Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
VRT Noticeboard
Welcome to the VRT noticeboard

This page is where users can communicate with Commons Volunteers Response Team members, or VRT agents with one another. You can request permissions verification here, or anything else that needs an agent's assistance. This page is multilingual — when discussing tickets in languages other than English, please make a note of this and consider asking your question in the same language.

Please read the Frequently Asked Questions before posting your question here.

The current backlog of the (English) permissions-commons queue is: 14 days (graph)  update

Start a new discussion

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
VRT Noticeboard
VRT Noticeboard
Main VRT-related pages

Shortcuts: Commons:VRT/N • Commons:VRTN

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 7 days and sections whose most recent comment is older than 90 days.

I miss the final processing here. --Subbass1 (talk) 14:13, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

? --Subbass1 (talk) 13:19, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Ticket in permissions-de queue. --Ganímedes (talk) 23:43, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As there is another thread about this I'll close this. --Ganímedes (talk) 22:20, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Ganímedes (talk) 22:20, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

GeoJSON under OGL3.0


Hello team I have identified a couple of datasets (GeoJSON in particular) that are currently under a Open Government Licence 3.0. These are from NatureScot and Scottish Government (SIMD datazones). Am I (as an editor) permitted to bulk upload these GeoJSON files using OpenRefine? Or would I need to contact the copyright holders first? I am then hoping to connect the data to the relevant Wikidata items for each datazone. Many thanks in advance for the assistance and advice. Drkirstyross (talk) 11:19, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19 files were deleleted without any reason, if course there was a permission mail (german). And there was a "nonsense" request (sorry to say so), which was answered (without further reply, iirc). Please undelete as soon as possible. --Subbass1 (talk) 20:45, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Subbass1: There is always a reason. Did you follow the emailed instructions?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 00:49, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, *I see* no reason. Perhaps some german should jump in here for clearing. (Strange that my files are processed nearly always by the same person (krd)). PS There also were files which weren't affected by the (answered, nonsense, imho) request. I really see it as a bad style then to delete them altogether, sorry. --Subbass1 (talk) 05:48, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Krd is an admin. He starts almost all tickets in several languages. He's *by far* one of the most active VRT agents, if not the most. So, it's not strange that he processes nearly always your files ... I've checked with the help of Google and I'm not sure to understand the problem. I saw Krd made some questions and request to do something but I'm not sure to fully understand the problem. Can you please clarify a little bit (here or in the ticket, but in English so I can try to follow, please). --Ganímedes (talk) 15:54, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but no, sorry, I'm not willing to argue the whole story in english. I'll wait for help by german admins. PS If you look up here, you'll see me asking for the very same ticket days/weeks before. At that time the files were online yet. No (helpful) answer there... --Subbass1 (talk) 19:17, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Krd: Kannst du kurz mitteilen, wo es hier hängt? Anscheinend fehlt da noch was zur Bestätigung der Genehmigung. Wenn dem so ist, sollte sich Subbass1 am besten erneut mit demjenigen in Verbindung setzen, der die Mail ans VRT geschickt hat. --Rosenzweig τ 07:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Es wartet auf einen VRT-Mitarbeiter, der es im Rahmen der Situation bearbeiten möchte. Krd 08:06, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's high time to finally get this issue resolved. krd knows since May 23 that everything of the interior in Ebrach is centuries old. You can also easily read about it on Wikipedia. Besides that the deletion of pictures of the organ consoles was inappropriate also. --Subbass1 (talk) 15:16, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2010061710041251 Studio Hartcourt released images under a "Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported" license. Does their license cover all Studio Hartcourt images, or just the ones they uploaded? There is a movement to delete all the pre 1929 to 1991 images because they are under an active copyright. RAN (talk) 04:33, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First, let me be mindful this is an older ticket from 2010. I think nowadays we would have not accepted it as such, it's a bit vague, but as to your question I think it's safe to say that the images uploaded under the specific account are okay, and the release does not cover any future uploads beyond the ones made by User:Studio Harcourt. I'd appreciate if a French speaker could confirm my review. Ciell (talk) 05:11, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I see that another ticket is related to Studio Harcourt: ticket:2020112910005534. Could you please tell us what it covers? (and I'm a French speaker so I can help you if needed) Ayack (talk) 18:46, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, @Ayack. Only covers a specific file. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 09:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone look up ticket:2012081410006029 and tell us what it says. According to Commons:Village_pump#German_currency_files_without_machine-readable_license it should have a letter from some German agency about PD status of Deutsche Mark bank notes. Jarekt (talk) 21:29, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The ticket contains an e-mail from the German Federal Bank stating:
  • They cannot answer if DM notes are PDGov ("Amtliches Werk"). This has to be decided by court if required, but they are not aware of any precedent. They do not object the use of the images if they are unmodified and used in good faith.
  • They don't have any business in Euro, GDR currency or Reichmark and refer to the department of finance, or the KFW regarding GDR.
In my opinion the ticket confirms nothing helpful. Krd 05:18, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Krd 15:49, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

I attempted to create a template for portraits of members of the Kentucky legislature using this ticket. Could someone summarize the contents of the email, to check that I'm correct in doing this? Thanks! -Mad Mismagius (talk) 01:58, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The ticket is for specific files only. The template currently is invalid. Krd 14:54, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What types of files does the ticket pertain to? Is is restricted by publication date, type of photo, or something else? I have seen this ticket used for several different files. -Mad Mismagius (talk) 01:46, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

--Ganímedes (talk) 14:16, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Ganímedes (talk) 03:04, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Goodness, what did he tell you in the VRT communication: that File:Peter_Kranke.jpg is a selfie? Who is the photographer = copyright holder? We are talking German copyright here (Urheberrecht) which is non-transferable. The image subject can only be the copyright holder if they themselves took the photo. --2003:C0:8F48:2600:203F:8108:71FA:4477 11:30, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On a side note, FYI: The uploader has been infinitely banned on the German WP for sockpuppetry and undeclared paid editing. --2003:C0:8F48:2600:203F:8108:71FA:4477 12:02, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ticket from 2015, incomplete per today's standards. Krd 14:56, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, File:Peter_Kranke.jpg could easily be self-taken with a self-timer. I've taken pictures of myself that way that look no more like obvious selfies, e.g. File:Joe Mabel self portrait 2020-01-12.jpg; I could probably provide an even better example, but not from a picture currently on Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 17:34, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Krd 15:51, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Could you give us some insight into who the ticket names as author of File:Knabenchor ULF in den 1950ern.jpg? The image is marked own work, but is from January 1950. It is possible, but still seems unlikely. If the ticket says something else, I'd be happy to correct the file page. Felix QW (talk) 17:07, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Permission from 2017 in German. --Ganímedes (talk) 20:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the ticket is invalid. Additional opinions welcome. Krd 07:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to reopen the ticket. Krd 06:32, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Krd 06:37, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hanay (talk) 06:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Krd 06:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Krd 06:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Does the ticket apply for File:Amandapasanen2020.jpg, too (same photographer & uploader as in File:81A7937.jpg)? Or should the file be {{Npd}}’d for now? --Geohakkeri (talk) 08:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The ticket does not apply to the mentioned file. Krd 08:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Krd 08:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Does this ticket genuinely release all of the content in the screenshot at File:RawStoryScreenshot2011.jpg under a CC-BY licence, including the main story image of Gov Scott Walker (which is an AP press photo) and the prominent banner adverts for Smiley Central and 1-800-PACK-RAT? Belbury (talk) 10:06, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding 10,000 images from an organisation to Commons, what is the best way to do the permissions?


Hi all

I'm exploring helping an organisation upload about 10,000 graphics to Commons, with hopefully many more in future. I will probably use PattyPan to do it because this is the tool I know how to use. There is no simple way for the organisation to openly license the graphics on their website because of how it is structured. I can see a couple of options for how to do the permissions for Commons

  1. I could upload all the images with the {{VRT pending}} template and then send an email with a spreadsheet with the names of all the images. Is there a simple way for a VRT volunteer to mass approve this upload? Also would me uploading 1000s of images with VRT pending get flagged, deleted, blocked etc? I would prefer this option but I don't know if it is possible for VRT to mass approve the images before the timer runs out and the images are deleted.
  2. I think there is a way of getting my account 'blessed' with the correct permission to just upload the images. There don't appear to be any instructions for doing this however.

Is there another way? Is number 1 possible?

Thanks very much

John Cummings (talk) 12:10, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an expert to this topic, but afaik there were several huge donations in the archive history. One example is Category:Images by Christian Bassow. So if there is no satisfying answer in the next days, you may ask the uploader (Raymond) on this discussion page how to process this :) --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 16:29, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It might be outdated but still have useful bits: Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Release of big collections.
@John Cummings My advise would be: sort out the written permission first (and make sure you've got everything covered!), and after that get in touch with the local language VRT team to see what works best for you both. I often work with a custom build template, where the WiR can include all the details and the pending template, and I will add the confirmation template when the procedure from the VRT end is completed. In that way, all changes can be addressed with a single edit - also the reason why I page protect the template after I add the permission btw. Ciell (talk) 16:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If ticket permission is required (i.e. the images cannot be tagged with a CC license at the source), please contact the VRT directly for the best procedure. There may be questions that don't need to be answered in public. Krd 17:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


As the grace period for the files in the named cat is almost over, I would be happy if the permission could be displayed. A permission for the depicted logo was probably not realized after all, but the permissions for the images themselves should be already there.

Thanks! --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 16:25, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(PS: The oldest files version should probably be deleted then --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 16:26, 17 July 2024 (UTC))[reply]
Hi @PantheraLeo1359531, please follow up on your email thread with VRT where the question of the logo was addressed. Ciell (talk) 16:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]