User talk:Fæ

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Notice If you want to see Python source code that supports some of my projects, go to Github and help yourself. The code is not written with reuse in mind... -- (talk) 15:57, 15 May 2018 (UTC)


Thank you![edit]

Dear Fæ,

I just wanted to say ‘Thank you!’ for your incredible restless work, which saves millions of images, many of them very valuable, for the benefit of all of us and maybe even for the benefit of future generations.

Thank you very much! --Aristeas (talk) 14:58, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! -- (talk) 09:04, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations 🎉, again[edit]

I just saw that you had passed the six million edit mark, I think that probably almost half free files on Wikimedia Commons were uploaded by you. Face-wink.svg Face-smile.svg --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 11:55, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Hello Fæ! I recently found the large and very important collections of artworks you've uploaded by George Cruikshank and Gustave Doré. I had to buy books of their works when I was studying illustration, satirical art, and life art in college, and what you've uploaded for free use is much more extensive and larger with more detail. As an artist, being able to download and examine these works is really priceless! I put Cruikshank on the high level of William Hogarth, and Doré really has no equal, especially in the beautiful, painstaking detail of his backgrounds. His London series alone is so full of detail I'll probably spend months on them. You uploaded some works by Hablot K. Browne too, the illustrator of several Dickens novels, and a very interesting and talented artist in his own right. I also downloaded the Hogarth and Bruegel collections. I'll be poring over these for years, and it's only a 5 gig collection all told. Thanks so much for these hugely valuable artworks. Anyone who says Commons is crap has to be an absolute philistine... 3D heart.png Jenny 04:45, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback! It's encouraging to read of how some of the images I upload are so useful for research, and enjoyed. :-) -- (talk) 09:14, 11 April 2018 (UTC)


Example of new Xeno-canto uploads in mp3, the Mallard

Hi Fae, I notice that back in 2013 you uploaded audio recordings of birds from the Xeno-canto website ( to Commons. (see the cat here and your notes here. I would like to encourage you to upload another batch.

I edit bird articles on English wikipedia and try to add audio recordings. If I search the Xeno-canto site with the query 'lic:BY-SA' I obtain 5783 results from 1310 species. If I restrict the search to recordings of the highest quality using 'q:A' ("loud and clear") I obtain 2208 results from 759 species. At the moment Commons has 678 recording and not all are high quality.

I've recently edited articles on antbirds (family Thamnophilidae - 236 species). If I search Xeno-canto with the query 'lic:BY-SA Thamnophilidae q:A' I obtain 121 results from 44 species. Commons has a single recording (here)(and the quality is only "B"). I notice that a large fraction of the Xeno-canto files with the BY-SA license were recorded by Niels Krabbe. Many thanks - Aa77zz (talk) 11:02, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

It's a nice project. Since that time Commons allows mp3s, so the process for uploading can be simplified. I'll look at revisiting the project and decide what the best format might be. It may take a few weeks to get around to it. -- (talk) 11:06, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Many thanks for your reply. When you're done I'll begin work including each file in the corresponding article. There are more than 10,000 species of bird so this is a long term project. - Aa77zz (talk) 17:21, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

(Dearchived) @Aa77zz: Uploads now running. You can list the new files using Petscan.

I have overwritten the source code with the new version. Published at ✓ Done -- (talk) 13:30, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks for all your good work. I'm travelling at the momement but when I get back to editing I'll start adding audio files to the articles. - Aa77zz (talk) 09:05, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Library of Congress maps[edit]

CIA map of Congo-Zaire boundary, 1972

Somebody just posted this zoomable detailed birds-eye view of Liverpool onto my twitter feed, which I thought was rather nice. (Nicer and nicer, the more you zoom in, in fact):

I think quite a lot of LoC maps have been uploaded over the years; and I see you've uploaded a lot of their prints and photographs.

Not that you're probably looking for a project, but would it be good to upload the whole lot of the LoC's online maps (about 27,000 ), less those we have already?

They look like they have a certain amount of cataloguing exposed on the website, that might go quite a way towards categorisation. Jheald (talk) 19:55, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll look into it, maybe Tuesday. It is a bit constraining to try on a mobile. -- (talk) 20:08, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
Started looking at this. I think it's a separate project from the LOC prints project due to the nature of the new website and iterative items, i.e. not just zoomable maps but atlases as books with images in a gallery. LOC seems to have no collection ID but relies on subject terms, but this needs some analysis on the JSON output to work out the best approach.
No especial hurry, so this is something I'll poke at in slow time, probably creating a project page when I start getting in to it. -- (talk) 10:02, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

I have got as far as the initial query loop and parsing. There are 27,199 items with 17,928 being single images. I'll probably set up the single images for uploads as they can sit in a bucket category. The other items will probably all need auto-categorization, which will need much more effort to make "non-controversial".

Now running, project page will be at User:Fæ/LOC maps. All uploads via the iiif service will be selected as PNG. Getting 503 errors at the moment (technical difficulties), this may or may not be transient. -- (talk) 20:48, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

@Jheald: Is there a visual mapping tool that can take the Commons image as a zoomable overly while you pin it to a current map? I know I can do this with OSM, but it's too fiddly to be practical as a way to find the coords of an old map. -- (talk) 07:41, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes there is, the Wikimaps Warper.
See eg File:Portsmouth point OS25 inch to mile1858.PNG for a map where it has been done -- follow the link in the button at the bottom, which is provided by {{map}}; or File:Map of Africa from Encyclopaedia Britannica 1890.jpg for a map which has been uploaded to the warper, but not yet warped.
It's a bit clunky (or was, the last time I looked at it a couple of years ago), because first one has to install a copy of the map image in the map warper's own private filespace.
Also note that it's a slow old process adding the coordinates to a large number of maps -- of 50,000 maps found in the BL 19th century book images on Flickr, it's taken three years to georeference 60% (progress page), and that's using the BL's georeferencer which is a bit slicker. Plus even with the coordinates it can still be tricky to identify what the map is actually of, especially for things like railways, rivers, battlefields, or pages out of larger map-books (see Category:MC_upload_prep_pages for UK state of play).
But I do think it is something well worth linking up, and encouraging people to do. Jheald (talk) 08:27, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
I recall playing with it a while back, but it looks little different now. Unfortunately clunky, and the OAuth login for Commons fails to work for me today in Chrome, even though my OSM account does. In theory Google Earth has a neat interface for zooming/rotating overlays (and I assume that is still available), but my old macmini is a bit slow for it. -- (talk) 09:23, 15 May 2018 (UTC)


Alexandra 1875, uploaded at "large" image size

Hi Fæ, I found a number of interesting scans in Category:Ship plans of the Royal Museums Greenwich you have uploaded. The filesizes and therefore quality of the scans differ dramatically from some 50 MB down to less than 200 KB. Is that a result of your uploading process, which I assume to be fully automated, or is that something the individual is responsible for, who first put those scans online? In other words: can anything be done to get higher quality versions of the low quality files for Wikipedia? Alexpl (talk) 09:34, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Normally the largest possible resolution is uploaded from archives. There may be reasons to have both older scans as well as newer ones from the same archive. If you have specific collections in mind it may be worth writing to the museum curators to ask whether higher resolution scans could be published for a Wikipedia project. If the issues are technical, it would be worth providing me the specific example to take a second look at.
In the case of the Library of Congress, we have been uploading from that source for so long, that we sometimes have digital scans that the library has upgraded in the years since first upload.
By the way, the RMG was a 2017 project, you can read the project page at User:Fæ/Project list/RMG. -- (talk) 10:30, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
I find it hard to keep track with new projects and usually get surprised by finding stuff like this. :) I drop in for doing some categorizing-work from time to time, thats about it. The images of HMS Alexandra [1][2][3] seemed nice at first for use in an article, but I cant even read the text on those tiny scans. Alexpl (talk) 10:54, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Refreshing my memory, I took a deeper look at the second example. The true source image is and the version uploaded is the largest the RMG has made available to the public. It's a bit sad, as the original artefact is six foot wide, so the RMG's archives must have a very large version of this photograph.
I have put out a tweet to ask for free stuff, though I doubt they will bend their policy of asking for money for better quality images. -- (talk) 11:10, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Ok, I will keep an eye open. And, btw, thank you for all the time and effort you have put in doing all the uploads. Alexpl (talk) 11:34, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Noah Silliman 2016-11-02 (Unsplash).jpg[edit]

{{Please link images}}

File:Noah Silliman 2016-11-02 (Unsplash).jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) Stombari7 (talk) 21:56, 25 May 2018 (UTC)Stombari7

Request: John Margolies Roadside America Photograph Archive from LoC[edit]

Hi, and thanks for adding so many images from the Library of Congress! When you are free, would it be possible to add a script to pull in the items from the LoC for the John Margolies Roadside America Photograph Archive, which were digitized in 2016? I have pulled some into a new category by the same name, but I imagine the script would be much more efficient and consistent. I created an article for Margolies last week and was quailing at the thought of going through his photographs and trying to upload them one-by-one.

Cheers, Mliu92 (talk) 15:15, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Additional stray thought: since the curators have been very good about adding the city and state to the title of these scans, would it be possible to automatically add a category of something like "Buildings in ___, ___" by searching the title text string for the second comma from the right? Cheers, Mliu92 (talk) 15:29, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

I'll take a look, though if I fail to spend much time on this in the next few days, the window for doing these things may slip by several weeks. -- (talk) 10:41, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
@Mliu92: I started drafting a test, but for several days the LOC servers are not working properly for iiif services (the stuff that renders images on request). This could be worked around, but I don't want to re-invent the wheel for a third time unless the service is permanently broken. I'll probably try analysing this again in a couple of weeks. -- (talk) 16:24, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
@: No rush; I appreciate your help with this. The entire subject of vernacular architecture is fascinating, and there is enough in there (along with the flickr album which has been previously partially transferred to Commons [it appears the flickr account manager added to the album after the initial transfer]) to adequately illustrate the concepts. Cheers, Mliu92 (talk) 17:19, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

@Mliu92: Upload run started, it will be a slow run of perhaps 1 per minute, so no need to panic about flooding. Slowness is partly a regular bounce issue where the WMF Commons API appears to not see the uploaded file for a few seconds, so upload verification keeps trying; this might be down to the old code I'm recycling and was later fixed, but I'm saving on my volunteer time by leaving it because it still works. There is a small bug causing the adapted old routine I'm using to skip the first gallery page (100 images), hopefully I'll return to it. Duplicates will be skipped. As I am not attempting to add any automated date or location categories, I'm guessing you will be interested in working on these using catalot later as part of your interest in curating the collection. :-)

This search will list new files as part of the batch upload.

I have re-examined the geographic data available, and the MODS data has entries in the format:

<country>United States</country>
<state>New York (State)</state>

However putting 500 or 1000 photographs in the top level State category would be considered flooding, and to match "Franklin, New York" to the nearest category of Category:Franklin County, New York, would be a difficult and inconsistent mapping process as our categories on Commons are not consistent. For these reasons I've skipped investing time in it. Where I have done this in the past, such as at Category:Sanborn maps, we had the freedom to create new categories which could be automatically named in a fully logical fashion. Again, the best option is probably to run searches for county/state in the source text within the bucket category and then manually sort them out with catalot in large batches.

Long term project page at User:Fæ/LOC#John_Margolies_Roadside_America_Photograph_Archive_(mrg). -- (talk) 12:17, 13 July 2018 (UTC)


File:József Attila színház előcsarnoka, a Szókimondó asszonyság c. színmű szereplőgárdájának egy része, b-j- Szemes Mari, Náray Teri, Eöry Kató, Gobbi Hilda, -, Egri István, Komlós Juci, Báró Anna, Fortepan 10571.jpg

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Apród (talk • contribs) 18:23, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:József Attila színház előcsarnoka, a Szókimondó asszonyság c. színmű szereplőgárdájának egy része, b-j- Szemes Mari, Náray Teri, Eöry Kató, Gobbi Hilda, -, Egri István, Komlós Juci, Báró Anna, Fortepan 10571.jpg. Apród (talk) 18:20, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Sparkling wine (8400499504).jpg[edit]

File:Sparkling wine (8400499504).jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sparkling wine (8400499504).jpg Renata3 (talk) 03:05, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Raudondvario dvaras, Raudondvaris, Lithuania (Unsplash).jpg[edit]

File:Raudondvario dvaras, Raudondvaris, Lithuania (Unsplash).jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Raudondvario dvaras, Raudondvaris, Lithuania (Unsplash).jpg Renata3 (talk) 03:10, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Several non-fleurons

Not sure I could just add them to your "needing speedy deletion" category. Regards, -- Deadstar (msg) 18:29, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes, any manual review is fine to then add the less useful image to speedy deletion. -- (talk) 06:37, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Loc housekeeping[edit]

Why are you putting images to File:Sam M. Kaaukai (1893 crop).jpg‎ and other similar images with images that do not match? Each of these are distinct crops of each person in the group photo. Is it a error in a bot or tool and can you fix it? Because I removed them and then you readded them. KAVEBEAR (talk) 04:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

I was aware of these additions, they mean that the gallery cross-links crops from the same source, which itself can be useful especially if the crops are not in the same parent category. However I am now limiting the housekeeping task so that this will only happen once. This does mean that "refreshing" will not happen if more crops are made or derivatives uploaded, but it will respect any manual revert. Ping me again if the the housekeeping runs twice on the same image from here on. Thanks -- (talk) 06:36, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Book of the black bass (Frontispiece- J. A. Henshall) BHL8568061.jpg[edit]

Hi, Fæ, I was wondering if this is the James Alexander Henshall (it surely looks like his signature). If positivie, I could insert the image to the article. Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 09:16, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Refer to, which shows this is the same author. -- (talk) 09:28, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Thank you very much Fæ, indeed. Lotje (talk) 11:52, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Nonsense image[edit]

Could you please add a description, categories, and a useful filename to this bizarre image that you uploaded, or otherwise nominate it for deletion? I am asking you before nominating it myself because it is use in userspace (though that does not matter for COM:INUSE), but it needs to have useful information added to it. As uploader, that is your responsibility. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:42, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

If you think it is out of scope, go ahead and nominate it. It represents a mime, whether that is in scope or not can be debated if you wish. -- (talk) 19:37, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
I don't believe that it represents the meme that you claim it does. The one (1) google hit for "sorry no dog no pony" is this blog post mentioning the ad. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:14, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Probably. Has to be one of these really, otherwise why would it exist? :-) -- (talk) 21:45, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Karl Kautsky, Beigeordneter des Staatssekretärs des Auswärtigen, Berlin LCCN2003652519.jpg[edit]

File:Karl Kautsky, Beigeordneter des Staatssekretärs des Auswärtigen, Berlin LCCN2003652519.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Karl Kautsky, Beigeordneter des Staatssekretärs des Auswärtigen, Berlin LCCN2003652519.jpg Mutter Erde (talk) 06:55, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Category:Economy images from Stadtarchiv Kiel[edit]

Hi Fae,

you've forgot to add the photos to a "Uncategorized files from ..." category.

Regards, Nāvika (talk) 09:54, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Attempt to reconcile[edit]

Hi Fæ, I appreciate that you wrote "I do not hate Yann." So if you say the truth, you will hopefully see this message as a sincere attempt to reconcile. I don't expect that all our disagreements would disappear in one day, but I am looking for a way to reduce tensions between us. I didn't find your question on 9 July as sincere, and I didn't appreciate your attempt to start a desysop procedure, but I may forget all that. So for me, this issue is passed and closed.

We often work on similar kind of images, i.e. produced by GLAM, so I can see areas of cooperation. I would like to say that this issue is not an attack on your work. On the contrary, I like these images, which I find them very useful for Commons. However there is a licensing issue, which should be fixed. Is it a mere coincidence that you uploaded this file, which I found in a discussion regarding Structured Data for Commons. Hopefully, you will answer positively to my message. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:53, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

@Yann: I am happy to move on. With regard to the example DR, others seem to have made the point I would have made, so there is no need for me to return to it. Thanks -- (talk) 09:43, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Need advice[edit]

Hi fae, See this Link to Smithsonian. Please advise your thoughts on whether or not we can download this? Regards Broichmore (talk) 20:57, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

@Broichmore: Yes. Longer answer, there is no significant doubt that this is PD per COM:PRP.
I have only spend a few minutes looking at it, and were this a DR, or part of a larger upload project, I would do more research. However, there are two perspectives that would probably be usful to justify a public domain status.
  1. This is 1933 and published in the USA. No individual photographer is known, all the record shows is a studio name. Without looking beyond the photograph itself and the Smithsonian's catalog entry, we can safely apply {{PD-US-No notice}} or {{PD-US-not renewed}}.
  2. The Smithsonian specifically claims to hold all rights to the photograph. As the Smith. is a type of Federal Institution, created by an act of US Congress and with the majority of employees being directly declared as Federal employees, this means under USGov law the photograph automatically becomes PD. Hence we can apply {{SIA-no known copyright restrictions}} or perhaps more directly {{PD-USGov}}. However this is a weaker case than above, made uncertain because of the Smith's nonsense about claiming to restrict commercial reuse, which I believe has no basis in US law unless the act that incorporated them somehow, weirdly and exceptionally, gives them a legal way out of the Federal laws that are supposed to govern all Federal organizations. However this latter point I would not want to willingly dive down the rabbit hole, when there are other legally valid rationales to host the image as PD.
Thanks -- (talk) 10:03, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
Many thanks. Broichmore (talk) 10:08, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
Fae, could you expand on the theory behind point 2? Regardless of this specific image, I believe it is factually incorrect: Federal institutions can and do own intellectual property that is not PD - so long as they or their employees did not create it. Storkk (talk) 10:16, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
This may be correct (examples would be better to examine than understandings). However the Smith. is stating that institutionally they are the copyright holder and they assert copyright, so this is quite different to asserting that copyright exists and naming a non-employee rights holder (the Scurlock estate). In this instance, there seem obvious contradictions against the legal requirements on Federal organizations, though I would be very happy to understand the legal precedent for this to be an exception.
However this is circling the rabbit hole. If this is worth a longer discussion, and precedent (on Commons) does not define this scenario especially well, a healthy way forward is the let the exemplar file(s) be uploaded, then raise a DR to establish a referencable public record. Keep in mind that we are in holiday season and in the UK we are having several weeks of unusually good weather, so folks like myself might not be around very much to participate. -- (talk) 12:04, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Furniture in the collections of the Missouri History Museum


And also:

Extended content

Yours sincerely, (talk) 16:51, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Destiny of the Redman


And also:

Extended content

Yours sincerely, (talk) 16:54, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Fire hats in the collections of the Missouri History Museum


And also:

Extended content

Yours sincerely, (talk) 16:57, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Clothing in the collections of the Missouri History Museum


And also:

Extended content

Yours sincerely, (talk) 17:00, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Category:Constantine the Great: The Reorganisation of the Empire and the Triumph of the Church (1905)[edit]

Hi Fae. In this category I have difficulty to categorizing the files because when I open the Book Viewer, the pages do not match the image. Can you correct these errors? Thank you. --DenghiùComm (talk) 08:20, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

I just randomly examined 2 cases, and the links worked perfectly well. I suspect any failures are one page off. Sometimes this is caused by image inserts that unfold, the unfolded version is added as an extra page and the link is often the folded page.
There is no automated fix that would work for these. The links are not especially wrong, as the correct document is linked, it's just the convenience of jumping to the right page. -- (talk) 08:54, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Pottery in the collections of the Missouri History Museum


And also:

Extended content

Yours sincerely, (talk) 11:02, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with Urban Light


And also:

Extended content

I am nominating for deletion images depicting the sculpture Urban Light. Barte (talk) 20:33, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with Urban Light


And also:

Extended content

I am nominating for deletion images depicting the sculpture Urban Light. Yours sincerely, Barte Barte (talk) 20:36, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with urban light


And also:

Extended content

I am nominating for deletion images depicting the 3D artwork Urban Light. Barte Barte (talk) 20:51, 19 July 2018 (UTC)