User talk:Multichill/Archives/2009/September

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Image categories

Hi Multichill, I added the categories as requested.Noliveonmars(talk)


I am extremely sorry, but I am not able to add categories to the images which I have uploaded. Can you please help me out so that I can categorize them. --Jazzradio (talk) 16:55, 29 September 2009 (UTC)Jazzradio

Please post new messages at the bottom. I tend to miss top posts. Please take a look at the links my bot provided or go to the Commons:Help desk. Multichill (talk) 18:07, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Image categories

Hi there, I added the categories as requested but am not quite sure whethter it is correct as it is... I think I only added the cats to the article isof the image. Could you take a look and7or advice how I add a category to an image after having them uploaded? Thanks n bests (Mudanzas2009 (talk) 15:05, 23 September 2009 (UTC))

Read the links my bot provided and enable hotcat. Multichill (talk) 18:10, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, first i got to say that the message your bot send me is in spanish, so thats the reason why you get so much spanish messages here. The bot message told to categorize this image, but when i go there i see that the image has been already categorized (Writers from Argentina | Argentine writers | Essayists) which are very correct, so do i have to delete the "Check categories" template? i dont think that image needs more categories.

thanks and greetings --Neotex555 (talk) 21:54, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

If the categories are checked you can remove {{Check categories}}. Multichill (talk) 13:18, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi I got a message to categorize the images I uploaded. But everytime I try to get to the gallery or check the categories, I get a SQL error :

"Database Error: Lost connection to MySQL server at 'reading initial communication packet', system error: 146 (sql) on sql/toolserver

- failed to connect to WikiList database failed to connect to WikiList database"

Its been happening over the last couple of days already. I can reach this page :

But nothing beyond that. If you could let me know what to do it would be much appreciated.

Thank you

Markds (talk) 15:52, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

AGAIN about Category Deleting/Bundesarchiv// by date vs. by place Hi Multichill, thanks for Your earlier conversations, now i have some other question :o)



Can You tell me please why i don't find any " delete log(s)" for this category by

Years 2008/2009 ??!:

Category:Images from the German Federal Archive by date __________________________________________________________

I copy here some previous messages whats "belongs" to this(not exactly but remembers us): All Berlin images to History of Berlin ___________________________________________

Hello Multichill, could just explain me why you move (or commanded to move) all uncategorized

Berlin images from the German Federal Archive to Category:History of Berlin? Now

it's quite difficult to recategorize them (or categorized them better) as they

don't contain the Uncategorized-BArch-Template anymore. Actually, it was a

unnecessary and rather senseless action. --Jcornelius (talk) 22:27, 2 May 2009


   After four months we still have a lot of barch uncategorized files. These 

files all had something to do with Berlin so i put them in Category:History of

Berlin. That's how categorization works. Uncategorized -> some general category

-> more specific categories. Multichill (talk) 19:00, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Bundesarchiv images of Charkow _____________________________________

Could you please create list of Bundesarchiv images made in Charkow for further

categorization? You deleted Category:Images from the German Federal Archive,

location Charkow, so it's hard to find related image now. Thank you. --

EugeneZelenko (Diskussion) 23:55, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

   Sorry, I'm not able to do that. Maybe User:Duesentrieb has this information. 

Multichill (talk) 15:19, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Bundesarchiv image categorization finished ______________________________________________

As of today, July 22, 2009, all of the images that are part of the Bundesarchiv

project have been categorized. That said, the temporary categories that you have

created (images needing categories from 4 Dec and 9 Dec) are now empty. As you

have already done for the 3 Dec category, I think that you can delete them now.

Thanks so much for all of the hard work you do categorizing images: I have really

learned to appreciate what people like you do after trying categorizing myself

for a couple of months! TFCforever (Diskussion) 02:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

   Wow, that's great! Some people might reason that categorization is never 

finished, at least all these images have at least one category. Looks like some

last remaining images to categorize are still in Category:Images from the German

Federal Archive involving sports. Multichill (talk) 17:25, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

       Vov&& You is the crasy? Uncategorized 1000+ photos!. -- 

13:39, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

You lost me here in this textdump. What's your question? Multichill (talk) 18:10, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Category:PD chem

Hi Multichill. Could your bot add {{Query chemical}} to images in Category:PD chem and Category:Media needing categories, if it is not able to find appropriate categories (≠ Category:Chemistry) automatically? --Leyo 08:04, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

When would I have to do this? Multichill (talk) 11:30, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
In cases like this if no (good) categories can be found automatically. It could also be done for images needing cat review in order to draw the attention of chemists to such files. --Leyo 07:33, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Too complicated? Too cumbersome? Not necessary? :-) --Leyo 10:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Probably not necessary. According to catscan this would currently only concern nine files. The reason for this low number is probably, that most pictures where this license is applicable and that are not categorized are uploaded with different licenses.

I would rather have a list of all _unused_ files in the Category:Chemical images that should use vector graphics in order to remove the convert tag. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 11:43, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

That's a quite hard. Multichill (talk) 18:12, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Category:First steps

Any idea why your bot is adding random images to the category First steps (as far as I can see about babies walking?) -- Deadstar (msg) 10:08, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

My bot uses Commonsense. You can use Commonsense in verbose mode (adding v=100) to get a trace (example). If this gets out of hand I can add the category to the blacklist. I think First steps is the source of the problems. Multichill (talk) 10:15, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for that, I'll have a look at cleaning up the cat later. -- Deadstar (msg) 10:34, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
So it was clean on Friday, but not so anymore. It'll require regular monitoring at this rate. -- Deadstar (msg) 15:58, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
I blacklisted the category. Multichill (talk) 18:15, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Acceptable images

[[File:Bruna Ferraz 2.jpg|thumb|right|400px]]

A puppy

Hi, please understand that images as the one at the right are encyclopedic and entirely in the scope of the project. Avoid spurious deletion nominations. --Damiens.rf 19:44, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Wtf? Why the hell are you telling me this? I've never even seen this image. Multichill (talk) 19:53, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
No but your bot did this edit [1] where it added a date to the deletion request. :-) --MGA73 (talk) 20:41, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
My bad, I got the wrong guy. Please accept this beautiful puppy image as an apology. --Damiens.rf 19:31, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Multichill (talk) 12:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC) images

Hi, I see you're going through my images and tagging them as Permission not sufficient using. Could u please hold on for a a few hours, I've contacted the webmaster and I'm pretty sure he'll give me the permission. ~ Zirguezi 11:40, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

OK. Multichill (talk) 12:06, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
O BTW, could you ask for permission to use the images under both {{GFDL}} and {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}}? Multichill (talk) 12:38, 5 September 2009 (UTC)


Why does your bot remove valid categories: [2] ? AnonMoos (talk) 08:05, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi AnonMoos, the bot didn't remove the category, just replaced it. Here you added a category, but forgot to remove {{Uncategorized}}. Because the file is tagged with {{Uncategorized}}, my bot added some categories. Category:Euclidean geometry and Category:Polygons were added. Category:Polytopes is a parent category of Category:Polygons so it was filtered of to prevent over-categorization. I recommend you enable hotcat. This tool will automagicly remove {{Uncategorized}} for you. Multichill (talk) 09:59, 5 September 2009 (UTC)


Only bunnies are allowed to hop here

Why can't or hasn't the Commonist source be updated or forked? I usually run it by clicking the webstart link, so I don't have a license.txt file available when I use it. I'll try to download it and use it that way, but the problem really needs to be fixed with Commonist itself rather than trying to continually track down users who are using it.--ragesoss (talk) 12:57, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Response at User talk:Ragesoss#Commonist licenses. No talk page hopping please. Multichill (talk) 13:09, 5 September 2009 (UTC)


Hi! I do not know how to categorise the image 'Alberdi.JPG'. He was a Catholic religious and Spanish historian. Could you be so kind of helping me, please? Best regards

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sergerod (talk • contribs) 16:36, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
Sure, like this. Multichill (talk) 14:43, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

License migration

Only bunnies are allowed to hop here

Sure (I had thought the template I had been using was updated to reflect the licensing change. I guess not). I already migrated that one, and have uploaded another new image under the new one and will do so in the future. I suppose I'll have to go back and migrate all my old ones, too. Daniel Case (talk) 14:38, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Response at User talk:Daniel Case#Relicense. No talk page hopping please. Multichill (talk) 14:47, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

License migration and Commonist

No problem for me if you want to add {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}}. I modify my license.txt in commonist. --Yoggysot (talk) 15:29, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Response at User talk:Yoggysot#Commonist licenses. No talk page hopping please. Multichill (talk) 15:40, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Commonist licenses

No problem for me too, you can add {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} and I fix my license.txt in Commonist. Ancalagon (talk) 16:29, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Response at User talk:Ancalagon#Commonist licenses. No talk page hopping please. Multichill (talk) 16:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC)


I made a response to your response here I don't know if the image can be kept--it is a relatively simple design as one would expect for objects in the 1940's of minor people. But if it should be deleted on Commons, please restore it on English Wikipedia. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 22:15, 5 September 2009 (UTC)


File:2010_SAG_PMap.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Filipe Ribeiro Msg 20:09, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Uncat and dups

File:Tso Moriri Lake, Korzok, in Ladakh.jpg marked with {{Duplicate}} got the categorized tag. Personally, I remove all categories when marking a dup for speedy deletion. To limit tagging, we could remove "hidden" from the backlogged Category:Duplicate. -- User:Docu at 20:17, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Don't ever remove categories. The duplicate category should probably not be hidden. Multichill (talk) 20:39, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
I removed the "hiddencat" from the dup cat. This should solve it. BTW there is no point in categorizing duplicates. It's already sufficient that two people check them. It's not necessary that even more have to come across them. Anyways, it wouldn't really be a problem if the category wasn't backlogged. -- User:Docu at 12:16, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Yeah categories can be removed if you are SURE that the correct categories are added to the other image and you are sure it really is a dupe and you are sure the dupe-template is on the image that should be deleted.... (All the things the deleting admin should check). --MGA73 (talk) 20:46, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Is this a hint? (forget my comment about the category being backlogged, Turelio just got to work on it). -- User:Docu at 21:03, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
It's anoying when the categories have been removed because you have to check the history to see if the categories were moved properly. Multichill (talk) 21:05, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

There 85 images that are both uncategorized and in Category:Duplicate [3] -- User:Docu at 05:06, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I agree with Multichill that removing cats is a problem. Since we do not know if the user that removed the cat really checked if cats are on the other image. Two things to do: Move fewer files and more should help deleting dupes. --MGA73 (talk) 07:27, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
I removed uncat from the dups for now. BTW I have no idea what you mean with "move fewer images". -- User:Docu at 13:18, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

BotMultichill bug(?)

Something seems to have gone wrong here. I can't be sure without looking at the code, but I suspect that the bot simply used an obsolete list of uncategorized files that didn't take my recent edit (made after this bot run started) into account. Still, given that it presumably needs to load the wikitext to make the edit, wouldn't it be possible to either:

  • a) check the wikitext itself to see if it appears to contain any non-hidden categories, or
  • b) check the last edit timestamp and, if it's later than the start of the bot run, reschedule the file to be re-checked later?

Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:03, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

The chance of this happening is very small so I don't bother to check. Multichill (talk) 21:07, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Same problem with this edit, even though the file does have a visible category (Category:Cryptomeria japonica cultivars). I've removed the bot error, but have no idea why it might have happened - MPF (talk) 22:15, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Just a small timing problem. Multichill (talk) 19:43, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
It doesn't seem like this should be hard to fix. Something like:
if (page.editTime() >= startTime):
    # Page has been edited since this script was started, don't save.
    page.put( ... )
where startTime is set to the current UTC timestamp (in MW_TS format, i.e. "YYYYMMDDHHMMSS") at the start of the script, ought to do it. (Disclaimer: I don't actually know Python, but I think the syntax should be more or less right.) If you can give me a link to the right source files, I can even try to submit a patch. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 14:10, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
You assume I wrote something for this. This was just a one time massive run. I just did a query and one line of ( -lang:commons -family:commons -regex -dotall "^(.*)$" "\1{{subst:Unc}}" -file:only_hidden.txt
) to add the template. Multichill (talk) 14:30, 9 September 2009 (UTC)


Can you replace an image from another using CommonsDelinker in all Wikipedias?. --TownDown How's it going? 07:00, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I can do that yes. Multichill (talk) 12:20, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Your bot

It doesn't seem to be a problem with the bot itself, but if look at the images it's self-evident why they aren't categorized. Or perhaps there is a category for this type of thing and I don't know about it?[4] Durova (talk) 16:00, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Every image should be categorized. In this case Category:Wikimedia humor seems suitable. Multichill (talk) 19:48, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Bot suggestion

Can the bot change its output when leaving messages for admins? I just got a message about an uncategorized image (which all I'd done was upload a non-watermarked version, but no matter), and got a massive bit of generic boilerplate that I already knew. It'd be nice if the bot could at least assume that admins here know the basics and just get to the point. :) EVula // talk // // 16:19, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Concur, and also if there is a way to note experienced users, the same applies (I have about 18,000 uploads). - Jmabel ! talk 17:58, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
I'd say IMHO the real problem is simply that the boilerplate is too long — newbies are probably just as likely to go tl;dr at it than experienced users. Maybe most of it could be moved to a short, dedicated help page and the actual text left on user talk pages condensed down to one or two short paragraphs. Or perhaps some of it could be hidden in a collapsible section, although that obviously does nothing for users without JavaScript turned on. Anyway, that's really something that anyone can fix — someone just has to spend some time doing it. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 18:32, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
One template for all. Just improve {{Please link images}} if you don't like it. Multichill (talk) 19:46, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
I remember reading discussion where the outcome was that it is acceptable for images to not be placed in categories as long as they are linked to from a page. You bot doesn't take this discussion into account. Please consider reprogramming to check for this condition. Royalbroil 01:05, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
We had this discussion and the output was that every image should be categorized (see my faq). So I won't change my bot.Multichill (talk) 09:22, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Another bot suggestions

If a page is tagged with {{Badname}}, probably the bot should not send a message indicating that it lacks categories. I just got a message for Image:Unidentified herons or egrets in flight, Westport, WA 01.jpg. It has no categories because it is a badly named duplicate marked for deletion. Under those circumstances, I don't think I'd be doing anyone a favor to put it in a category. - Jmabel ! talk 17:58, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Same for me, but I just neglect in such case the category demand. But may-be your botmultichill is able to exempt uncategorised to-be-deleted files from any to-be-categorised template. --Havang(nl) (talk) 18:33, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
See #Uncat and dups. Someone made Category:Duplicate hidden (fixed now). Deletion cats shouldn't be hidden. Multichill (talk) 19:51, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
A late thanks, I like contributing but have too much other things to do for the moment. I'll come back. -- Havang(nl) (talk) 18:30, 9 September 2009 (UTC)


Please teach your bot some manners. A page like File:800px-Hendrik Avercamp 001b.jpg has SEVEN categories. Why I need to get my emailbox cluttered with false alarms about that?

Mee ophouden! Jcwf (talk) 19:03, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Je moet verder kijken dan je neus lang is. Multichill (talk) 19:40, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Bot question

Hello, may I please ask you, if the bot is checking categories for all the images on Commons every day? Let's say the image was uploaded yesterday, when the image's category would be checked by the bot? I am sorry if that info is written somewhere and I should have known it. Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:34, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Normally my bots monitor recentchanges (every hour) and newly uploaded files (once a day). These bots use a conservative approach and won't catch all uncategorized files (catch around 500 files each day). These bots were created by me before we had hidden categories (if I remember correctly). Now we have hidden categories and most of the service categories are hidden. Yesterday I did a query at the toolserver to find all files only in hidden categories. Couple hours later I had a list of about 37.000 uncategorized files. I tagged these files as uncategorized and you can find them in Category:Media needing categories as of 6 September 2009. This probably caught most of the files my regular bots missed. You can find the tasks of the regular bots here and I also have some fancy statistics here. I hope this answers your question. Multichill (talk) 21:00, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
I was surprised that I got message about categories for the file that was uploaded in July... and now I know why! Thank you very much for taking your time to explain it to me.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:04, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
You're welcome Mbz1! Multichill (talk) 18:18, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


Of nine images you tagged, 8 already had categories; six had half-a-dozen, and for a long time, too. Macdonald-Ross (talk) 21:44, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Take a look at User talk:Macdonald-Ross#Please link images. It's an incremental message. Multichill (talk) 04:28, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Multichill, your bot is doing great work

It is due time for some positive feedback on your user page, and I'm very happy to receive your notices. Categorization is crucial and your bots are fighting uncategorized images effectively and friendly. But of course some people have to complain anyway. Nillerdk (talk) 05:14, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind message Nillerdk. Multichill (talk) 18:18, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Category-Bot should notify the author, not an image-editor

It would be fine, if the bot checks for templates, which indicate, that the image is an only altered image. An contributor of a Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Image workshop or german de:WP:Fotowerkstatt wont be able to categorize. E.g., the bot could check for the template {{Bilderwerkstatt}}, and notify the uploader of the image from the template-parameter "|orig=GeweihHirsch1.JPG|" . Regards, --Nyks (talk) 07:45, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

No, the bot always notifies the uploader. Multichill (talk) 07:58, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
=> The altered images wont get categories, even if the original gets categorized by the author. --Nyks (talk) 08:24, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Which includes people who simply reverted some upload vandalism. Rocket000 (talk) 10:18, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
To maximize the chances of actually getting the files categorized, it would be best to notify all uploaders. I realize that this would take some extra work to implement, since you'd also have to query the oldimage table, but it would avoid the problem described by Nyks above. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 10:39, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
You have a point but notifying 2, 3, 10 people is not needed if first person fix the image. So bot should notify first user. If he/she does not fix it then the second... etc. But lets say that you upload an image of a house. Then someone finds it amusing to upload an image of a penis and I revert this edit then I will stand as "uploader" also and maybe also the penis-dude. Anyway this is only a temporary problem. When the bot has found all old images without a proper category then only new images (with one uploader/editor) will be left. --MGA73 (talk) 11:53, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Categorized Imaged Reported As Uncategorized

Dear Bot Owner,

I appreciate your efforts on categorisation. However, I could not help noticing that BotMultichillT reported 3 of my uploads as uncategorized, 2 of which were actually categorised.

Yours, Robert Illes (talk) 08:22, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello, BotMultichillT made also an error with marking File:Holospira arizonensis shell.jpg and notifying me. This is a bug report. --Snek01 (talk) 09:03, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
File:WashMonument WhiteHouse.jpg is another interesting case; BotMultichill (correctly) called it uncategorized after the source, categories, and license was vandalized. I restored the info, removing the uncategorized template, but afterwards BotMultichillT came by and added categories anyways. I reverted it, but then it came by three more times and added more (including a duplicate, and also a parent cat to what was there). Not sure why it is doing that, but I've reverted them again. Carl Lindberg (talk) 13:51, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Commonist licenses

Dear Thesupermat,

As you might know Wikimedia is currently migrating from the GFDL to cc-by-sa-3.0. Wikimedia Commons is also migrating and we're down to less than 8000 files (started with about 1,8M files) . Unfortunatly this number keeps growing because Commonist contains outdated license templates. You appear to be running Commonist, could you please change the following lines in your license.txt?

{{self2|GFDL|cc-by-sa-2.5,2.0,1.0}} should be changed to {{Self|GFDL|Cc-by-sa-3.0,2.5,2.0,1.0}}
{{self2|GFDL|cc-by-2.5}} should be changed to {{self|GFDL|cc-by-3.0}}
{{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} should be changed to {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}}

Can I also fix the images you have already uploaded by adding {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}}?

Thank you very much, Multichill (talk) 12:48, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Can I also fix the images you have already uploaded by adding {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}}? Yes, of course
Cher Thesupermat,
Comme tu le sais peut-être, Wikimedia est actuellement en cours de migration de la GFDL vers la licence cc-by-sa-3.0. Wikimedia Commons est également en train de migrer vers cette licence, et nous n'en sommes plus qu'à 8000 fichiers à traiter (il y en avait environ 1,8 million au départ). Malheureusement, ce nombre croît toujours, car Commonist contient des modèles de licence obsolètes. Tu sembles utiliser Commonist pour tes imports ; pourrais-tu changer les lignes suivantes dans le fichier license.txt de ton dossier Commonist ?
{{self2|GFDL|cc-by-sa-2.5,2.0,1.0}} devrait être changé en {{Self|GFDL|Cc-by-sa-3.0,2.5,2.0,1.0}}
{{self2|GFDL|cc-by-2.5}} devrait être changé en {{self|GFDL|cc-by-3.0}}
{{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} devrait être changé en {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}}
Peux-tu également m'indiquer si je peux corriger les images que tu as déjà importées, en y ajoutant {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} ?
Merci beaucoup. Multichill (talk)

Traduction par guillom

Merci de ta traduction, parce que l'anglais et moi c'est pas top même si j'avais compris le message dans ses grandes lignes Clin. Pour ce qui est de commonist, je modifierai et pour la correction des images en {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}}, bien sur que oui. @+.--Thesupermat (talk) 15:50, 6 September 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for bringing some uncategorised files in my uploads to my attention. They were old and I would never have detected them (they had a hidden cat only). Lycaon (talk) 14:52, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. Nice to hear. I even got a note myself about some files I totally forgot about ;-) Multichill (talk) 18:38, 8 September 2009 (UTC)


Your bot has asked me to categorise Image:Picture1.png and Image:Picture 1.jpg. I would gladly do so but I do not have admin rights in this neck of the Wikimedia woods. Please do it for me: the description from File:Illustration.png is what we need. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:49, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure, ✓ Done. Multichill (talk) 18:05, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

file:Causes du burnout.png

hello, thank you for the bot's alert, I thought I had done by loading the image with HotCAT sorry cordially thanks to answer on fr.wikipedia Micthev (talk) 18:07, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome, thanks for your friendly message. Multichill (talk) 18:37, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Your bot

Your bot sent me an uncategorized notice on my talk page. I dealt with the problem, but I feel your bot acted inappropriately because my talk page is tagged as a soft redirect ({{softredirect}}) to my real talk page on the English Wikipedia. Your bot should have either logged into Wikipedia and notified me there or it should have simply emailed me without editing the talk page. I've removed the notice because my Commons talk page is not an active talk page. Diff of the edit in question. --Thinboy00 (talk) 23:06, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

This is intentional. When you happen to come to commons you see the note, act on it and remove it. Multichill (talk) 09:16, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Problems with category notification

Pictures like are properly categorized, imo, why does your bot notify me about missing categories? --Mbdortmund (talk) 09:02, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Please see the history and if the categories suggested by my bot are correct, mark the image as checked (click "Check them now!"). Multichill (talk) 09:12, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deleting temporary files

Please see reply at Commons talk:Deletion policy#Speedy deleting temporary files. Thanks. Kaldari (talk) 16:39, 9 September 2009 (UTC)


Please don't give orders to add categories to an image when there is no image... AnonMoos (talk) 08:21, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Orders, lol. Don't blank pages, we have {{Speedydelete}} for that. Multichill (talk) 08:58, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
The original png-version was deleted as superseded by a svg-version (15:19, 21 July 2006 Erin Silversmith (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "File:Islam.png" ‎ (Superseded. Wrong file name.). So there were in fact an image ;-) --MGA73 (talk) 14:06, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


Hi Multichill, you notified me that some of my uploads are uncategorised, e. g., here:[5]. This and the other files are already categorised on the species level. So, what do you (or your bot) want me to do? Yours, --Accipiter (talk) 10:04, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Looks like Kilom691 already fixed it. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 09:50, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


Hey, I've uploaded some new pictures today and was wondering whether this time I used the correct license. Could you take a look to see if the license i used conforms with the new license policy? Tomer A. 07:42, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Nice images if I may say so on Multichill's talk page :-) {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} is fine - just remember to add a describtion of your images. --MGA73 (talk) 14:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for hint Smile.png

Felipe lord (talk) 20:45, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Fallback in {{Information}} not working

Hello, since you're the one who made the autotranslation in {{Information}}, I thought I'd tell you this. Just recently I've seen that the information template's fallback doesn't work (random file). In "de-formal" it should fallback to "de", but instead it shows the English version. Are you able to fix this? Thank you. --The Evil IP address (talk) 19:05, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Currently {{Information}} doesn't include a fallback feature. Probaby because we ran into template loops. It could probably be fixed with {{Fallback}}. You should leave a note at the talk page to see opinions on changing the template. Multichill (talk) 19:12, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Www3cubed: delete

Please delete the image: A self-bad-self-complete.jpg . It's a copy of: 1986-self Portrait.jpg. I would do it myself but I don't know how. - Thanks, Www3cubed (talk) 18:55, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

✓ Done File:A self-bad-self-complete.jpg is now deleted. --MGA73 (talk) 19:04, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Some scan This file has Author and Source

出典 戦史叢書「支那事変陸軍作戦1」Page142 作者 みや東亜

— Preceding unsigned comment added by みや東亞 (talk • contribs) 04:38, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
So why are you telling me this? Looks like a scan to me. Multichill (talk) 08:04, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Don't mix source and topic categories

I thought we hashed this all out on my talk page. Anyway, now that you've removed the Wikipedia Loves Art catagories from the museum categories and made the WLA cats hidden, Docu is complaining that there's no easy way to find the images. Why can't you wait until we've finished uploading, reviewing, and categorizing the WLA images before making your changes? It would certainly make the process easier. I realize that the process is taking a while, but Pharos has asked me to wait until he hears back from the other museums before finishing the upload process, and we don't want to start the manual reviewing/categorizing until the uploading is finished. Anyway, I'm getting totally frustrated with this entire process and the fact that everyone is asking me to do things differently. I just can't seem to make everyone happy :P Kaldari (talk) 20:19, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

I can't wait because I know that if I wait these temporary hacks become permanent. This should fix it. Multichill (talk) 14:59, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


Hi Multichill. Thanks for your message. As a beginner in wikipedia i don't know correctly how to do it. I asked now an other, more professional user an he explained me this. The next uploads i will sort in the correct categories. Sorry for my mistakes and thanks again for your message, Best wishes--MittlererWeg (talk) 22:24, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Good luck and have fun here! Multichill (talk) 18:29, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

What a mess

I just ran into a one of the worse category messes ever. This one particular user decided to start his own tree of life category system! All the way to the species level including images by other people. I've been trying to clean this mess up the last couple hours. I almost got it to a manageable state but there's still some uncategorized images now (his categories weren't hidden for the most part). It's not your fault, but your bot actually made it worse since he had personal galleries (with taxoboxes and everything) in the mainspace. Your bot populated his categories for him. My first idea was to simply have SieBot move everything in his species categories to the real species categories (of which some didn't even exist) and to have your bot populate new ones for where there was only a gallery.. but guess what? He like making personal templates as well. Subst? See how that works. I had enough for today, but I just wanted to let you know the situation and possibly you can prevent your bot from warning him about all these uncategorized files since I'll get to them in the next couple days. There's not too many, but, well, let's not make the situation worse for when he comes back. Thanks. Rocket000 (talk) 01:34, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

I remember that name. I think I ran into that mess too and just skipped it because we have plenty of work to do. Great that you cleaned it up! We should probably somehow look for categories which should be hidden. Multichill (talk) 18:28, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Category:Staffordshire hoard

Flickr - portableantiquities - Hilt Fitting.jpg

Hi Multichill,

I just read that you reviewed a really cool Flickr picture of the treasure found. Three other pictures in that category, however, aren't working, although they can probably be found on the same Flickr page. Do you know what went wrong there? I'd be really grateful if those pictures became available. Thanks, Groogokk (talk) 11:01, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

The traces of the pictures are now gone; I guess they'll have to be re-uploaded. Thanks anyway. Groogokk (talk) 11:48, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
The author changed the license right after I uploaded that file. I'm afraid the other files can't be uploaded under the current license. Multichill (talk) 18:23, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Flickr - portableantiquities - Hilt Fitting.jpg

File:Flickr - portableantiquities - Hilt Fitting.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

-- 21:49, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Left a response over there. Multichill (talk) 18:21, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

flickrripper setting the flickrreviewer

Dear Multichill, where exactly can I put my name as flickrreviewer in the ?--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 12:43, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I found where to add it (user-config). It's in the documentation but not the code documentation...--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 13:57, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Yes, it's still very rough coding, I know ;-) Multichill (talk) 18:22, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Potd description templates

[6] Any way of checking if these pages are blank? I remember I used to run into these a lot, it's usually because the author made it for the wrong day (or wrong language in this case). Rocket000 (talk) 09:07, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

{{Potd description}} could be changed to display a big warning when {{{1|}}} is empty. Multichill (talk) 09:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Alcyon 1906 2HP 7 logo.jpg

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | hrvatski | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | sicilianu | slovenščina | svenska | українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 09:19, 30 September 2009 (UTC)