter merchandise display that I'm wondering would be fine to upload, again with the emphasis on the myriad of associated products and not on any particular item. Thanks. --BrokenSphere 04:14, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

It depends. If it were a photo of the store or a photo of the shelves at an oblique angle, you'd have a good argument for de minimis, but if it were a straight on shot of the shelves, it's difficult to argue that the items on the shelves are not the primary subject. A rule of thumb is, could you in theory edit out the copyrighted content without diminishing the value of the image? If not, then it may not be de minimis. You may want to also leave a note at Commons talk:De minimis referring to this discussion. Dcoetzee (talk) 04:57, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
✓ Done --BrokenSphere 15:59, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
A couple of the shots are at oblique angles vs. full on. What about spines, like of game cases or books? --BrokenSphere 16:10, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

changing uploaded file name

I want to change an uploaded file name. Is there a way to do it. Or do I have to delete it and upload it again?

You could use {{Rename}}, but basically it's upload and delete old copy. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:58, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Citypeek (talk) 15:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


Please check the licensing again

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zinnia112 (talk • contribs) 00:49, July 30, 2009 (UTC)

✓ Done --Yarnalgo (talk) 04:01, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Mass update of GWB White House photos

After Mr. Obama took office, the entire previous contents of Mr. Bush's site were moved to . See an example Would there be any way to have a bot or some other way to update any images that have in the source and also are dated between Jan 20, 2001 and Jan 20, 2009 to update the URL? I have found that this is all we have to do to have a current, correct source. Thanks --rogerd (talk) 22:09, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

this might be a better example, since the previous example is actually a picture of the senior Bush, and might be confusing. --rogerd (talk) 22:14, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
I think User:MerlLinkBot is working will work on it after his bot flag request will finaly approve, Commons:Bots/Requests/MerlLinkBot. Commons:Bots/Work requests/Archive 3#Weblink replacement:, was my proposal of March. --Martin H. (talk) 02:03, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Cedrus libani var. libani

English: Lebanon Cedar

erscheint nicht das gewünschte Bild, sondern stattdessen der Text "Groesste Zeder Deutschlands.jpg". Das Programm findet also meine Datei nicht.

Die Datei ist nur auf de.wikipedia hochgeladen und kann entsprechend nur dort eingebunden werden. Du musst diese auf Commons verschieben, damit man die auch hier einbinden kann. Für die Verschiebung empfehle ich das Programm CommonsHelper. --The Evil IP address (talk) 18:21, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Nachdem ich das Bild wie empfohlen auf Commons verschoben habe, ist es jetzt auch hier in der Galerie zu sehen. Dazu musste ich ein TUSC-Konto einrichten. Am Schluss kam die Belohnung:

Congratulations, you are now a verified TUSC user! Weep tears of joy, or something.

Naja, so war es auch. Vielen Dank für den Tipp. Der User Ueberwald