Commons:Village pump

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Shortcut: COM:VP

Community portal
introduction
Help desk Village pump
copyrightproposals
Administrators' noticeboard
vandalismuser problemsblocks and protections
↓ Skip to table of contents ↓       ↓ Skip to discussions ↓       ↓ Skip to the last discussion ↓
Welcome to the Village pump

This page is used for discussions of the operations, technical issues, and policies of Wikimedia Commons. Recent sections with no replies for 7 days and sections tagged with {{section resolved|1=--~~~~}} may be archived; for old discussions, see the archives.

Please note


  1. If you want to ask why unfree/non-commercial material is not allowed at Wikimedia Commons or if you want to suggest that allowing it would be a good thing, please do not comment here. It is probably pointless. One of Wikimedia Commons’ core principles is: "Only free content is allowed." This is a basic rule of the place, as inherent as the NPOV requirement on all Wikipedias.
  2. Have you read our FAQ?
  3. For changing the name of a file, see Commons:File renaming.
  4. Any answers you receive here are not legal advice and the responder cannot be held liable for them. If you have legal questions, we can try to help but our answers cannot replace those of a qualified professional (i.e. a lawyer).
  5. Your question will be answered here; please check back regularly. Please do not leave your email address or other contact information, as this page is widely visible across the internet and you are liable to receive spam.

Purposes which do not meet the scope of this page


Search archives


 

Village pump in Rzeszów, Poland [add]
Centralized discussion
See also: Village pump/Proposals • Archive

Template: View • Discuss  • Edit • Watch


Oldies[edit]

Review of initial updates on Wikimedia movement strategy process[edit]

Note: Apologies for cross-posting and sending in English. Message is available for translation on Meta-Wiki.

The Wikimedia movement is beginning a movement-wide strategy discussion, a process which will run throughout 2017. For 15 years, Wikimedians have worked together to build the largest free knowledge resource in human history. During this time, we've grown from a small group of editors to a diverse network of editors, developers, affiliates, readers, donors, and partners. Today, we are more than a group of websites. We are a movement rooted in values and a powerful vision: all knowledge for all people. As a movement, we have an opportunity to decide where we go from here.

This movement strategy discussion will focus on the future of our movement: where we want to go together, and what we want to achieve. We hope to design an inclusive process that makes space for everyone: editors, community leaders, affiliates, developers, readers, donors, technology platforms, institutional partners, and people we have yet to reach. There will be multiple ways to participate including on-wiki, in private spaces, and in-person meetings. You are warmly invited to join and make your voice heard.

The immediate goal is to have a strategic direction by Wikimania 2017 to help frame a discussion on how we work together toward that strategic direction.

Regular updates are being sent to the Wikimedia-l mailing list, and posted on Meta-Wiki. Beginning with this message, monthly reviews of these updates will be sent to this page as well. Sign up to receive future announcements and monthly highlights of strategy updates on your user talk page.

Here is a review of the updates that have been sent so far:

More information about the movement strategy is available on the Meta-Wiki 2017 Wikimedia movement strategy portal.

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation, 20:31, 15 February 2017 (UTC) • Please help translate to your languageGet help

February 16[edit]

Public domain images of the Oroville dam crisis[edit]

Hi!

I just came around these pictures of the 2017 Oroville Dam crisis. I haven't got time to upload them but maybe someone would have the time to make them available on Commons.

Have a good day, Letartean (talk) 15:28, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

I've seen images of the crisis with a copyright notice from the California Department of Water Resources. I am not certain that such a copyright claim would be legit; {{PD-CAGov}} sounds like it would apply to images made by the DWR, and people incorrectly claiming copyright on things they don't have rights to is common even in government departments. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:10, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
The site seems to be produced by the DWR and the pictures have a Public Domain license attribution on the site (click on one of the picture to see it. Maybe you're right, still. Good day, Letartean (talk) 16:29, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Please note my (currently unanswered) query, above, about #California Highway Patrol images. Andy Mabbett (talk) 23:36, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Images from Tweeter are quite uncertain, but I don't see any issue with images from the California Department of Water Resources website. A lot of images from there would be useful on Wikimedia. Any one with a bot? @:? Regards, Yann (talk) 16:29, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
I tried to get a few images, but I always get "Download unavailable. Please contact us for download access to this file." Any idea how to get them? Thanks, Yann (talk) 17:38, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
On this page, there is a "Download" button (with a downwards-pointing arrow) in the lower-right corner. However, it appears that usage of the download option requires signing up for a free PhotoShelter account. On the sign up page, there is a note about accessing specific site content, which may be relevant. --Gazebo (talk) 14:32, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Intersection categories[edit]

I'm working on some categories; see, for example, Commons:Categories for discussion/2017/02/Category:Taken with Canon EOS 60D and Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM. It looks like it's a straightforward intersection of Category:Taken with Canon EOS 60D and Category:Taken with Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM. This should be doable with the Help:FastCCI tool, but it just hangs. Trying it on the command line, I think it's broken?

 $ wscat -c 'wss://fastcci.wmflabs.org/?c1=11297552&c2=19631121&d1=15&d2=15&s=200&a=and'
 connected (press CTRL+C to quit)
 < QUEUED 0
 < COMPUTE_START
 disconnected

There are, for Canon alone, about fifty camera models and sixty lens models. The combinatorial blowup here is potentially over three thousand, and that doesn't even include filters. Is FastCCI broken? Should there be three thousand intersecting categories instead of two sets of fifty and sixty? I don't think intersections are warranted here, but I feel like I'm missing something. COM:CAT#Principles says that intersection categories are sometimes reasonable, but I don't think they make sense here, especially if we have tools which can perform the intersection. --grendel|khan 21:45, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

I don't know about FastCCI, but a search query can give the intersection: incategory:"Taken with Canon EOS 60D" incategory:"Taken with Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM". Creating the thousands of intersection categories doesn't sound like a great idea. Next somebody will want Category:Taken with Canon EOS 60D and Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM on 2017-02-19. --ghouston (talk) 03:59, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Also, once you choose a particular set of intersections, you make it harder to do different intersections. E.g., incategory:"Taken with Canon EOS 60D" incategory:"CC-Zero". There's also a good chance that a lot of this intersection work will be undone when Structured data is implemented. --ghouston (talk) 04:11, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you; that search query is extremely helpful! (It's even worse than you think; there's intersection categories for all manner of equipment; see Category:Taken with Canon EOS 60D and Canon EF 100mm F2.8 Macro USM + Raynox DCR-250, for example.) One thing that worries me is that policy (COM:CAT) is mostly silent on this. ("A category can combine two (or more) different criteria; such categories are called "compound categories" or "intersection categories"."--there's no guidelines for when it is or isn't appropriate to do this sort of thing.) Is this the right place to seek a firmer policy, or at least to push for a flatter categorization for the camera-equipment categories? --grendel|khan 08:37, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
  • As I mentioned at the deletion discussion in question, when it comes to camera + lens combinations, I don't find the intersection to be too problematic. Yes, there are numerous possible categories. However, a simple camera + lens combination is useful for showing the potential performance of a certain body with a certain lens, as camera performance can vary considerably based on lens used (and vice versa). I don't think it will reach the point where we have Camera + lens + date, and if it does such intersections would be deletable under the simplicity principal at COM:Categories.
@--ghouston: I thought the more advanced search tools allowed us to select how deep of a search to go (i.e. up to 3 subcategories). In such a case, if you tell the tool to search down three levels wouldn't searching "Taken with Canon EOS 60D" automatically bring up images in "Taken with Canon EOS 60 and foo lens"? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:08, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Probably, but I expect it would be slow when there are a lot of categories to be scanned. --ghouston (talk) 08:49, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Recruiting photographers[edit]

How do we recruit photographers online and/or offline? So far, Wikipedians demand more free photos as they are challenging the use of copyrighted photos. If more photographers are recruited, they can let us share some of their own photos of things and people, living and deceased. Thoughts? --George Ho (talk) 09:52, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

I searched for an image of w:Jill Saward at Flickr but found none except photos of the singer with the same name. I don't live in the UK. Nevertheless, I found Twitter webpage and official website of her husband (widower), Gavin Drake. I don't know what to appropriately say to him, given that Saward died last month. I don't feel comfortable taking advantage of a grieving widower just for an image of Saward. If contacting him is not a good choice, how else can I convince any photographer to contribute to Commons? --George Ho (talk) 19:07, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

One possibility is to look at the history page of the Wikipedia article and look for the people that have contributed to the article. In particular when they contribute also to Commons, you can ask them. Possibly they have ideas how to obtain the desired photos. Success. Wouter (talk) 19:30, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
@Espresso Addict, Philip Cross, Aircorn, Stephen, Marchjuly: Your thoughts about this? --George Ho (talk) 20:01, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Also pinging Jayron32. --George Ho (talk) 20:03, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Firstly, please don't use "free" and "copyrighted" as if they were opposites. They are not. We have lots of free content here that is protected by copyright.
Secondly, we already have File:Jill 080627b.jpg, for which the uploader claims to have sent in permission evidence via e-mail.
As for the subject heading, if all you want are free media, then you don't necessarily need to recruit photographers to Commons – you "only" need to convince them to publish their content under a free license. Creative Commons does a lot of work on that. LX (talk, contribs) 23:56, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
@LX: Oh... the Saward photo is still pending. Hmm... I didn't know that. That case aside, I have another case of obtaining a permission to use a photo of w:A. A. Gill. I contacted some photographers about the Commons. I provided them links to contribute to Wikimedia Commons, like a Welcome page and COM:Flickr files. I did imply permission to use their photos, but I also said that they can upload their photos to Commons themselves. I've not yet received a response from them. Well, I did receive one email saying that this photo is not his work but someone else's. I replied and still am awaiting another response. --George Ho (talk) 01:32, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
we have a desperate need for photos. why don't you submit an idea lab for small grants for photo stringers of living people at premieres and book festivals? Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 04:15, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
@Slowking4: I am not sure which "idea lab" you refer to. Can you clarify? Commons:Picture requests looks messy and requires a lot of cleanup. --George Ho (talk) 04:36, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
it is the on ramp to grants - here you go meta:Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire - Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 12:04, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
@Slowking4: Reading IdeaLab, that requires a lot of resources and effort. What happens if I just bring up the idea and then not contribute afterwards? --George Ho (talk) 20:09, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
idealab is where you pitch ideas - the probability of implementation goes up as the quality of the planning goes up. - it will take resources to stipend photographers. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 20:33, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
@Slowking4: I created meta:Grants:IdeaLab/In memoria and commemorations, but it's more about images of people who became recently deceased and ones who are now deceased. When shall I create an idea about recruiting photographers in general? --George Ho (talk) 22:26, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

I refer people to en:WP:A picture of you (if I'm asking for a picture of them) or en:Wikipedia:Images from social media (if I'm asking them to donate pictures they've taken themselves, and then posted to sites like Twitter or Facebook. Note that the pages are on Wikipedia, because that's the brand that most people recognise, and that they are written in plain language, with (I hope) no Wikipedia jargon. Andy Mabbett (talk) 15:15, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
i have also started m:Grants:IdeaLab/images of living people. we will see if we can pry loose some expense money. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 17:16, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

February 20[edit]

European Space Agency release its content under a CC BY-SA 3.0 IGO license[edit]

[1]

If someone could import them en masse with a bot or something, that would be great.

Regards. --Thibaut120094 (talk) 14:54, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Wow! We should also review deleted files from ESA. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:35, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
@: FYI. Andy Mabbett (talk) 16:53, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
This is incredible news!! It seems from the announcement, however, that we can't automatically regard their content as CC BY-SA as we can automatically regard NASA content as PD. It's just a statement of intent to apply the license a lot more broadly. Am I reading that right? If so, hopefully they will retrospectively apply it to most of their online archives soon, if they haven't already.
Addendum: I found their use policy, which confirms that the CC BY-SA license only applies "where explicitly so stated". So it looks like this is an announcement that they plan to explicitly state it in a lot more places in the near future. I can't wait! A2soup (talk) 04:07, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Absolutely fantastic, but as has been suggested, this should only be taken as moving forward under specific circumstances. It only applies, for now, to material produced in whole by ESA, and not to anything created under partnership with industry or other agencies. So, we'll still have to exercise caution when uploading, but things are about to get a whole lot easier. Very exciting, as I especially hope this opens up even more of the Rosetta archive. Huntster (t @ c) 08:41, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Removal of out of scope mass announcements[edit]

I would like to propose that mass announcements and posts which are posted across many projects but have no obvious connection for Wikimedia Commons, or raise no issues for the Wikimedia Commons project, can be removed from the Village pump, and any contributor that takes action to do this may do so with a presumption of good faith from the wider Community. As stated at the top of this noticeboard, it "is used for discussions of the operations, technical issues, and policies of Wikimedia Commons", so posts which are simple blanket mass announcements and raise nothing of obvious interest about the operation, technical issues or policies of Wikimedia Commons should not be here, while those that meet the scope should be kept for discussion. For notices of wide general interest to the entire Wikimedia Community, CentralNotice has the best impact, and using that procedure for mass communication helps to keep this noticeboard in scope. Thanks -- (talk) 20:02, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

If you're referring to "Tech News: 2017-08" directly above, then I would prefer that they keep posting it here. There are some other announcements which are less relevant to Commons, but also less frequent... AnonMoos (talk) 01:04, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
How about replacing post like that one, which are at best tangential, with a link to the master post on meta? By the way you can subscribe and have copies on your talk page, if you really want transcluded copies. -- (talk) 02:18, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Edit summaries or the Hovercards/Page Previews beta feature are available on Wikimedia Commons. How did you get to "no obvious connection"? --Malyacko (talk) 13:35, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

If there's a specific regular post that is cluttering this page, then we can debate removing it. Otherwise this just seems like rule creep. The scope quoted above has remained unchanged since the page was created and I doubt that a whole lot of thought went into it. It used to also say "Other discussions are welcome here until pages are created to hold them" and now we have some other pages which are listed. There is more variety here than that "scope" implies. Including, for example, discussions about new websites containing free images, or noting legal and political threats/opening of free content. Even notices of wide community impact (such as WMF) may warrant discussion among Commons regulars, something that the central notice does not provide. Surely this should be a page where people can post whatever they, in good faith, feel the community might like to discuss (that doesn't have a dedicated forum) without having to read 101 rules or run the risk of someone rudely dismissing their edit. I'd rather this page supported good-faith-inclusionism than some kind of unilateral "good-faith" removalism. -- Colin (talk) 13:53, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

+1. Yann (talk) 14:10, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol keep vote.svg Agree with Colin --Jarekt (talk) 17:38, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
+1 --El Grafo (talk) 10:40, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

really dislikes the tech news has advocated several times to get rid of tech news on this page. See also discussions at Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2016/02#Tech_News:_2016-07 and Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2016/11#Tech_News:_2016-44. I'll note that this page can be unsubscribed from the delivery list by simply removing it from m:Global message delivery/Targets/Tech ambassadors. Matma Rex (talk) 16:50, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Please don't make statements about what is in my head, unless you have mind reading powers. I do not dislike tech news, and I find it interesting to check over, which I can do by following it on meta and anything tech and more urgent I tend to find out about from announcements on Wikitech-l. Movement wide newsletters and announcements posted by bots are not a good fit, as frustratingly to ask questions you have to go to yet another forum off Wikimedia Commons. If someone who contributed to the tech newsletter were to customize the post, or even just introduce it to point out anything of interest for Commons contributors, that would be great and would indicate some human interest rather than automatons relentlessly delivering box-ticking of the Comms plan. -- (talk) 17:06, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
yeah, some projects have such self regard, that they like broadcasting on noticeboards. some others narrow cast on user talk after opt in. i prefer the latter; it is more considerate. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 17:13, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose this proposal. Seems to be a solution to a non-existent problem to me. Sure, there are other methods for mass announcements, but removing these announcements from the village pump don't do any good for the community. And I think some conservative users here prefer announcements on the village pump over CentralNotice. -- Poké95 06:59, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

February 21[edit]

WikiProject Women[edit]

Hi, I created this project. Your contributions, opinions, suggestions, and critics are welcome. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:35, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

You left out Annie Besant's name in the caption. Not too sure why you chose her, since her main life's work was Theosophy, and she held a number of extremely bizarre (and sometimes repulsive) beliefs in connection with it... AnonMoos (talk) 14:19, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I don't understand what you want to say by "Annie Besant's name in the caption". The objective is to help the creation and promotion of images of women, by women and for women, irrespective of their origin, opinions, etc. And she also was a women's rights activist, although she is better known for her work on theosophy. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:41, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Dude, her name ain't in the caption. It says "British women's rights activist, writer and orator", but does not include her name. To see some of the dark side of the swirling vortex of strange occultism that was Theosophy, start with en:Root race. Would you really include a photo of en:Ilse Koch on your page? (Not that I'm comparing Besant and Koch...) AnonMoos (talk) 15:11, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
dude, go change the caption. not sure why you want to sea lion a project with anti-theosophy ideology. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 17:10, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
If I were to edit the caption, it would basically be impossible for me not to change it to be a lot less evasively blandly flattering than it is now. And if she were just a follower or believer in theosophy, it might not be so relevant -- but she was in fact its main founder, and so basically a cult leader... AnonMoos (talk) 22:27, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

What does it mean?[edit]

This message is followed by a table with metadata in every file page.

"This file contains additional information, probably added from the digital camera or scanner used to create or digitize it.

If the file has been modified from its original state, some details may not fully reflect the modified file."

What does the second sentence mean? Please explain it.--維基小霸王 (talk) 16:57, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

This refers to en:Exif data. Image editing programs can remove or modify that data. For instance, en:Exif#Problems has an example where the embedded thumbnail may not be updated when an image is modified, so the thumbnail will show an outdated version of the image. clpo13(talk) 17:26, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Would it be possible to insert a link to w:EXIF, into the text mentioned above? Andy Mabbett (talk) 20:17, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

February 22[edit]

The first video uploaded to YouTube[edit]

Hello.Is there a benefit of being here?See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Me at the zoo.webm.Thank you --ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 13:16, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Cropping an image to remove possible non-de minimis image of a fictional character?[edit]

Please see this deletion request discussion: Commons:Deletion requests/File:ShimajiroDisplayChina.jpg - A user is arguing that the image should be deleted because there is a cardboard cutout of a copyrighted character but I proposed cropping it out so what is left is de minimis (it is a display of Shimajiro-themed merchandise in China) - the character originates from Japan WhisperToMe (talk) 15:33, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Babel box is too wide[edit]

en
en

I have noticed that the box displaying the language abilities of users is too wide, as a result of which there is a distinct white edge (empty space) on the right.

The width of the box is 250px, but I think this should be 242. The examples on the right will hopefully show you the difference.

The width appears to be defined by class="mw-babel-wrapper".

I don't know if this issue can be resolved locally, but perhaps a developer or somebody with editing rights can look into it. ErikvanB (talk) 20:36, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

I've often noticed little things like this. The only answer is usually to design your own, as you've done above, or as I've done on my user page. I've also seen a lot of messy pages where the user doesn't seem to worry about it. These are the people whose pictures and posters on their walls at home are all crooked and uneven... Face-wink.svg lNeverCry 21:39, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Ha! Ha! Thanks. ;-) ErikvanB (talk) 22:29, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Also please note that there is deprecated template {{babel}} and MadiaWiki's parser function {{#babel}}. There are differences between them. --jdx Re: 04:38, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
  • You also have the option of adding the language categories to your user page manually. Daphne Lantier 08:25, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

February 23[edit]

Redirected categories, inmovable interwikis[edit]

Is there any possibility that interwikis migrate with redirecting category, see for example: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Meenikunno_Nature_Park. Otherwise, it is very dedious to fix these manually--Estopedist1 (talk) 10:13, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

I am not sure that they should migrate. Ruslik (talk) 18:51, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Voting for cut-off date for PD-old with unknown date of death of author[edit]

Hi all, to conclude the discussion about how we should deal with old files if the PMA+70 rule applies and we don't know when the author died, I have started a vote: Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#Voting. Please vote, so that we can come to a consensus. Jcb (talk) 22:22, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

February 24[edit]

~~~~ Not Working Properly[edit]

~~~~ Not Working Properly in source editing -- Suyash Dwivedi (talk) 07:17, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

@Suyash.dwivedi: How is it "not working properly"? Example and expectation required. --Malyacko (talk) 11:52, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Is there a way to export all vector graphics from a pdf automatically?[edit]

Hi all

I'm working with some open license publications that have 100s of open license vector graphics graphs in them. Currently I have worked out that I can extract them one page at a time using Illustrator or Inkscape as svg files, however it is taking far to long. Can anyone think of a way to extract the images in some way more automatically? Is there a way to automated making svg files from all pages in a pdf? There are going to be 1000s of pages in total, maybe even 10,000s.

Thanks

--John Cummings (talk) 09:17, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

I have never used it, but you might give a try to PDF2SVG. --jdx Re: 10:10, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Jdx, unfortunately I can't get it to run for some reason.... I'll keep trying. --John Cummings (talk) 16:10, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
OMG Jdx, I got it working and it is amazing. It works perfectly :) :) :), I will write a guide. --John Cummings (talk) 16:21, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Current preferred language ?[edit]

Is there a good way to get somebody's current preferred language, to pass on into a templated Wikidata query?

I know on Wikidata, the system software seems to use people's Babel template to generate a sequence of languages to offer. Is anything like that available here, and is it available to template writers?

Thanks, Jheald (talk) 16:59, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

{{int:lang}} -> en for example used in {{Fallback}}. I assume something similar was probably already build by someone in LUA. Multichill (talk) 21:25, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
In LUA one way is to call lang = frame:callParserFunction( "int", "lang" ), but as I recall the most robust way was to pass an language parameter from the template and template gets it from the user with {{int:lang}} default. See {{date}} or {{authority control}}. --Jarekt (talk) 14:43, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

February 25[edit]

Reuploading a large number of files[edit]

What's the easiest way of reuploading lots of files? I've tried using VicuñaUploader, but it refuses to reupload files. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me
10:31, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

  • By "reupload" do you mean to write over an existing file? (I don't have an answer, just trying to clarify the question.) - Jmabel ! talk 17:48, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
In case the answer to Jmabel’s question is yes, then it is a feature: In Commons:VicuñaUploader you can read “It checks file-name conflicts before sending files to Commons”. — Speravir – 18:59, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Sure, but the lack of a manual override is a bit of a misfeature. - Jmabel ! talk 21:51, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
@Jmabel: It depends a bit from point of view, I think. At least it should not be made too easy to overwrite files to hinder (?) vandalism. — Speravir – 19:05, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Clearly it shouldn't be something absolutely anyone can do, but equally clearly there should be some way to give someone believed to be reliable a means to do this. - Jmabel ! talk 22:17, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
@Speravir: Is there another program or script that allows reuploading? Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me
05:49, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
@Jc86035: Just before the cited sentence there is a reference to Commonist, see Commons:Commonist. The VicuñaUploader is more or less a fork of it. (Update: More less. “Fork” is very probably the wrong word here. — Speravir – 21:56, 26 February 2017 (UTC)) And then there is Pattypan, like VicuñaUploader programmed by Yarl, but I do only know, that it exists. — Speravir – 19:05, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
@Speravir: I've tried Commonist and it does work, but it annoyingly overwrites all the description pages. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me
12:23, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Though it may not help: There is also Commons:Upload tools. I didn’t myself know of this until today. — Speravir – 00:37, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Sorting character for unidentified subjects[edit]

Please could we discuss it in Category talk:unidentified subjects#Sorting character thanks--Pierpao.lo (listening) 10:53, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Multiple copyvio uploads[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Mathew_hall

82.132.236.211 23:12, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Files deleted, user warned. Yann (talk) 23:33, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

February 26[edit]

Moving images to wikipedia?[edit]

There are images of sculptures in Category:Einar Jónsson that (by my reading) are still subject to copyright restrictions, but would be acceptable at wikipedia under en:Template:PD-US-1923-abroad because the sculptures were made before 1923. I don't suppose we have an easy way to transfer things to wikipedia and delete them from Commons? Thanks. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:18, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

MediaWiki:ExCommons.js--Steinsplitter (talk) 09:26, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Excellent. Thanks, Steinsplitter. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:42, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

I've added the script, but I don't see any new options. Should something show up on the image page or elsewhere? Maybe I need special permissions? - Themightyquill (talk) 11:12, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

February 27[edit]

Backlog in permissions-commons OTRS queue[edit]

We have quite a backlog in permissions-commons OTRS queue with 640+ permissions waiting to be processed going back 2 months. I am working on the oldest permissions and many files related to them are already deleted so we need OTRS members with admin rights to process them. But any help would be appreciated. If you want to become OTRS member see meta:OTRS/Volunteering--Jarekt (talk) 14:36, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

WebM files on iOS devices will not play.[edit]

I can not play WebM files on my iPad. Is this not possible?

example: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:20100930_xl_Hermann_Scheer_Neue_Energie_fuer_linke_Alternativen_Keynote_power_to_the_people_rls_on_green_tour_scheer-100930_lowres-1GB.webm

--Molgreen (talk) 18:52, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

This seems to me not being an issue of Wikimedia Commons, but of iOS. I can play this file you’ve uploaded with Firefox on Windows. As far as iknow there is a Firefox for iOS: Firefox for iOS — Mozilla or (only German link) „Firefox Klar: Der Browser mit Privatsphäre“ im App Store. I do not know, whether this version is able to play WebM. — Speravir – 21:56, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
iOS don't natively support WebM, so you can't play WebM files on iOS devices without a third-party app. Chrome and Firefox, which both have iOS versions, natively supports WebM. VLC (it also have an iOS version) also natively support WebM. Poké95 09:54, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Tech News: 2017-09[edit]

19:55, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

February 28[edit]

سلام، چگونه می توانم به یک مقاله ویکی پدیا یک عکس اضافه کنم؟

اینجا را ببین.. Maybe a Persian speaker can give you more help.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 09:11, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Is there a way to scrape The Noun Project website for icons?[edit]

Hi

The Noun Project has 1000s of very clean, well designed icons, many of which are available under a Wikimedia compatible license. Currently. They would be incredibly useful for outreach projects, publications, Wikiproject pages etc, I have used them widely on the Connected Open Heritage project]. The site has names and categories for each icon and clear licensing, it also has an API. Would some kindly wizard be able to take a look at if it is possible to mass import them? I would be very happy to do grunt work.

Thanks

--John Cummings (talk) 09:44, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

ships menus[edit]

Menu Transatlantique French line Liberte.jpg
I have a few questions:
  • Wat is the date of the menu?
  • Who is the painter/illustrator of the French frigate (a ship within a ship) on the menu?
  • I have made a detail scan and removed stains. Is it posible to use the detail picture to correct the main picture?Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:48, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
@Smiley.toerist:, maybe adding the Category:1856 in France could be useful. Lotje (talk) 12:54, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
It seems to be the same image as this one by "F. Roux". Oddly, the menu says the ship was launched 26 April 1856, contradicting the info at en:French frigate Audacieuse (1856). They seem to have used the same cover image at least as early as 1950, but this ebay sale of a very similar menu dates it to 1961. I guess you are planning to change the source from "own work"? - Themightyquill (talk) 12:57, 28 February 2017 (UTC)