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 ↓
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/2023/09.

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:

# 💭 Title 💬 👥 🙋 Last editor 🕒 (UTC)
1 Check location 4 2 Smiley.toerist 2023-09-17 10:48
2 Largest file? 6 5 Enyavar 2023-09-20 08:30
3 Higgins 5 2 RZuo 2023-09-19 06:34
4 Potential commons UTRS? 25 13 Abzeronow 2023-09-20 19:03
5 File:Allam Medical Building.jpg 3 3 DMacks 2023-09-24 07:02
6 Images based on purchased 3D assets 7 3 Hemiauchenia 2023-09-17 19:38
7 Translation of poetic works 4 2 Jmabel 2023-09-24 16:03
8 The 1ooed millionth file on Wikimedia Commons 4 4 PantheraLeo1359531 2023-09-20 15:07
9 Since most of the files I have transferred from frwiki have been retained for pd-textlogo, why not delete the redundant files on frwiki? 11 5 Jmabel 2023-09-24 16:09
10 Interpretation of Template:PD-Switzerland-official 6 3 Espandero 2023-09-19 10:28
11 Cropping 9 4 Jmabel 2023-09-19 18:48
12 {{}} 2 2 Jmabel 2023-09-24 16:11
13 Do we have tools do search through EXIF data of images on WIkimedia Commons? 4 2 Polarlys 2023-09-21 13:54
14 Clitoris Anatomy labels 2 2 Glrx 2023-09-20 23:58
15 Photo challenge July results 2 2 Anna.Massini 2023-09-21 06:55
16 FoP reform status by jurisdiction 2 2 Donald Trung 2023-09-23 20:24
17 Hidden category that shouldn't be 7 4 Bjh21 2023-09-23 18:12
18 Temporary guardrails 5 4 El Grafo 2023-09-22 14:39
19 This enclosed page has an incorrect description for an image. How do I correct it? 6 2 Starlighsky 2023-09-23 02:22
20 Stalled category moves 10 4 Jmabel 2023-09-24 21:03
21 c:Category:Deletion requests by country 7 6 GPSLeo 2023-09-24 17:14
22 Best file format for 3 minutes 4K video of building demolition 5 3 Frupa 2023-09-24 11:09
23 Extraneous "thank you" in notification template 5 3 Jeff G. 2023-09-24 19:37
24 Categorisation and IP edits 2 2 From Hill To Shore 2023-09-24 22:08
  • 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.
Broadwick St, Soho, London: a water pump with its handle removed commemorates Dr. John Snow's tracing of an 1854 cholera epidemic to the pump. [add]
Centralized discussion
See also: Village pump/Proposals   ■ Archive

Template: View   ■ Discuss    ■ Edit   ■ Watch
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 7 days.

September 10[edit]

Check location[edit]

I used the board on the train in

to identify Category:Ciano train station. I cant match with the other features in the category. There are sheds but no shed with a railtrack besides it. File:Ciano d'Enza station 2002 2.jpg is the same place. The same train type leads me to the conclusion, that this should be Reggio Emilia station. Be again I miss identifying elements to confirm.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:02, 10 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

this train station should be around Parma as it is obviously the same train as File:Parma station 2002.jpg.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:08, 10 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Smiley.toerist: File:Ciano d'Enza station 2002 1.jpg and File:Ciano d'Enza station 2002 2.jpg are located at Guastalla station. You can see the shed with those colours in this older Streetview image. Here you can see your 2002 view from a bit higher up. --HyperGaruda (talk) 12:01, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks I renamed the files. I suspect I travelled from Parma File:Parma station 2002.jpg to Guastalla File:Your boiler advertising train 2002.jpg? to Reggio Emilla File:Reggio Emilia station 2002.jpg. I was put on the wrong track by the Ciano d'Enza sign (upside down on the train).Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:48, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 11[edit]

Largest file?[edit]

Hi, Let's try some useless competition. ;o) What's the largest file on Commons? File:Atlas der Alpenländer, 1874 (14243013).jpg is 3 Gigapixels. Yann (talk) 19:08, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

These are larger:
  • Disclosure: I used the search function to return any image bigger than 50000 by 50000 pixels ;)
    --HyperGaruda (talk) 20:18, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Ah yes, computer-generated images can be created arbitrary of any size. It doesn't count. ;o) Yann (talk) 21:07, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    File:“Declaration of victory after the Battle of Leipzig on 18 October 1813”.jpg is slightly smaller (2.9 gigapixels) but it's a single image rather than several images stitched together. It's also quite a bit heavier at 1.49 GB vs 720.93 MB. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 16:04, 12 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    We can even take this to the extreme. My guess is that one video may be the largest file in data, but is uploaded as split file due to the file size limit of 4 GiB (this is equal to 3:20 minutes to 5 minutes of a 4K video from a full frame camera). But if we look at the aerial photographs of Bavaria (ca. 70500m²) by the Bayerische Vermessungsverwaltung and combine them to a single image of the whole state of Bavaria, we get approx. an image of 650.000 x 915.000 Pixels (40cmx40cm equals 1 pixel), or approx. 600 Gigapixels with approx. 1 terabyte in file size. The common size limit (JPEG, PNG, etc.) is 65535x65535, so it is hard to realize such an image :) --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 14:38, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Why limit yourself to Bavaria? You want a high-resolution map of a large area, possibly a stitch of Category:100-sheets_Map_of_the_Russian_Empire_1804-1816, where each individual file measures 4900x4500 pixel. The full map is 13x10.25 of those sheets, i.e. 59k-x-50k pixel, that comes pretty close to the size limit. Additionally, it's a good contestant for the oldest largest file. So what you're looking for is old land surveys that cover as large areas as possible with as much precision as possible. --Enyavar (talk) 08:30, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    September 12[edit]


    The Flickr Commons team is stumped trying to identify this man named "Higgins" who appears to be in Manhattan in 1925 and would have been a newsworthy person: File:Higgins LCCN2014718609.jpg. Can anyone identify him? --RAN (talk) 04:14, 12 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    James A. Higgins might be a possibility, but there're no other photos online to verify. found this thru . doesnt seem to have relevant photos either. RZuo (talk) 09:44, 12 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Good clue! I looked to see if he had a US passport, but no, and his obituary has no image. No image at Ancestry either. There are still a dozen or so more from the Bain Collection unidentified, if you want to try. We are in a tranche from 1925 now, but some of the unknowns are from the a decade earlier. I will set up a page of the most prominent unidentified people later today. --RAN (talk) 12:46, 12 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @RZuo: The Library of Congress thinks they found him:,%20columbia%20records&pg=PA48#v=onepage&q=joe%20higgins%2C%20columbia%20records&f=false What do you think? --RAN (talk) 18:45, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    i dont have knowledge of america in early 20th century at all, so i cant say.
    the guy in "the billboard" does look quite similar, but i dont feel 100% sure. RZuo (talk) 06:34, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    September 14[edit]

    Potential commons UTRS?[edit]

    Blocked Commons editors with their talk page access revoked cannot usually appeal their block easily, (they could email an admin for help, but that is rarely considered) enwiki already has UTRS, why can't this be extended to commons as well? --Grandmaster Huon (talk) 17:01, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    No principled objection on my part, but a bit of an "is it worth it?" Do we have any idea how often this particular process results in someone being reinstated on en-wiki? - Jmabel ! talk 18:27, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Welp, we on ENWIKI use UTRS for people who have already lost talk page access (usually through further disruption) and people who have talk page access but who cannot follow the unblock instructions on their talk page. As you might imagine, suddenly being sent to a different venue does not improve their ability to understand the reasons for their block and make a convincing unblock request. But the goal should not be to unblock those incapable of being unblocked. The goal should be to provide a means of contact and education that reduces onwiki disruption and allows the appellant to come to grips better than if they were left in Limbo without a point of contact. And a few do come to understand how to address the reasons for their block well enough to be unblocked. Best, Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:50, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It's telling that simply being able to navigate the ENWIKI unblock procedure is considered a noteworthy achievement Trade (talk) 19:57, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I am curious if UTRS is merely a dumping ground for editors with whom we've lost patience and blocked their talk page, or if it's actually a means for someone to appeal a block successfully. Are there stats kept anywhere about the rate of successful appeals? ~Anachronist (talk) 00:11, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Not sure whether this is really necessary on Commons, as the average profile of our blocks is likely different than on :en. Usually we do not revoke talkpage access with our blocks. Typical exception are persistant vandals who continue on their malicious activity on their talkpage after being blocked. IMO, there is little need for such accounts to be unblocked ever. --Túrelio (talk) 19:11, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    What if these vandals change their ways to become constructive editors someday, how will they be able to contact commons to be unblocked? Since Commons has no UTRS and asking for unblock via email or talk page to other wikis may be considered block circumvention. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 19:22, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Not directly related to Commons but UTRS is also available for Global Lock lifting, but there are few volunteers avaliable to process these requests, but other than Meta and enwiki, UTRS is not avaliable on other wikis, there should be a global UTRS and Standard Offer proceedure for all wikis.
    Perhaps global arbcom to handle cross wiki disputes? Grandmaster Huon (talk) 19:23, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I think the existing general is sufficient for this very rare case. GPSLeo (talk) 19:44, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Enwiki info hotline doesn't respond to unblock requests. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 20:09, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    So I doubt the commons version will too. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 20:10, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    (Edit conflict) The Wikimedia Commons should have a UTRS and I don't think that "there should be a global UTRS and Standard Offer proceedure for all wikis." because "WP:SO" is an essay and not policy and it is simply enforced as policy, waiting 6 (six) months doesn't magically change someone's behaviour and deliberately telling people to wait 6 (six) months before being able to even make an appeal actually goes against the Commonswiki blocking policy which states that blocks are a preventative measure and not a punitive one, the SO is a punitive measure. Talk page and e-mail access could be revoked for many reasons beyond just talk page access, some admins just default to this and sometimes after a user sufficiently doesn't understand what they have been blocked for then an admin can decide that continued unblock requests are "a waste of time" and revokes these venues. Let's say that someone has learned to be less disruptive but they don't have TPA and can't e-mail anyone how would they appeal their block? It is considered to be taboo (and even an indef blockable offense) to request this on any other wiki. A UTRS would definitely solve this problem.
    My main issue with the UTRS is that it's all "behind closed doors", by default the bot that places the template on the blocked user's talk page should also include the entire message unless they themselves have selected to not want this to be publicly posted and the response should also be posted publicly on the talk page. The only exceptions should be in cases where privacy is indeed something to be protected.
    Users are commonly blocked for persistently uploading copyright ©️ violations and if someone learns how to respect copyright laws in 2 (two) weeks or so they shouldn't have to wait 6 (six) arbitrarily selected months over some English-language Wikipedia essay. Once TPA is revoked a standard template with information about unblocking, what the user needs to understand, and at the very bottom a link to the UTRS should be provided, obviously UTRS agents can revoke UTRS access like they already can at the English-language Wikipedia, but I don't think that we should prevent appeals for 6 (six) months for no reason other than that an essay stated the number. I also don't think that information about unblocks and how to get unblocked should be directed to general OTRS / VRTS members. Today the Wikimedia Commons has a relatively small user base, but in the future many more people can join and it's better to have the options and not need it than to need it and not have it, UTRS agents will most likely just be admins willing to take on unblock requests and won't increase the workload for anyone, it will simply simplify an otherwise difficult process to navigate. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 20:14, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Well all Wikimedia projects have a small userbase, the largest project, the english wikipedia has only 120,604 active users in the last 30 days. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 20:19, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    No, most indefinite blocks aren't for copyright violations, but for harassment, vandalism, socking, and other LTA. I don't have statistics, but that's my evaluation as longer-term admin here. I have been contacted by blocked users to other wikis, but the request is rarely in good faith. Yann (talk) 16:45, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    What if such LTA's change, the idea that once an LTA, always an LTA is unconstructive. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 18:25, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Potential CU blocks with TPA removed are difficult to appeal as there are only 4 CUs in commons and they are mostly busy, so it is difficult to get the block resolved in a timely manner. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 19:10, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I haven't been super active on en.wp UTRS the last few years, but Deepfriedokra's description is right on. It should be, they are probably the most active UTRS admin we have over there. By the time someobody reaches the point of a UTRS request, there is a solid chance they are a lost cause, but sometimes the more private one-on-one nature of UTRS seems to really work for some people, and they get unblocked. The only final avenue of appeal after UTRS is the Arbitration Committee, and Commons doesn't have that, so I think this is an idea worth at least considering as a final appeal venue for Commons, but of course it only makes sense if the admins here at Commons are willing to do it. En.wp also used to have the ban appeals subcommittee], which was comprised of a subgroup of the arbitration committe. I accidentally got it disbanded, but that's another story. Commons could try something like that even without an ArbCom, by electing a block appeals committee of something like four or five trusted admins. I do think it is valuable to have a final, off-wiki avenue of appeal that is something more than "just email any random admin you think might be sympathetic" but I'm not sure which model is agood for Commons in particular. Beeblebrox (talk) 02:24, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      UTRS with block appeal subcommittee, best of both worlds. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 04:56, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    •  Info The WMF is currently developing a new Private Incident Reporting System, maybe we could use this system for the purpose requested. --GPSLeo (talk) 07:06, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      Thank you!
      Is this possible for all wikis? Grandmaster Huon (talk) 16:05, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      It's been in development for a year now and it hasn't been implemented yet?
      Come on. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 19:11, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    •  Info As a context note for current and future readers, the proposer of this change to Commons blocking policy/procedures has been indefinitely blocked on two language versions of Wikipedia in the last month. That doesn't invalidate the proposal to make changes on Commons but it may help editors understand the proposer's perspective. From Hill To Shore (talk) 21:55, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Warning sign Attention: Parallel vote going on at VP/P. --El Grafo (talk) 09:22, 20 September 2023 (UTC) Was it really necessary to split it up like this?Reply[reply]
      I have marked that other conversation as a resolved section and invited the participants to join the discussion here. From Hill To Shore (talk) 11:48, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Yes, I noticed the invite. Thanks, From Hill To Shore. As I said in the other thread, I'd be willing to support allowing UTRS on Commons. I agree with the others that this would probably be seldom-used on Commons. I also share the concerns that it would be less transparent than unblock requests on talk pages, but measures to improve communications by those who are not familiar with Commons is a good thing. Abzeronow (talk) 19:03, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    September 16[edit]

    Hello, it looks like the original file was overwritten in 2018 by a file which appears from the file info is a copyrighted image. Could someone have a look and delete the latest version if it is a copyright otherwise move it to a different name so original can be used. Keith D (talk) 22:23, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Good spot. I've reverted and flagged the copyvio revision for deletion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:18, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    ✓ Revision deleted DMacks (talk) 07:02, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Images based on purchased 3D assets[edit]

    I am currently in a dispute with @FrankHM: regarding this image: [1]. This image is based on a purchasable 3D asset on Renderosity by Raul Lunia (Dinoraul). [2]. FrankHM has asserted that he has purchased a standard license to use the model from Renderosity (stated here), and therefore per Renderosity's license agreement he can create images that are copyrightable to him. (Covered in the section "Allowed uses of the standard license" [3]). Would something like this require UTRS to show proof of license? I have concerns that this image is not acceptable under the license regardless, as the relevant section says that the render must satify these criteria: 1. The new work does not compete with the original Product. 2. The new work is uniquely different from the original Product. However, I don't see how a render of the 3d model on a white background could be considered not-compete or "uniquely different" from the original 3d model. Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:54, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    The license for the 3D model is:
    The Buyer shall not redistribute the Product, in whole or in part, in any file format for sale or for free. The Buyer shall not store the Product any place where it could be used by another person or party (whether it is on a network or on the Internet). The Buyer shall not convert or recreate the Product to any other media format and re-distribute the files, regardless of whether it is for sale or free. The Buyer shall not use the Product in such a way that the original materials could be extracted. Products sold at Renderosity shall not be used for illegal purposes."
    The PRODUCT I have bought is a 3D model (.OBJ file). This file is NOT present in the picture! The picture is a plain .JPG file wothout that do not contain any 3D information.
    "The Buyer may copyright any newly created rendered images using the purchased, original Product files, provided the original Product files remain protected from being extracted from the derivative work. The Buyer may use the Product in rendered images for any personal or commercial projects, as long as the Artist’s work is protected from extraction and the Buyer has not violated any other terms of the License."
    That is: I can create ANY picture and I can claim copyright of these pictures as long as I do not include the 3D model (.OBJ file).
    How I render MY image is not of your concern. If I choose to use a blank background that is MY choice.
    Before YOU start claim copyright violation, YOU need to learn the rights (and probably learn to read). It do not state ANYWHERE in the LICENSE file that the render image have to be "considered not-compete or "uniquely different" from the original 3d model"; Rather the oposite. The Buyer are not allowed to change the 3D model!
    .:. Frank .:. FrankHM (talk) 00:07, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    A render of the 3D model clearly qualifies as a "newly created work" for the purpose of the license, and therefore the non-compete and "uniquely different" criteria clearly apply to it. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:09, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Where imn the licese file do YOU read "non-compete and "uniquely different"
    It is the Buyer’s responsibility to read and understand this license (the “License”). If you are unsure about anything in this License, please send an email to before using any Renderosity files.
    This is a legal and binding agreement between you (the “Buyer”) and Renderosity MarketPlace, (“Renderosity”). By installing, downloading, copying, or otherwise using any Renderosity files (the “Product”), you have conclusively accepted all of the terms and conditions of this License.
    Purchase of the Product from Renderosity grants the Buyer a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable license to use the contents of the encapsulating zip file. The Buyer may use the Product commercially in the form of rendered images but may not distribute the Product or any of the Product’s files. The Artist (Author) retains all copyrights to the files. The Buyer shall not copy, modify, reverse compile, or reverse engineer the Product, or sell, sublicense, rent, or transfer the Product to any third party.
    This License does not grant permission to produce a real, tangible replica of the 3D mesh/model/product acquired. An additional license for production rights may be purchased by contacting Renderosity and will be subject to negotiation and approval by the vendor. Renderosity will contact the vendor on the Buyer’s behalf.
    The Buyer shall not redistribute the Product, in whole or in part, in any file format for sale or for free. The Buyer shall not store the Product any place where it could be used by another person or party (whether it is on a network or on the Internet). The Buyer shall not convert or recreate the Product to any other media format and re-distribute the files, regardless of whether it is for sale or free. The Buyer shall not use the Product in such a way that the original materials could be extracted. Products sold at Renderosity shall not be used for illegal purposes.
    The Buyer may copyright any newly created rendered images using the purchased, original Product files, provided the original Product files remain protected from being extracted from the derivative work. The Buyer may use the Product in rendered images for any personal or commercial projects, as long as the Artist’s work is protected from extraction and the Buyer has not violated any other terms of the License. The Buyer may backup copies on hard drives, CD or DVD of the zip file for personal archival purposes only. The Buyer may not store files online. For Merchant Resource Products, additional permissions or limitations of rights will be specified in of each Product’s readme file. Software programs and utilities may have an additional license from the company or vendor that developed it. The Buyer agrees to be bound by the additional permissions and limitations contained in the Merchant Resource Products and Software Programs or utilities. For any product to be considered a Merchant Resource, Software program or utility, it must be clearly stated as such.
    The Buyer retains this License, even if the Artist stops selling the work at a later date, or decides to charge a different price.
    The Artist has verified that all items in the zip file are his/her own original work. Any components of the Product containing work from third parties require documented proof of rights to use, and are on file at Renderosity. All Renderosity Artists represent and warrant that they legally possess the power to grant the Buyer this License for all enclosed materials.
    Renderosity or the Artist may revoke this License upon receipt of information that the Product is being used in violation of any copyright laws or it is shown that the Buyer has violated any of the terms and conditions above. Upon receipt of notice that the Buyer has violated any copyright laws or the terms or conditions of the License, the Buyer shall immediately delete all Product files, both in original and derivative form, contained in the notice.
    If the Artist shows that any of the original material can be extracted from the Buyer's derivative work, the Artist may require both the original and derivative work, and all copies thereof, to be deleted. The buyer may be banned from the site, and downloads may no longer be available. Upon receipt of such a demand, the Buyer shall immediately delete all Product files, both in original and derivative form, contained in the notice.
    In the event the Buyer is not satisfied with the Product, a refund may be issued based upon Renderosity’s refund policy. Issuing refunds is at the discretion of the Artist and/or the Renderosity MarketPlace staff. Refunds will be issued only after the Buyer has worked with the Artist to correct the problem. If a refund is issued, the Buyer must delete all copyright protected Product files on his/her computer and any creation that was made using the Product.
    The Buyer hereby agrees to indemnify Renderosity and its directors, officers, agents, and employees and to hold each of them harmless in all respects, including costs and attorney’s fees, from and against any and all claims, demands, suits, or causes of action of whatever kind or nature and resulting settlements, awards, or judgments resulting from any breach by the Buyer of the License. This indemnity shall survive the termination of the License.
    The License shall be governed by the laws of the State of Tennessee. For the purposes of the License, each party hereby consents to the personal jurisdiction and exclusive venue of any court located in Rutherford County, Tennessee.
    Force Majeure:
    No party will be liable for and shall be excused from any failure to deliver or perform or for delay in delivery or performance due to causes beyond its reasonable control, including but not limited to, work stoppages, shortages, civil disturbances, terrorist actions, transportation problems, interruptions or power or communications, failure or suppliers or subcontractors, natural disasters or other acts of God.
    The provisions of this License are severable. If any provision of the License is for any reason held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this License shall be unimpaired and continue in full force and effect, and, to the maximum extent permitted by law, the invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision shall be replaced by a mutually acceptable provision, which, being valid, legal, and enforceable, comes closest to the intention of the parties underlying the invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision. FrankHM (talk) 00:16, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    You can find the section by pressing "ctrl f" and then searching for the phrase "uniquely different". It's clearly there in the standard license under the section "ALLOWED USES OF THE STANDARD LICENSE" as I previously stated. [4]. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:22, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Furthermore, it clearly states that "The Buyer shall not recreate the Product or convert to any other media format and re-distribute the files, regardless of whether it is for sale or free." in that. In the first place, I feel that the fact that the file is marked as "Frank Markussen's Own Work" is itself a problem. It would be best if we could contact Raul himself, but unfortunately he is no longer in this world. Ta-tea-two-te-to (talk) 04:49, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I concur, I've opened a deletion discussion. . Please participate if interested. Thanks. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:38, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    September 17[edit]

    Translation of poetic works[edit]

    Question: Which is better, translating the contents of a file of a poem or poetic work literally (i.e. word by word and accounting for grammar and other subtleties), or taking a translation of said contents from an (obviously) free source that preserves the file's poetic nature?

    Context: Commons has several sound files for the German national anthem "Deutschlandlied", some more commonly used than others across the projects and usually with captions. The captions themselves tended to be literal, rather than poetic, as is the Swedish TimedText for one of the files. Songs fall under the scope of this discussion because of their inseparably poetic nature and will never or almost never have lyrics in prose. While I concede that literal translations are useful for reading the precise semantics of original works, I always leaned toward the view that the translator ought to retain such works' poetic character. This might not be important when there are no authors to translate them at all, but what about those who have? In the case of the "Deutschlandlied", Project Runeberg hosts a scan of a 1916 book containing a poetic translation, pages 11 to 12. I would just go ahead and replace the caption with that translation, but in the absence of Commons guidance, I find my self in a moot situation. After all, translations like that are not official, and there probably will never be one anyway. Has there ever been a discussion about how to deal with poetic works, particularly in relation to poetic translations by noteworthy authors?

    I am keenly aware of the Translators' noticeboard, but since I am discussing guidelines, I thought it better to bring the discussion here for a sooner and clearer clarification on Commons' position on the matter. FreeMediaKid$ 10:01, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    • I don't think either is "better", and having both versions available (presumably under distinct filenames) would be good.
    • I presume you know -- but just in case -- that since the fall of the Nazis, only the third verse is used. The earlier verses, whether translated literally or poetically, are a touchy matter in present-day Germany, to say the least. - Jmabel ! talk 16:06, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • You presumed correctly. The reason I chose one of the short versions of the same anthem uploaded to Commons was out of concern for tact and sensitivity, and I did feel slight embarrassment making the anthem the subject of the discussion, though it could have been worse. Anyway, it looks as if neither approach to translating poetic works is more desirable than the other. While it was not quite the answer I was hoping for, it does imply that I have , which I will likely do to one of the short versions of the song other than the one cited. Additionally, I could also add the entire contents of the Project Runeberg book (not just the section on the "Deutschlandlied"; that's awkward) to Wikisource, but that is if I had edited the project at all, let alone the Swedish Wikisource. My contributions here on Commons will do, and someone else can claim credit for bringing the book's contents there. FreeMediaKid$ 07:19, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • @FreeMediaKid!: "the go-ahead to add free poetic translations by noteworthy authors for every other similar file" Again stating something you presumably understood but didn't state: "as long as they are public-domain or free-licensed". - Jmabel ! talk 16:03, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    The 1ooed millionth file on Wikimedia Commons[edit]

    Good evening! Today Wikimedia Commons has crossed the milestone of 97.5 million media files, in connection with which I would like to ask the question - will it reach the historical milestone of 100 million files by the end of 2023? In this regard, I have an idea for organizing a file upload marathon, regardless of copyright, and it would be advisable to coincide with several significant dates, such as Thanksgiving, Halloween, etc. MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 11:33, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Flickr has a lot of free files that can be used for upload, so is youtube. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 19:01, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @MasterRus21thCentury: Can you please explain what you mean by, "regardless of copyright"? Commons has strict policies on copyright, so we need to be careful with phrasing your idea in a way that avoids confusion. From Hill To Shore (talk) 08:41, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    With a daily average growth of approx. 30300 files in 2023, we can assume to reach the threshold in 70-80 days, which is end of November or beginning of December 2023 --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 15:07, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Since most of the files I have transferred from frwiki have been retained for pd-textlogo, why not delete the redundant files on frwiki?[edit]

    I believe the community on frwiki has a low TOO that doesn't reflect practices here on commons and wikimedia as a whole. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 19:08, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    You should probably give a read to COM:TOO France and ponder if frwiki was correct in keeping those files local. Especially since you were blocked for your actions in regards to them. -- ferret (talk) 21:16, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    We can all agree that this is below TOO. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 22:07, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    France doesn't use sweat of the brow, so most of the logos are too simple to be copyrighted. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 22:16, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    While I would guess that the logo you give as an example is below TOO in France, it's probably close enough to the borderline that if fr-wiki is more comfortable retaining as locale, I can certainly imagine a fair rationale for them to do so. - Jmabel ! talk 22:21, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Still have plenty below TOO files left in frwiki. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 00:02, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    For File:Logo-groupe-sos.webp you forgot to copy across the author and date information, which I have now inserted. If you are going to transfer files from any other wiki projects, make sure to do a manual check that all information has come across. In this case, the French wiki template seems to insert "inconnu" ("unknown") for any blank fields, while Commons does not. This means if you leave everything to the automated tool, you will lose a lot of valid information. I note that the French wikipedia users said you were relying on translation tools rather than knowing their language yourself; if you don't know the source language enough to replicate the valid information here, I would advise against attempting any more transfers from other languages. I have not checked any of your other transfers yet for any similar mistakes. From Hill To Shore (talk) 05:07, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    This section is WP:PROXYING and/or canvassing, this user has been blocked indefinitely from frwiki (and enwiki, probably dewiki soon) for machine translations and for asking deletion of logos above COM:TOO after uploading them to Commons.

    Links: [5][6][7].

    No file has been "retained" since there were no deletion requests.

    Logos uploaded by Grandmaster Huon can be found here since they don’t show up in Special:Uploads because of FileImporter. —Thibaut (talk) 05:42, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    How can I be unblocked from frwiki? Grandmaster Huon (talk) 06:33, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yes, I was blocked from frwiki for those concerns, enwiki is a different story, and dewiki is in good standing. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 06:38, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Grandmaster Huon: Your block on fr-wiki is not Commons' affair (except for raising a bit of a yellow flag). However, your using Commons to canvass for changes on fr-wiki (proxying, as mentioned above), or to ask about how to be unblocked on fr-wiki is Commons affair, and is not OK. I'd hate to have to block you here, but if you continue doing this I pretty much have to. The only way to be reinstated on fr-wiki is to appeal your block on fr-wiki. Your talk page on that wiki says how to appeal. - Jmabel ! talk 16:09, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    September 18[edit]

    Hi, a few months ago SpinnerLaserzthe2nd started importing logos from swiss municipalities on Commons that were previously stored on frwiki. Such logos can be found there: 1 and 2. SpinnerLaserz claims that Template:PD-Switzerland-official makes all swiss municipalities logos ineligible for copyright. I'm unsure about this interpretation. From my understanding its the acts, means of payment and so on that are ineligible, but the logos could still be protected. I would like a second opinion on this. Thanks, Espandero (talk) 11:00, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    @ARK Are logos are exempted from copyright? Because I do know the municipal logos are officially used by governments. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 15:56, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I don't think it's a mather of the logos being used by the municipalities or not (of course they are). It's more a question of the interpretation of the law. To me it states that the acts, means of payment, ... are public domain, but I'm not sure that it means every image used in those documents are public domain. Since "logos" are not listed in the law I would tend to think they might be protected by copyright. - Espandero (talk) 16:06, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I had emailed the Swiss government to see if the logos were copyrighted. Everybody knows that Swiss coats of arms and flags (all of which are banner of arms) are exempt from copyright in Switzerland. If the government state the logos are still copyrighted, we can move them to the mainstream Wikipedias. I know that years ago, another user (3122WIKI) had uploaded a municipal logo with this template. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 16:17, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Brand markers such as logotypes, municipal or otherwise, are primarily covered by trademark legislation. For guidance, I would recommend you look to the logotypes of major Swiss brands as featured on Commons: ABB, Coop, CSS, Migros, SBB, Swiss Post etc., all of which use the same permissions templates in their respective file description. An outlier is the UBS logo on German Wikipedia, which points to the contested nature of the usage but seems to err on the side of caution (see also the UBS logo on English Wikipedia). Standard disclaimers apply. I'm not a lawyer. ARK (talk) 08:20, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Logos that are on Commons are usually concerned by C:TOO, as shown by the exemples above. It seems to me that at least some of the municipalities logos are not in this range. So it's either the logos are in the public domain because of Swiss laws, or they're copyrighted and those that are above the threshold of originality should be deleted and set back on WP:fr. Espandero (talk) 10:28, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    September 19[edit]


    File:Nayab Singh Saini calling on the Minister of State for Labour and Employment (IC), Shri Santosh Kumar Gangwar, to discuss to upgrade ESIC facilities in the state, in New Delhi.jpg Can someone crop the image of person standing in right. He is Nayab Singh Saini, a minister of Haryana. Admantine123 (talk) 05:40, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    On the left hand side of the screen showing the image, there should be a link to the crop tool. If not there, here is a link to it Try it out... Broichmore (talk) 10:26, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I did it but the original image got replaced by the new one. The original should also be present separately. Admantine123 (talk) 12:40, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Admantine123: I've reverted your change. Please try again, but on the second screen, select "upload as a new file" rather than "overwrite". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:08, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I'll do it for them. - Jmabel ! talk 15:08, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Admantine123: the added image needs categories; the original image still needs at least one category that applies to Nayab Singh Saini. - Jmabel ! talk 15:15, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thanks a lot, let me check. Admantine123 (talk) 17:21, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Jmabel: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:28, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Pigsonthewing: in this case, I'd rather teach him to categorize, and didn't want to ask him to do several things. - Jmabel ! talk 18:48, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Hello! Who can find files from the Italian government website through PetScan and apply the appropriate license? MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 12:03, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    @MasterRus21thCentury: presumably in theory anyone can. Can you be more specific? - Jmabel ! talk 16:11, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    September 20[edit]

    Do we have tools do search through EXIF data of images on WIkimedia Commons?[edit]

    Do we have tools do search through EXIF data of images on Wikimedia Commons? I am currently amazed at the amount of Getty images, some of which are tagged as copyright infringement only after months or years. Regards, --Polarlys (talk) 18:50, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Remember Getty also republishes historic images that the Library of Congress has released either as CC, PD, or "no known copyright restrictions". They also republish Associated Press images that the LOC says have never had their copyrights renewed. Those images up to 1964 had their copyright expire. AP images are "made public" by their distribution to news outlets, even if never published in a newspaper or magazine. --RAN (talk) 21:24, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It is still a good idea to search for newer images, we generally side with images in archive never being published, until proven so. Considering the above exceptions. --RAN (talk) 04:57, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Richard, thanks for your comment, but I don't think photos of current football matches or concerts fall into this category. Viele Grüße, --Polarlys (talk) 13:54, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Clitoris Anatomy labels[edit]

    Request word labels in English in SVG file. .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 22:17, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    The version of Thumbor introduced in April 2023 causes this problem with all multilingual SVG files whose default language is not English.
    For this file, the default language is numbers.
    Glrx (talk) 23:58, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    September 21[edit]

    Photo challenge July results[edit]

    climate change: EntriesVotesScores
    Rank 1 2 2
    Title Storm Mathis - Lake Zug oceans are rising Contaminación atmosférica
    en la ciudad de Madrid
    Author Roy Egloff Spielvogel Saldeplata
    Score 13 9 9
    half: EntriesVotesScores
    Rank 1 2 3
    Title Farm track near
    Micheldever, Hampshire
    My birthday cake!
    Oops there's only half left!
    Ein in der Längsachse
    vertikal zerstückeltes Automobil.
    Author Simon Burchell Anna.Massini Levin Holtkamp
    Score 15 15 11

    Congratulations to Simon Burchell, Anna.Massini, Levin Holtkamp, Roy Egloff, Spielvogel and Saldeplata. -- Jarekt (talk) 02:41, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Thanks (⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 06:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    September 22[edit]

    FoP reform status by jurisdiction[edit]

    We have a great page on Commons:FoP, but I could not find a corresponding listing on how local WMF chapters are trying to lobby for law changes, if at all, plus other relevant changes in legal jurisdictions per country. Ping User:JWilz12345 who inspired me to start this discussion with several examples. Also ping User:Ymblanter who recently on en wiki told me in the context of Ukraine that "WM Ukraine is aware of this and, as far as I know, they think it is not possible at the moment." Perhaps they could elaborate here. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 02:41, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Not sure if this is useful as you talked about local chapters, but the page "Commons talk:WMF support for Commons" is essentially the centralised talk page for the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), and as far as I know many local chapters communicate through them (I could be wrong). --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 20:24, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Hidden category that shouldn't be[edit]

    How to unhide this category. Broichmore (talk) 08:06, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    • @Broichmore: It's a disambiguation category. Those are always hidden. Why do you think it "shouldn't be"? - Jmabel ! talk 17:51, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Jmabel: Firstly, it's 22 miles long, in a highly developed and complex country. Secondly it's not best served by 3 arbtrary sub categories.The River Thames or London are not disambig pages, then why this? What are your arguments as to why it should be? Broichmore (talk) 08:56, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Broichmore: You appear to be assuming that there is only one Allan Water in Scotland, when in reality there are at least two. One is an 8km river that feeds into the River Teviot near Hawick. The other appears to be a longer river that feeds into the River Forth. I am not sure what the 3rd red linked category represents but it is possible that there is a third body of water with the same name in Scotland. While it is rare for two large rivers in a country to share the same name, there are thousands of small streams and tributaries feeding into the larger rivers. It is very common for people in previous centuries (without the aid of instant communication) to give the same name to different rivers. As with all separate entities that share the same name, they must be disambiguated to prevent confusion. From Hill To Shore (talk) 09:55, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Broichmore@From Hill To Shore: According to OpenStreetMap a third one also drains into the Tweed, this one between Melrose and Galashiels: --bjh21 (talk) 10:50, 23 September 2023 (UTC) updated link --bjh21 (talk) 18:12, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Broichmore: you've probably been adequately answered already, but since you specifically addressed your comment to me: a disambiguation category does not have dimensions. I presume that the category referring to the specific body of water in question is not hidden. - Jmabel ! talk 15:06, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Temporary guardrails[edit]

    What type of category can I use for these traffic guardrails? Smiley.toerist (talk) 08:27, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Category:Roadside barriers? --ghouston (talk) 09:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    They are used for temporarily redirecting pedestrians, often due to construction work of some sort going on. There does not seem to be a category that exactly matches this:
    Now that we know where to put it, we just need a proper name for the to-be-created Category ... El Grafo (talk) 10:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    They could be placed in Category:Traffic management barriers which would be a child of Category:Traffic management. Whether they are intended for pedestrians, cars, bikes or trains, they are normally used to separate one type of traffic from another, or to direct one type of traffic away from a hazard. Either way, these are methods of managing traffic. From Hill To Shore (talk) 12:28, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Wow, that subtree is not at all integrated with the rest. Which makes me wonder: what's the difference between Category:Traffic management and the well-populated Category:Traffic control? El Grafo (talk) 14:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    This enclosed page has an incorrect description for an image. How do I correct it?[edit]

    This image from a museum has the correct description of the object in the museum display, as shown in the image. However, the image description made slight error in what the object, How can I correct it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starlighsky (talk • contribs) 19:50, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    @Starlighsky: you don't say what image, so there's only so much help I can give, but you edit the text of the description exactly the way you edit here. Or are you asking about changing the file name? If the latter, use {{Rename}}.
    Also, in the future, this sort of question is better asked at COM:Help desk. The village pump is more for things that might need broader community discussion. - Jmabel ! talk 21:04, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Sorry, here it is: File:Tri-cone Insert Bit (roller-cone bit) - Houston Museum of Natural Science - DSC01339.JPG. Starlighsky (talk) 21:57, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Starlighsky: is anything stopping you from editing that? - Jmabel ! talk 23:12, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I can't seem to edit the title to an image page. Starlighsky (talk) 23:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Starlighsky: Are you trying to change the description or the file name? (I'm guessing the latter.) If it's the file name, please use {{Rename}}, as I said in my intial answer. Also, there should be a "move" option somewhere (location depends on the skin you are using, but typically at the top, over the image), which for people without filemover privileges is effectively the same as using {{Rename}}. - Jmabel ! talk 02:07, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yes, it was the latter. I followed your instructions and requested the change. Thanks! Starlighsky (talk) 02:22, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Stalled category moves[edit]

    User:CommonsDelinker/commands seems to be stalled out again for category moves. I tried the documented way of kickstarting it, but that seems to believe the bot is already running. Jmabel ! talk 23:10, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Posting again: does someone know somewhere more useful to post this? The bot has now been stalled out at least 3 days, creating a significant backlog. - Jmabel ! talk 15:07, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Pinging @Grin, Magnus Manske, Mdaniels5757, Steinsplitter, Zhuyifei1999 as Maintainers. @Jmabel: I also left a pointer at User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands#Stalled category moves.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:57, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It's SteinsplitterBot's job to actually move the categories; CommonsDelinker just removes the commands once the other bot moves them. Nothing anyone other than Steinsplitter can do AFAIK; I left them a message 11 days ago without reply. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 14:55, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    How can a function this essential be left entirely at the mercy of one person? - Jmabel ! talk 16:14, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    That is exactly one person more than nobody. Think about that. grin 16:47, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Which means we have a system with no redundancy at all. And that's exactly what I'm thinking about. We shouldn't be in a position where features break if something happens to one person. Why aren't trusted bot-users routinely sharing out their duties and their code, backing each other up, etc.? - Jmabel ! talk 20:56, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Jmabel: The best answer I have is that they are busy humans who have neither the time nor the trust for robustness.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 20:59, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Jeff G.: if the entire community here is ready to rest so much trust in them, you'd think they'd have some trust for one another. - Jmabel ! talk 21:03, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Unfortunately I have no access to sbot, so I cannot even check the logs about problems. I wrote an email to Steinsplitter, maybe helps. grin 18:48, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    September 23[edit]

    Is there a reason why the categories here are all named so differently (United States law deletion requests‎ vs. Japanese law deletion requests)--Trade (talk) 03:37, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    It looks to me like the adjectival forms are used, except those make for awkward constructions in some cases, because if we said "American law deletion requests" or "British law deletion requests" it may be considered unexpected or undesirable in some way? Elizium23 (talk) 04:00, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I spent some time creating deletion requests by country categories for stamps recently. At least IMO it's usually better to use the adjectival forms. Except it doesn't work with the United States specifically because "America" really refers to the continents of North and South America, not the country. So we are kind of stuck with it. There's a few others exceptions to. Like New Zealand versus New Zealander. I don't think either way of doing it is super intuitive, but at least using adjectival forms somewhat separates categories for deletion requests from normal ones. --Adamant1 (talk) 09:00, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    British copyright law is also an incorrect term as the UK copyright law also applies to Northern Ireland and the other oversea areas. GPSLeo (talk) 10:11, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @GPSLeo: en:United Kingdom lists the demonym as "British". What would you prefer, "UKish" or "UKian"? @Trade and Adamant1: Also, for the US, as an American, "American" is more acceptable to me than "USian" or "USish". See also en:Demonyms for the United States.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:13, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Or, these categories could simply be left alone and we avoid any ambiguity. No solution appears to be perfect, so we pick the one that is least bad. Ambiguity is always bad. Huntster (t @ c) 13:43, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    We could also change the wording to "of the" and then just use the infinitive form of the name. "Deletion requests related to laws of the United Kingdom" GPSLeo (talk) 17:14, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Best file format for 3 minutes 4K video of building demolition[edit]

    I want to upload a video that I have filmed in 4K quality. I need assistance in which format and resolution to upload.

    I’ve posted a week ago to Commons:Graphic Lab/Video and sound workshop#Best file format for 3 minutes 4K video of building demolition but didn’t receive any replies. In order to get any interaction I do now post here as well. Please answer there. --Frupa (talk) 12:22, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Hi! I recommend the VP9 codec (*.webm) with high quality. If you don't edit your videos, you can convert your video in the same color, chroma subsampling, bit depth and bitrate (usually between 100 and 200 MBit/s) (and frame rate). The video will be also rendered in lower resolutions, so you can upload the best quality you have. I convert with FFMPEG, this allows you to execute the settings you want to have. An example for a command in FFMPEG could be: FFMPEG -i "INPUTvideo.MP4" -c:v libvpx-vp9 -crf 7 -pix_fmt yuv422p10 -c:a libopus -b:a 512000 -preset slow "OUTPUTvideo.webm". Greetings! --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 16:03, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • The video will be rendered in different resolution on Commons, to be more preciseful --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 16:06, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      The help page at commons recommends two pass transcoding for optimal result. I wonder, if this is better and if it is really a difference to set the pix_fmt. Also I noticed that a VP9 transcode is often significantly larger (bitrate, file size) than HECV-mp4. C.Suthorn ( - (talk) 16:23, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    PantheraLeo1359531, please look again what I posted on the linked page. I have no difficulties using FFmpeg. It’s just that the output file in VP9 at 4K is 28GB in size!
    The upload form Special:Upload states the maximum upload size can only be used by transfer via URL (will my private URL be visible to everyone?) and the limit is still 4GB. MP4 is not allowed, though. This way I could only upload a VP9 at 720p version. Can we arrange for any other transfer method to utilize the 4K quality? --Frupa (talk) 11:09, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    September 24[edit]

    Extraneous "thank you" in notification template[edit]

    Why does {{Discussion-notice}} (when used in English) end with the words "Thank you."? If I'm having to tell a mendacious editor that I'm reporting their behaviour, I'm not asking them for anything and I certainly don't want to thank them.

    I can't see the words in {{Discussion-notice/en}}. From where do they originate? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:10, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    It's in {{Discussion-notice/layout}} as {{Thankyou-tag}}. Elizium23 (talk) 18:53, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you (!) I've removed it. People can always add their thanks manually if they wish to. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:20, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Pigsonthewing: Thanks for removing it. It was there from the first edit 18:31, 11 January 2012 by Rd232.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 19:37, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Categorisation and IP edits[edit]

    Problems of categorization: Category:Islamophobia and Category:Anti-Islam have redundant categories. I tried to eliminate redundancies but some "user" comes, reverts your correction and even adds "more" redundant categories! Normal, there is a cast system here, worse than in medieval India. Admin, user, IP. Anybody can have prejudices against IPs (I am a user, I know better than IPs...) This arrogant attitude is one basic reason why some people simply do not want to become "user"s here. Enjoy your playground. 21:16, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Note: I have provided a section heading for your comment inserted into the previous discussion. I have also linked the categories you mentioned for the convenience of other editors.
    I have taken a look at your edits and you provided no edit summary. Explaining what you are trying to do goes a long way toward helping others understand your actions. If you don't try to communicate, you shouldn't be surprised if someone reverts your edits without communication. Being logged in can help with communication but you can still communicate while logged out; it will just require more effort from you to achieve the same result. From Hill To Shore (talk) 22:08, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Also: unlike "the caste system of medieval India," nothing prevents anyone who may legitimately edit from an IP address from creating an account instead. The choice to edit with no identification other than an IP address is yours, not ours. Unless, of course, you are dodging a block, in which case you should not be editing here at all. - Jmabel ! talk 00:21, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    September 25[edit]