Commons:Village pump

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

Shortcut: COM:VP

↓ Skip to table of contents ↓       ↓ Skip to discussions ↓       ↓ Skip to the last discussion ↓
COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES (index)
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; the latest archive is Commons:Village pump/Archive/2022/06.

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:


 
Cast iron pump with handle dated 1875 in the form of a fluted column with Corinthian capital on a profiled, square stone base [add]
Centralized discussion
See also: Village pump/Proposals • Archive

Template: View • Discuss  • Edit • Watch
# 💬 Title Replies 🗣️ Last editor ⏰ (UTC)
1 Is re-licensing own work possible? 4 4 LPfi 2022-07-01 13:45
2 Name mountain river in the Tatra mountains 6 5 LPfi 2022-07-01 14:01
3 SUL not working 9 7 Robert Flogaus-Faust 2022-06-29 17:58
4 Graphic lab icon 3 2 Donald Trung 2022-06-30 05:15
5 Adjacent maps 3 2 Jheald 2022-06-29 20:35
6 Notification of DMCA takedown demand - Liberia, Africa 2013 10 5 El Grafo 2022-07-04 16:44
7 How to download audio files from the Library of Historical Audio Recordings at i78s 4 2 Yann 2022-06-30 18:16
8 Can anyone find more info on what looks like "Sig. Greene" 5 3 Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 2022-06-30 12:06
9 Object location 3 3 Jarekt 2022-06-30 12:02
10 Facial recognition of holocaust victims 1 1 Pigsonthewing 2022-06-30 10:46
11 Locations in Slovakia 6 2 Smiley.toerist 2022-07-06 20:02
12 "recent changes" query 1 1 Conny 2022-06-30 20:17
13 Category moves 5 2 Schlosser67 2022-07-01 11:17
14 havelshouseofhistory 3 3 Animalparty 2022-07-01 22:31
15 Updated UAE law 1 1 JWilz12345 2022-07-04 03:02
16 Results of Wiki Loves Folklore 2022 is out! 1 1 MediaWiki message delivery 2022-07-04 16:12
17 Repository of 400k pictures under CC-BY, mostly from underrepresented countries 12 6 Syced 2022-07-06 00:42
18 Is it allowed to re-nominate photos as a quality image? 3 2 Drow male 2022-07-05 17:27
19 Fair use and Commons 4 4 Jmabel 2022-07-05 15:23
20 Abuse filter overwriting artwork 3 2 Adam Cuerden 2022-07-05 21:04
21 Crop tool 3 2 Pigsonthewing 2022-07-06 16:27
22 New Sign language videos not displayed properly 2 2 C.Suthorn 2022-07-06 02:35
23 Vinayaraj user categories 1 1 Themightyquill 2022-07-06 08:38
24 Speedy deletion script/tool/gadget 9 4 Pigsonthewing 2022-07-06 16:32
25 Italian law change may impact images of cultural heritage subjects 2 2 Ruslik0 2022-07-06 21:02
Legend
  • In the last hour
  • In the last day
  • In the last week
  • In the last month
  • More than one month
Manual settings
When exceptions occur,
please check the setting first.
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 7 days.

June 26[edit]

Is re-licensing own work possible?[edit]

Is such a change allowed? Veverve (talk) 02:56, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, also as the user changed the license to less restrictive (cc-by-sa-4.0 -> cc0) there should be no problem with it in any case. --Zache (talk) 03:00, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Once an item is deliberately released as PD, if it is still within copyright and the author changes their mind, most jurisdictions will uphold attribution, and sometimes protect the author if the work is being used as an attack on them. How would you explain it... if I release my work to the public domain, and you claim it is your work, I can prevent that by demanding attribution. But I cannot prevent its use or demand a fee on sales, because I released it with a contract of free use to the general public. So the reality is, unrestricted commercial attribution and public domain are basically the same thing. Attribution in the license is as much a warning to the end user as a gift to the author. Correct me of course if I'm wrong. And I've read somewhere that some jurisdictions will prevent a work being used to humiliate the author, but I am fuzzy on the details of that. ~ R.T.G 10:27, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In most of Europe and some other parts of the word, there is the concept of moral rights to a work, separate from the economic rights. In Finland (probably the same in all the EU) you cannot give away your moral rights, and thus a PD release is not legally possible. CC-zero tries to get as close as possible while still valid e.g. in the EU. It explicitly gives away as much as is legally possible using only general language. A PD release is legally invalid in the EU: you are still entitled to your moral rights (attribution, limits on use and on modifications) and can uphold them in court, but whether you lost your economic rights by the the invalid release is up to the court, and what they decide may vary by jurisdiction. –LPfi (talk) 13:45, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 27[edit]

Name mountain river in the Tatra mountains[edit]

River in the Tatra mountains 1994 1.jpg

This river starts high in the mountains and passes the village Stará Lesná on the way to join the Podrad river. I walked downriver until I could take the train back at Tatranská Lesná station. There are other images numbered from 2 to 6.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:57, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Second question: I noticed in 2014 a lot of dead trees in the area (File:Tatra forest dying trees 2014 1.jpg). What happened?Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:03, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Smiley.toerist: Sorry, Google Maps doesn't know.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 13:58, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If I read the OSM correctly, this is the Studený potok.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:31, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Smiley.toerist: toen ik langskwam zag ik je opmerking en breidde de beschrijving bij de afbeelding uit. Mocht ik fout zitten, dan hoor ik het graag. :-) Lotje (talk) 15:49, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In the 1980s (?) there were many areas with dead trees because of acid rain. I have seen similar caused by insects. I don't know the Tatra area, so I cannot say what the reason is here. –LPfi (talk) 14:01, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 28[edit]

Graphic lab icon[edit]

The WP-fr graphic lab icon has changed. The icon currently used is File:Logo wikigraphiste.svg. Can you replace it with the current one in the Atelier graphique and Graphic lab templates ? Regards. Manjiro5 [💬] 20:31, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Does everything have to be more minimalist? The description reads "Icône pour le modèle Utilisateur graphiste sur la Wikipédia francophone. Version simplifiée et plus moderne File:Crystal Clear app gimp (vector).svg", the thing is, minimalist logos look like something a toddler can draw with ease, intricate logos actually require more skills as a graphic artist to make. Plus the whole idea of it being "more modern" simply means "following trends", it is also a trend to slap "Copyright - All rights reserved, you may NOT copy, archive, store, or many ANY unauthorised copies even for private use anywhere" on a website (I don't even think that copying something for private archives is explicitly disallowed, as most film and music related Copyright suits are also about the distribution of copied materials rather than the copying itself, but that's another story). I don't see any particular reason to follow a trend simply because "it's trendy".
"Version simplifiée et plus moderne" is just "Version simplifiée", C'est simplifiée pour les simplification (It's simplified for the sake of simplification). If multiple versions of the same image exist then it could simply be added as an optional thing unless there's widespread consensus that it should be changed.
I've seen what simplification does to Wikimedia websites and the Vietnamese-language Wikipedia's "Desktop mode" is nearly un-useable because of it, all for the sake of "modernisation" (simplification).
For mobile devices an argument could be made that the simplified "more modern" logo is better.
But let's objectively compare these two (2) images, they're both just paintings with a brush on it, the main argument for simplifying logos like these is that they are easier to see on small screen devices (see the attached image above / to the right), but I'm not sure if that's a good argument either. One could make the argument for consistency as logos have consistently been Simplified (page protections, OTRS / VRT logo, among others), but I'm not sure if that would be a good argument either. Perhaps this should be proposed at the talk page of the Graphic Lab to see if there's consensus for it. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 05:12, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Interestingly enough the mobile version of this template doesn't display any image at all, so this "more modern version" (read: mobile-friendly version) is basically only useful for people on a mobile device in "Desktop mode". I genuinely don't see the added benefit here. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 05:15, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 29[edit]

Notification of DMCA takedown demand - Liberia, Africa 2013[edit]

In compliance with the provisions of the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), and at the instruction of the Wikimedia Foundation's legal counsel, one or more files have been deleted from Commons. Please note that this is an official action of the WMF office which should not be undone. If you have valid grounds for a counter-claim under the DMCA, please contact me. The takedown can be read here.

Affected file(s):

To discuss this DMCA takedown, please go to COM:DMCA#Liberia, Africa 2013. Thank you! Joe Sutherland (WMF) (talk) 21:51, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the same photographer, jbdodane/blk24ga, uploaded thousands of photos under a CC-BY license to Panoramio and then switched to selling them commercially on Alamy. There could be more takedown notices yet to come related to this photographer. Nosferattus (talk) 03:47, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Nosferattus: so do you you think the photog uploaded in the past with a free license and is trying to walk back the legitimately granted license rather than that some Panoramio user was grabbing these illegitimately? If so, this might be worth someone pursuing. - Jmabel ! talk 03:53, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel: The photos at Alamy have detailed descriptions (regarding non-obvious information) that are not present on Panoramio, so I don't think it was someone just trying to resell someone else's photos from Panoramio. Here are the two photosets if you want to investigate further: https://web.archive.org/web/20161029043147/http://www.panoramio.com/user/6465408?with_photo_id=97582260 https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/?pseudoid=%7b37481651-1769-4C51-9FBB-3FC90C779570%7d&name=jbdodane. Nosferattus (talk) 04:08, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Nosferattus: Oh, I'm sure it wasn't someone just trying to resell someone else's photos from Panoramio. My suspected scenario is that he put them up, free-licensed, on Panoramio. We legitimately republished those free-licensed photos. Then he changed his mind, put the pictures on Alamy, and no longer offered the free license. But you can't take back an irrevocable license. - Jmabel ! talk 15:31, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It seems we have a problem with at least some of these images. See Carl's comment on COM:DMCA#Liberia, Africa 2013 and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Kenedja Hotel - panoramio.jpg. Yann (talk) 14:34, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
See Category:Files from blk24ga Panoramio stream. BTW we have a technical issue somewhere: 593 results while only 400 files (and only 35 files). Yann (talk) 15:18, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FTR: There's also Category:Images from blk24ga Flickrstream. Seems to be a mis-named duplicate of the Panoramio category: there's partial overlap and I did not encounter any images actually coming from Flickr. El Grafo (talk) 13:29, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and I can't remove this category with VFC. Any idea? Yann (talk) 14:31, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Cat-A-Lot also skips and complains that "the old category could not be found", even though it is clearly there in the wikitext - not hidden in a template or something. HotCat has no issues removing it. No problem with Cat-A-Lot and other categories on the same image [1], so it must have to do with either this category in particular (bug?) or flickr stream categories in general (undocumented feature to prevent abuse?). El Grafo (talk) 16:44, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 30[edit]

How to download audio files from the Library of Historical Audio Recordings at i78s[edit]

The website i78s.org is a treasure trove of tens of thousands of digitized 78rpm discs from 1892 to 1939, all from David Giovannoni's amazing private collection (which consists mostly of early American pop music). Thanks to the Classics Protection and Access Act, all of those recordings published before 1923 are public domain. Unfortunately, however, the i78s website does not offer any way to download audio tracks; it only lets you listen to them via the website's embedded player. After some digging into the website's Javascript, I was able to figure out how to extract the mp3 files:

  1. Find a track you are interested in and load its "blue card" which shows the discographic information.
  2. Get the record ID. Hover your mouse over the email icon under the close box. In Chrome this should show you the URL in the bottom corner of the browser window, something like mailto:feedback@i78s.org?subject=i78s Feedback ID %2315214. You can also just click the email icon, which will open your email program and start a new email with a subject like i78s Feedback ID #15214. The record ID in either of these cases is 15214 (the %23 in the URL is a URL-encoded hash mark, not part of the record ID).
  3. Load https://i78s.org/api/audio?recordId=XXXXX, replacing the XXXXX with the record ID. This will either load the mp3 directly in your browser or start downloading it.

Note that only autopatrollers and higher level users can upload mp3 files to Commons. Nosferattus (talk) 00:13, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@, Yann, Illegitimate Barrister, and Mysterymanblue: Pinging some folks who might be interested in this. Nosferattus (talk) 00:16, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also note that the {{PD-US-record-expired}} template is the licensing tag you would want to use for these. Nosferattus (talk) 00:27, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Nosferattus: Thanks for the information. I only get a register form, and I can't manage to register. :( Yann (talk) 18:16, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone find more info on what looks like "Sig. Greene"[edit]

At File:Max Samuel Grifenhagen.jpg the artist looks like "Sig. Greene", can anyone find more on him so he can have a Wikidata entry? --RAN (talk) 01:22, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Object location[edit]

Since more than a year, I have entered object locations in this way {{object location|nn.nnnn|ee.eeee|region:LAND}}. It worked very well, the geographic data were shown in gr°min'sec. Today, everywhere a warning ist shown, "Lua error in Module:Coordinates at line 168: attempt to index local 'entity' (a nil value).".--Ulamm (talk) 08:42, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps because of this change? @Jarekt: as the user who edited that. --Rosenzweig τ 09:18, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pictogram voting keep-light-green.svg Fixed --Jarekt (talk) 12:02, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Facial recognition of holocaust victims[edit]

This resource may be useful for identifying people in our pictures of holocaust victims. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:46, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Locations in Slovakia[edit]

Very similar church to: File:Vaľkovňa, kostol.jpg

The chronological sequence can be found in Category:Smiley Toerist Slovakia 1993 trip. These places cannot be far appart as we moved mostly be foot. Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:25, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, that's not as easy I thought it would be. The photo 51 is Červená Skala railway station for sure and 62 is Vaľkovna. So I assume, that the church should be located somewhere in between (or nearby). But it doesn't ressemble any of churches: Telgárt, Šumiac, Červená Skala ([2]), Vaľkovna, Pohorelská Maša ([3]), Pohorelá. The church would be located at the side of some of 1st class roads (due to road markings), in the area being Road I/66 or I/67 (if we extend the searching area). Regards — Draceane talkcontrib. 15:34, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I must clarify: The pictures 49 to 51, was a restday, where I did do some local rail travel, without the group. The group travelled by train from Vaľkovňa station to Pohorelá. This was not the original plan, but it was raining and with the train one could do some distance. After the train we had to climb up the mountains. Both the church and the farm are before the train trip.Smiley.toerist (talk) 16:50, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Smiley.toerist: OK, so then it's church in Stratená. :-) — Draceane talkcontrib. 18:19, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tatra mountain ranges[edit]

My trip was outside the very visited high Tatras (north of Poprad), but the less wel known 'Nizke Tatry' range (see map: [4]). I suspect this is under another name in Category:Mountain ranges of Slovakia. When I research the mountain top Category:Ďumbier, it is classified by 'Lower Tatras'. At 2043 meters it is stil a high mountain. (The highest in Slovakia is 2655 meter)

Problem solved: translate Slovak to English: Nizke ->> Low.Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:52, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Does any one know the spectacular hike route along the ridges?Smiley.toerist (talk) 20:02, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"recent changes" query[edit]

Please find my search for an sample query. Regards Conny (talk) 20:17, 30 June 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Category moves[edit]

There seem to be many unanswered requests on page User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands/Category moves. Has the robot fallen asleep? --Schlosser67 (talk) 20:58, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Schlosser67: FWIW, That's a talk page, so I don't think a bot is running on these. It's up to some admin to move these to User:CommonsDelinker/commands so the bot will act on them. Looks like a backlog has accumulated. - Jmabel ! talk 22:00, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've approved a few dozen. Let's see what happens. - Jmabel ! talk 22:19, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like those went fine. So it's just a matter of admin backlog. - Jmabel ! talk 02:22, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking into the matter! The "robot fallen asleep" was meant tongue-in-cheek, of course. Let's see what happens. --Schlosser67 (talk) 11:17, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 01[edit]

havelshouseofhistory[edit]

The site appearing as the source of various autographs and illustrations is given as http://www.havelshouseofhistory.com but links now lead to https://ivanteevka.org/ which appears to be a gambling site. Mcljlm (talk) 15:09, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could we blacklist that along with boxrec.com?   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 16:14, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The last stable URL in Internet Archive appears to be July 2012, after which it briefly turned into a Turkish website before redirecting to a domain registration site and finally becoming the Indonesian gambling site of today. What a trip! If current dead/hijacked links can be archived, that would be ideal. --Animalparty (talk) 22:31, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 04[edit]

Updated UAE law[edit]

The UAE copyright law was recently updated last year, coming into force in January this year. The 2003 law is now repealed. Impacted page is COM:CRT/United Arab Emirates.

but I'll not prolong Wikimedian photographers' expectations: no freedom of panorama still in UAE even in the new law. They just changed "broadcasting programmes" to "broadcasts."

The link: https://www.moec.gov.ae/documents/20121/376326/copyright.pdf (found on the "notes" of the WIPO lex entry of the law that only contains the Arabic edition). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:02, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Results of Wiki Loves Folklore 2022 is out![edit]

Please help translate to your language

Wiki Loves Folklore Logo.svg

Hi, Greetings

The winners for Wiki Loves Folklore 2022 is announced!

We are happy to share with you winning images for this year's edition. This year saw over 8,584 images represented on commons in over 92 countries. Kindly see images here

Our profound gratitude to all the people who participated and organized local contests and photo walks for this project.

We hope to have you contribute to the campaign next year.

Thank you,

Wiki Loves Folklore International Team

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:12, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 05[edit]

Repository of 400k pictures under CC-BY, mostly from underrepresented countries[edit]

MV Likoni, uploaded via Crowdsource, and best picture of this ship we have so far
We had "Textile Mills in ..." categories for most US states, but zero picture for Pakistan, the 4th largest textile producer in the world

Hi all,

Here is a repository of 400k pictures under CC-BY: https://crowdsource.google.com/images

Pros:

  • Mostly from Africa and other underrepresented regions. These are the regions from where Commons and the Wikipedias need pictures the most.
  • All pictures are recent.
  • More than 30% of the pictures are of good photographic quality.
  • A good 5% of the pictures show something that has a Wikipedia article but no Commons picture yet.

Cons:

  • No geolocation nor description. This limits us to pictures where the subject can be identified, for instance ships/military/devices/streets/signs/etc.
  • Labels are unreliable.
  • No date. You only know that all pics were uploaded between 2016 and now, so please mention that in the description.

Please use the search bar to find relevant pictures, flex your detective skills and Google Street View to identify the place with 100% certainty, and upload them where they fit :-)

Pictures imported from the Crowdsource app dataset so far: Category:Contributed via Google Crowdsource app

Thanks! Syced (talk) 01:46, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Great! As for date: {{other date|between|2016|2022}}. - Jmabel ! talk 02:05, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another "con": all faces are covered in Gaussian blurs. While this is sometimes desirable, it's super-inconvenient in terms of any picture of a particular person. - Jmabel ! talk 02:13, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you click on the source link to check if the license fits, you are suggested to log in on Google. I don't think this is a proper way to go: source page and license should be visible to everyone, not just to those who happen to have a Google account and bother to login. Therefore, the pictures should be deleted due to licensing issues, and not uploaded from this source anymore. Regards --A.Savin 07:21, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @A.Savin: I disagree. We allow uploads of pictures scanned from books that not everyone can access, and a picture from a Web site that only some people can access is similar. COM:EVID doesn't have any requirement for a lack of paywall or similar. It might be a good idea to put these pictures through Commons:License review, though, so that one licence reviewer with a Google account can confirm the licence for everyone else. --bjh21 (talk) 10:45, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Syced another con: much of the public space in Pakistan is ok here because of {{FoP-Pakistan}}. For Africa, unfortunately, the number of countries with suitable freedom of panorama can only be counted by one's hands: Algeria, Angola, Egypt, Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Eswatini, Kenya, Lesotho, Mauritania, Nigeria, São Tomé and Príncipe, Tunisia, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. For other countries, perhaps only sceneries, nature, flora and fauna, very old / ancient buildings, ordinary houses or structures with no artistic touches, and cityscapes (where individual architectures are de minimis) are OK. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:37, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Is it really a con of the dataset itself? :-) It is true that a lot of the pictures are from Africa, but most seem to not be pictures of buildings, see for instance https://crowdsource.google.com/images?labels=africa Thanks for the reminder! Syced (talk) 12:49, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Syced: you're welcome. And, take note of some concerns opened by other editors above my message. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 17:51, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can we not get a bot to import all these images, and put them into a holding category for review? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:05, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Pigsonthewing: While there is plenty good here, the majority are not worth having and (by my quick estimate) well over 10% will involve copyvios because of what they portray. So I'd be really hesitant to bring them all into Commons on a fully automated basis. - Jmabel ! talk 18:33, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • After browsing a few hundreds pictures (and importing 26 of them), I agree with Jmabel's estimation numbers. A bot would have to be really smart to identify whether the picture should be imported or not without any human help. Browsing 400k pictures manually is not realistic either, so maybe something semi-automatic could work, for instance pre-selection then import using the right settings? It is a lot of work, but the opportunity to amend our geographical bias is hard to ignore. A link and explanation with sufficient warnings at Commons:Free_media_resources/Photography#General_collections could be a good start. Syced (talk) 00:42, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is it allowed to re-nominate photos as a quality image?[edit]

For a few years now, I have nominated several of my photographs to be Quality Images. Some 121 received the affirmative vote, and a few did not pass the filter, some because they were not centered (it was fixed by cropping them) or they needed a perspective correction.

These days I am learning to handle the Gimp, and I wonder if it is possible to nominate these photos again, in case I make the pertinent modifications that, due to my ignorance, then I did not know how to do. --Drow male (talk) 07:12, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Drow male: Probably better to ask at Commons talk:Quality images. - Jmabel ! talk 15:21, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thank you. Drow male (talk) 17:27, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use and Commons[edit]

Why is it impossible to upload fair-use files on Commons? If I correctly understand, Commons was created to simplify usage of the same file in multiple Wikipedia projects, but It’s need for fair-use files too. 31.131.194.249 10:05, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because only some marginalized areas (the state between Canada and Mexico for example) allow fair use and only very few wikipedias (en for example) have a rationale for use of fair use. And: For each case that you actually use an image under the fair use rationale you have to write an individual text explaining the rationale for the specific use of the specific image. That does rule out reuse and therefore it does make no sense to lobby for fair use in commons. It is not simple and it cannot be simple. C.Suthorn (talk) 11:05, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
See also COM:FAIR and the WikiMedia Foundation Licensing Policy Resolution of 23 March 2007.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 11:17, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But there's more to it than that. Commons is not just a repository for Wikipedia. The intent is to host content that can freely be reused. Inherently, material used on a "fair use" basis cannot be freely reused. - Jmabel ! talk 15:23, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse filter overwriting artwork[edit]

Is there any easy way around this? I don't upload over originals, but it's not uncommon for me to be doing a restoration, someone changes the information template to an artwork (or the original I've created a copy of used it already), and then, if the files are greater than 100MB, I can't use the chunked upload script (because of the abuse filter), and I can't use the regular upload (because greater than 100MB, and simply removing the Artwork template doesn't seem to remove them from the filter. If it helps, File:Thure de Thulstrup - Battle of Shiloh.png is the file in question in this case.

I think someone presumed Artwork = painting, which would be fine if people didn't keep slapping it on every lithograph, poster, photograph and illustration they could find. Honestly, I kind of dislike the template for several reasons (its fields don't fit well with a lot of use cases people try to force it onto) but I can live with the rest. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:12, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam Cuerden: You just need to include the word "overwrite" or "overwriting" in your edit summary. -- King of ♥ 18:47, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Really? Well, that's useful knowledge. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:04, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Crop tool[edit]

It's obvious from several recent, and unresolved, posts on Commons talk:CropTool that the near-essential Crop Tool is badly broken. Can someone fix it (perhaps by rolling back changes), or should it be disabled and links to it removed from other pages? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:54, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

maybe only remove it from tif-file-description-pages. jpeg works mostly. --C.Suthorn (talk) 19:46, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's failing on jpegs for me. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:27, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New Sign language videos not displayed properly[edit]

Hello all,
Is there a (new) known issue with video display ? Making video files being displayed as audio files ?
We uploaded videos produced by the same programing tool in 2018 and 2022. The early video is displayed properly in Commons / Wikipedia. The later one is displayed as an audio file, but when we open it in a browser (media:LL-Q33302 (fsl)-Yug-chinois.webm), the browser displays it as a video file. When we inspect the html code, the first one is considered by mediawiki a `video`, the second one is considered an `audio`.

Any hint to share ? --Yug (talk) 21:30, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Link: File:LL-Q33302 (fsl)-Yug-chinois.webm. Probably the upload is incomplete. If you download the file from the media-link you provided and compare it to the file you uploaded, you will most likely find, that the uploaded version is some bytes smaller. --C.Suthorn (talk) 02:35, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 06[edit]

Vinayaraj user categories[edit]

Vinayaraj has kindly shared a great number of images with commons, and has categorized them in his own user categories, which is also great. Unfortunately, however, he named these user categories by simply adding "Vinayaraj" to the end of them, which is frequently confusing since many of these categories are latin names for plants and animals. These were nominated for discussion by Charlesjsharp and then Vinayaraj asked me to rename them all to "by Vinayaraj" for clarity. I deleted the first one, but I didn't realize just how many there were. Can anyone help do this mass renaming with a bot? Thanks! -- Themightyquill (talk) Themightyquill (talk) 08:38, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion script/tool/gadget[edit]

Like in en WP, where there are Twinkle, Ultraviolet, and RedWarn among others which provide for one-click speedy deletion nomination, are there any such things here on Commons? I couldn’t find any such thing on preferences. MxYamato (talk) 14:31, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MxYamato: "Quick Delete" under preferences/ Gadgets - but I see you use an iPad, and that may not be available on mobile, only desktop, view. See Help:QuickDelete. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:32, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help nominating personal photos for speedy deletion[edit]

A user, @Ambika kushwaha simraungadh has posted a good deal of personal photos, som explicitly labelled as “Ambika fb” (fb for Facebook I guess). See this. Can someone please help me nominating them under CSD F10, and notifying the user on their talk page. I’m a little new to Commons and couldn’t find a tool/script like Twinkle or Ultraviolet over here. Thank you. MxYamato (talk) 14:34, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MxYamato: In general, I find the best tool for this is VisualFileChange. Takes a little learning, but if you are going to do this sort of thing it's worth it.
However, in this case this user has all of seven uploads. Surely that is not too much to do by hand. - Jmabel ! talk 14:50, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see, thank you. He has seven, yes, but I use an iPad and its keyboard has a small trackpad. My wrist pains. MxYamato (talk) 14:56, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@MxYamato: Hi, and welcome. Reporting of a copyright violation here is with {{Copyvio}} is generally accompanied by a post of a notification to the user talk page of the uploader using {{Copyvionote}}. Alternatively to using those manually, you can click the "Report copyright violation" link in the left sidebar, under the "tools" section, which does all of the work for you. Please do one of those. If you don't see the "Report copyright violation" link in the left sidebar, you can use the JavaScript method of enabling AjaxQuickDelete on Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets once and then refresh once (to see my extra buttons, search User:Jeff G./common.js for "window.AjaxDeleteExtraButtons"). TwinkleGlobal has some rudimentary function here (search m:User:Jeff G./global.js for Xiplus to see my implementation). To notify users, use the User Messages gadget. See also COM:TOOLS.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 15:03, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, @Jeff G. for the information. However, the issue at hand is related to personal photos posted users who have no constructive contributions, and their deletion per CSD F10. Your provided info is useful to me still, thanks. MxYamato (talk) 15:06, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@MxYamato: I use my 'Speedy F10' button for that.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 15:21, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nice, trying to put those things on my script file now. MxYamato (talk) 15:23, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Italian law change may impact images of cultural heritage subjects[edit]

"Reusing images of Italian cultural heritage from Wikimedia Commons will become more difficult".

According to the new Italian National Plan for the Digitization of Cultural Heritage (Piano Nazionale di Digitalizzazione, PND) images can be published on the Wikimedia projects, but to reuse them for commercial purposes you need to ask for permission and pay a fee.

-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:37, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

These are non-copyright restrictions. Ruslik (talk) 21:02, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. Commons should only host media that can be re-used, even commercially, for free. The above proposed restriction clearly prohibits free commercial re-use. -M.nelson (talk) 22:34, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@M.nelson: So are you saying we should not host trademarked but uncopyrightable logos? You're welcome to propose that, but I can tell you pretty confidently that you'll be voted down. - Jmabel ! talk 01:49, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel: If trademarks prevented all commercial re-use, I would agree. But I believe trademark infringement only applies to "mis-using" the trademark (for example re-using it in a way that misleads a consumer or implies sponsorship), and therefore there are legitimate ways to re-use trademarked content. -M.nelson (talk) 10:36, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It may be a form of COM:Non-copyright restrictions, but the dictates of the upcoming Italian law already do not conform with the principles of the Definition of Free Cultural Works. There are four such freedoms — "freedom to use the work and enjoy the benefits of using it," "the freedom to study the work and to apply knowledge acquired from it," "the freedom to make and redistribute copies, in whole or in part, of the information or expression," and "the freedom to make changes and improvements, and to distribute derivative works." The under-review law will trample upon the first, third, and fourth freedoms.
As per what is indicated on the Wikimedia blog article, it is the first time this media repository was mentioned. The law mentioned it as: "The download of cultural heritage reproductions published on third-party websites is not under the control of the public entity that holds the assets (e.g., images of cultural heritage assets downloadable from Wikimedia Commons, made “freely” by contributors by their own means for purposes of free expression of thought and creative activity, and thus in the full legitimacy of the Cultural Heritage Code). It remains the responsibility of the cultural institution to charge fees for subsequent commercial uses of reproductions published by third parties." In the original Italian text ([5]):
Il download di riproduzioni di beni culturali pubblicati in siti web di terze parti non è sotto il controllo dell’ente pubblico che ha in consegna i beni (ad es. le immagini di beni culturali scaricabili da Wikimedia Commons, realizzate “liberamente” dai contributori con mezzi propri per fini di libera manifestazione del pensiero e attività creativa, e quindi nella piena legittimità del Codice dei beni culturali). Rimane nelle competenze dell’istituto culturale l’applicazione di corrispettivi per i successivi usi commerciali delle riproduzioni pubblicate da terze parti.
_ JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:00, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is a substantial restriction on freedom, but I think we just have to roll with it, if that's the law as passed. It is unreasonable for us not to host copies of ancient works because Greece and Italy want to enact some form of eternal copyright-like protections. Our current copyright rules block uploading some files we potentially could, but we're talking 25-40 years at worst, usually for hundreds of millions of people, not eternal protection of BCE works for laws of one country.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:49, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Prosfilaes anyway, Wikimedia Italia is doing its best to stop this cultural heritage law from being implemented. From the Wikimedia blog article: Wikimedia Italia sent an open letter to representatives of the Italian government, calling out not to add restrictions on images of cultural heritage in the public domain licensed under an open license on Wikimedia projects. We will keep asking that, to push our country to align to international standards on openness and civil society participation to the conservation of its own heritage. There is already no FOP there, but adding such restriction adds fuel to the no-FOP-in-Italy fire. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:19, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If this rules are as strict as I understand from the discussion and quotes here I think they would be in conflict with with European contracts because of restriction of press and research freedom as there is no exception for education, research and reporting. I understand that they want some restrictions for commercial use like there are for pictures of identifiable humans. But with this they would prohibit nearly every publishing and using of photos of old buildings. --GPSLeo (talk) 15:11, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 07[edit]