User talk:OsamaK/Archive 2

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.

File:Michelle Bachelet with sash.jpg

You need to fix your bot, because this image is CLEARLY sourced. Cantus 22:43, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Havoc wreaked

I'm writing to both you and D-Kuru because sometimes what happens around here is a succession of errors. First File:Calendário Asteca.jpg got tagged because it had no source, and then it got deleted because the omission had not been fixed. Fortunately, File:Calendario Axteca.png already existed.

Do you realize that the image File:Calendário Asteca.jpg was used on hundreds of pages on more than 20 wikis? Do you realize that Aztec sun stone has a variety of similar images all based on the calendar?

Okay, Jic was notified that the image had no source, but really. That was a problem that could have been more easily fixed – and in much less time than it took me today to go and fix the problem across all the wikis. Next time, please stop and think about the effect that deleting an image may have – especially one like this one? Cheers. Evrik 17:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


Why did you overwite a version of Image:Slogan-ar-wiki.svg which actually displays (though not fully correctly, due to Wikimedia SVG renderer bugs) with a version which doesn't display, then nominate it for speedy deletion on grounds of being corrupt⁇? AnonMoos 13:41, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Did you look at recently-generated thumbnails of this image, such as ? The display is not all there yet, but the remaining problems are more due to WikiMedia software problems, rather than because of problems with the SVG file… AnonMoos 14:51, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Image ar:صورة:Turs-ul-Iman Shi'ar-uth-Thaluth.png on Arabic Wikipedia

With respect to image Turs-ul-Iman_Shi'ar-uth-Thaluth.png on Arabic Wikipedia, I'll ask you the same thing which I asked "Санта Клаус" there:

Please be so kind as to tell me why, with respect to an image which I've personally created from scratch and personally uploaded to Wikipedia, can't I include a basic description of what the image is and what it’s about⁇

If the image is "controversial", it’s not because of the information included on the image description page ar:File:Turs-ul-Iman Shi'ar-uth-Thaluth.png, at least not that anyone has bothered to tell me about… AnonMoos 14:40, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

The text on ar:صورة:Turs-ul-Iman Shi'ar-uth-Thaluth.png is merely a description of the content of the image. The diagram in the image contains twelve sentences, and I list all twelve sentences. What’s wrong with that? AnonMoos 08:27, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Image Tariq

Hello, I'm sorry for only replying now, but I don't come here very often. That image Tariq.jpg was taken from English Wikipedia. I only brought it to Commons, so it could be used on other projects. I assumed its status was o.k. --JLCA 15:54, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you're right, but I thought that that verification had already been done on English Wikipedia. All the information that it had, I placed it on the page when I uploaded it to Commons. Maybe an administrator from English Wikipedia can look it and ask the person who uploaded it to English Wikipedia. I'm sorry, it was apparently based on an incorrect assumption from my part. --JLCA 15:12, 22 November 2007 (UTC)


  • Hi OsamaK. Thank you for your attention. But I move the most of the photos from t.wikipedia, en.wikipedia, de.wikipedia, fr. wikipedia, bg. wikipedia and ja.wikipedia. I don't know all this languages. So, I don't understand the items on photos. I only take and carry:) But, I'll look at the usage informations and I'll try to categorize them after I finished uploading. Thanks again:)) --Maderibeyza 07:58, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

PNGs deleted

Hi there. I've just deleted the PNGs from my user page. Apologies for the delay: Real Life has been keeping me very busy lately. – 52 Pickup 17:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Deletion request now here – 52 Pickup 10:37, 21 December 2007


Hi, I notice you have tagged a whole lot of images that contain {{AgenciaBrasil}} with a {{no source since}} template (eg File:RJ106100.jpg, File:Valdemar105987.jpg, File:General140430.jpg, File:Funeral140675.jpg, File:Moraleslula 20060113 01.jpg (I think there are 129 in total, though I haven't checked who tagged them all)). These images all appear to contain all the required information (description, author, source, licensing), is this just a mistake by a bot or is something really missing? :-) --Tony Wills 11:03, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

(copied here from my talk page in case you have not seen it :-) So you have been busy :-). Firstly what the template demands isn't actually relevant (it doesn't make the rules), the information presented covers what commons requires, and is rather more detailed than many other images have. Second there is an "out clause" – "if available". Often deep links into a site are no help because material is moved, or the site restructured. I think a tag that will have the images deleted if an uploader from 23 months ago doesn't respond in 7 days is a bit drastic when there is no obvious copyvio going on. I personally have no doubt that these images were sourced from there. Possibly we need to set up something like the flickr image verification system that checks soon after they are uploaded, that images really do come from that site. I don't think they keep many years of archives on site. So maybe some work needs doing, but deletion won't help anyone :-) --Tony Wills 11:53, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I didn't read it. I was working per this comment in my user talk page. These images are really unsourced! you can't put {{AgenciaBrasil}} without saying the source. {{AgenciaBrasil}} isn't a source, it’s a license tag only.--OsamaK 11:17, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Pictures from Agência Brasil taken before 28 July 2007 can be browsed at (the site was restructured and soon they'll move the pictures from there). It has a calendar, so you can search the pictures by date. Sometimes the server can overload. If so, deleting the cookies from may help. --Julián Ortega Martínez 13:39, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
If they are really, let’s start replace "No source" with the crroct source.--OsamaK 11:17, 29 December 2007 (UTC)


please stop or you'll be blocked. Don't add no source without first looking at the picture! Many of the images you added as "no source" do have a source/author. Bogdan 16:37, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Are you kidding? You can't block me with this un-valid reason. Please be sure before saying something like that! If you didn't, I'll request remove your admin tools--OsamaK 11:19, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Image:012 lrg.jpg

Why did you tag this picture? And why didnt you leave a message at my talk page. I consider this very rude. Multichill 17:06, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Attention

You're currently being discussed here – see here. Please remember to always notify the uploader (although it seems you are in most cases, from what I've seen). Giggy 02:21, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Dupe image

Sure it is. And not too complicated. I just need to get a moment to do it. Ping me again if it isn't done in a few days. --Platonides 22:14, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

try this and tell me if it doesn't work. -- 15:09, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

// add Dupe-template using a parameter parsed from the current URL
addOnloadHook(function() {
    var parts = /&dupeimage=([^&]*)/(location.href);
    if (!parts) return;
    var dupe = decodeURIComponent(parts[1]);
    var editform = document.forms["editform"];
    if (!editform) return;
    var wpTextbox1 = editform.elements["wpTextbox1"];
    var wpSave     = editform.elements["wpSave"];
    wpTextbox1.value = "{{Dupe|" + dupe + "}}" + "\n" + wpTextbox1.value;;

Apply for sysop?

Hi OsamaK.
You are a really good commons-contributer and you are this in really boring spaces (like Dupes) and for a long time. I belive you will be a great sysop, and because you always say 'no' to my requests in IRC I therefore ask official on this way:
Would you like to become a sysop on wikimedia-commons? I would like to suggest you on COM:RfA. In my oppinion you would be a great help for all the other sysops here.
Best regards, __ ABF __ ϑ 13:58, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

hum, Thanks ABF. I have long tagging backlogs (Just like yours :)). I'll try to finish these backlogs (If this is possible in commons, because there are always new backlogs). I'll tell you when I'm free :)--OsamaK 14:02, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
I second this. I have offered to nominate Osama for adminship before but he refused. Osama, whenever you feel that you are ready, just inform me and I would be happy to nominate you. --Meno25 07:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

File:No Israel.svg

Image deletion warning File:No Israel.svg 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 image, 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Thuresson 18:21, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


Hi Osman, Please take a moment and advise me about this image at Commons:Deletion requests/Image:ArmyCommand.jpg. 10xx Ori

‌ Dated, (just for archive bot :) )--OsamaK 18:17, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


is really not fine. Please remove it. __ ABF __ ϑ 14:27, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

even this :)--OsamaK 16:06, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
I think it shouldn't be deleted. No attacking..--OsamaK 16:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
"Who cares about them!" is not a very nice remark. Mind you, there are many people out there who do care about Israel and Palestine. --Boricuæddie 16:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
For you, I'll delete "Who cares about them!" :)--OsamaK 17:01, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
شكرا --Boricuæddie 17:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
I think this was more a matter of interpretation than on being an attacking statement. As far as I understand, OsamaK was screaming for help for people living in the Gaza strip and ending the sentence posed as a question with an exclamation mark because of that. However, apart from any sympathies I may have, I think that Wikimedia Commons should be place where users should vent their political stands. This will only divide users and create conflict. Please calm down and consider removing any political statements not directly related to Wikimedia Commons from your user page and/or talk page (this is not only for OsamaK, but for anyone reading this). Cheers! Siebrand 11:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


hiya, i don't use wikis much, but i uploaded some content once i think you deleted. on my user page i discussed that each ogg encoding was of my own creation or downloaded from a public-domain-serving website. i knew the copyright-expiration dates to be near public domain, but wasn't certain. another user commented further on my talk page, finding two to be special cases, but otherwise the rest ok. i don't know how (nor will i visit this enough) to tag up the files properly, maybe you can with this information. everything should be searchable via "charlie patton" --evilmousse

Dated (Just for archive bot)--OsamaK 08:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Please tag…

Hi, could you please try and tag duplicates so that Category:Duplicate has at least 200 entries all the time? You can keep on tagging them as I still have more than 11.000 left ;) Cheers! Siebrand 10:57, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'll try to do that. Cheers! :)--OsamaK 15:04, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


Hi. I noticed that you put a deletion tag here due to being duplicate. However, can you instead please delete the twin here? The latter image file was based on the former image file. Also, the latter image file is not linked in any Wikipedia articles, whereas the former image file is linked in several Wikipedia articles. Thanks.Ferrylodge 06:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

better name

Sorry for revert but File:Farsky Kostol.jpgFile:Kostol Nanebovzatia Panny Márie (Banská Bystrica).jpg is better direction because of name. —Kandy Talbot 11:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

FYI, possible redlink pending

re: this page, where you had the sole link on this matter in the second listed image…

I nominated an PD-map image for deletion you have on that page here, as being the second worse name of the three. With two others, somethings got to give! Cheers! // FrankB 02:27, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Duplicate coat of arms?

Good evening Osama,

You put a duplicate tag on File:Blason famille Menou.svg because it looks like File:Blason famille Noailles.svg. Please consider that the two families concerned are very different from each other, and have a coat of arms of their own… even if it is the same by chance. Jimmy44 gave some online sources (in French, sorry) on his file’s description to show that this family has been bound to this coat of arms for ages.

The deletion of one of these two files would increase the confusion between the two families. The name of the remaining file would be inappropriate for the other family, and its description would be confusing too.

So please let us keep these two files, which were drawned separately by different users (and do not even have the same size in kilobytes) for a different purpose, and remove your dupplicate tag. Thanks in advance.

Best regards, Bruno 20:51, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing, if you saw file history, you would see the new version of this file which was uploaded recntly with unknown reason (They was really dupes). I'll remove dupe tag, because they really aren't same now. But I think we must not have two version of the same file. Thanks again!--OsamaK 20:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
I am afraid you misunderstood me, because you seem to thank me friendly… but ask for the deletion of the file whereas it is exactly what I tryed to avoid. Never mind, let’s see what will come from the vote. Regards, Bruno 21:24, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
OK, sorry :)--OsamaK 07:51, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

normal courtesy

Is there a reason you don't leave a courtesy "heads-up" on the talk pages of uploaders when you nominate images they uploaded for deletion? Geo Swan 07:32, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

In the case of File:Alyacoub1.jpg, File:Alyacoub2.jpg, etc, I think you nominated the wrong copy for deletion. Mine were filed under the individuals’ full names, and included the page where they were originally published.

The other files incorrectly said they were published by the FBI, when they were actually published by the State Department. Geo Swan 07:32, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Over on the Village Pump I was told "leave it on the other one." I have done that. Geo Swan 20:23, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Old issue?

I got your note.

Sorry, I can't agree that this is an old issue. The discussion you directed my attention to dates back to January 3rd. You tagged the images in question on February 10th -- five weeks later.

Please. I urge you to be more careful.

In these particular instances I am concerned that you failed to take into account which images were better documented -- which had the more meaningful name, and which listed the URL to the original source page where the copyright holder first published the image.

You do realize that a URL to the original source page is Essential? Without the URL to the original source we can't verify that the images have been tagged with the correct liscenses.

Regarding your note -- you wrote:

"OK, sorry for that. I had many images uploaded by same user. If I click "No source" I'll get edit conflict. For example look at User talk:Carlosar. If I wait until saving, that’s will lost my time. Otherwise using a bot, And I think you'll not allow"

Sorry, but I am concerned you still don't understand why leaving a heads-up is important:

I have read the argument you seem to be offering here many times. I am going to paraphrase what I think you are saying: "If I slowed down my maintenance efforts, by taking the time to document what I am doing, and the reasoning behind my efforts, I wouldn't get as much done. Skipping steps makes me more efficient."

If this is what you meant I urge you, in the strongest possible terms, to slow down, and accept the hit to your efficiency.

IMO those who are trying to enforce policy must fully comply with it themselves.

IMO it is important for those trying to enforce policy to remember that they are fallible, that this is a cooperative effort, so it is essential that they explain their actions. If you nominate images for deletion, and you don't tell the uploader, they don't have a clue it was deleted.

Even if, for the sake of argument, the reasoning behind your nominations for deletion is flawless, you still need to inform the uploader, because that step is part of their education. If your reasoning is flawless they need to be informed so they will learn what they were doing wrong.

Not informing uploaders is rude. It erodes the community’s overall commitment to collegial discussion and consensus based decision making.

Candidly Geo Swan 20:23, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

File:William-Adolphe Bouguereau (1825-1905) - The Birth of Venus (1879).jpg

Please take a look. Regards, Code·is·poetry 19:20, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Hassan Nasrallah image

tagged the image as a copyright violation, as a courtesy, the image is an apparent copy of [] 22:19, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

لومړی مخ

Could you please che4ck it up and tell me if it it should be marked as patroled? I know noone else who might be able to understand it. Regards and thanks in advance, abf /talk to me/ 14:20, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Duplicate issue: File:Sr-sj-natmon-map.jpg and File:Santa Rosa San Jacinto NM.jpg

Hi, how do you decide which version of duplicates to keep? In this case the filename might be better in one, but the file information and particularly the categories were much, much better in the other. The admin, who acted after your notice decided to keep the better file name. Who would have transfered the description and the categories to the kept version? I just did it, so there is no harm done, but please take care that meta information such as descriptions and categories don't get lost by sorting out duplicates. greetings --h-stt 10:54, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

New dupes

Hi Osama. I put another 2.400 dupes up for tagging. In the past week we have processed about 4.000 duplicates. The Commons total is now down to 9.773. Let’s go and tag :) Cheers! Siebrand 15:07, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

meaningfull dupes

Hi OsamaK you and siebrand are doing a good job. but this type of dupes has a special reason. De Die Wüstenharfe 096.jpg I put this special image in when a page is missing in a scanned book, to flag this explecitly. Sometimes when we find an interesting historical book at Google book search it may be that they have forgotten to scan a page. to assure the concordance of page numbers and scan number we'll put this image in. I think you'll find this picture round about 100 times in total. please keep them it will help us to improve our work thank you.

Yust another thing, I talked with siebrand, that he will inform me if there are dupes of scanned textes in german language and I will solve this type of problems. Especially if there are german textes involved or the scans are from GerWsUpload or marked as part of the category de Wikisource book and its derivates.

It would be very kind if you would do the same Greetings --Joergens.mi 20:25, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I think I'll wait a few thousand dupes more for them to stand out more… There probably are between 50 and 100 book errors at the moment… In a month or two they'll probably come in in a big batch :) Siebrand 21:16, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

deprecated function in your monobook.js

Dear user, I noticed that you use the includePage function in your monobook.js page.

This function is now obsolete, as the importScript function was introduced with rev:35064 to the MediaWiki Javascript core library wikibits.js. It also keeps track of already imported files.

To allow us to remove includePage from Mediawiki:Common.js I'd kindly ask you to replace its use with importScript (same syntax!). Thanks! --Dschwen 17:03, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

"no license" tag

Before you add {{no license}} tag – check the history. Here you can see the File:8-course-tenor-renaissance-lute-04.jpg has been blanked (vandalised) by in April 2008. It would be much easier to repair it with one-click than waste time with imaginary "no license". Julo 13:55, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

  • OK, not a problem any more. Julo 15:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

dupe tagger

I had a problem trying out your dupe tagger, see

Do you know what may have caused this? Regards Finn Rindahl 18:13, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply at my talk. The link is dead because the image in question has been deleted as a dupe(!) of File:Panhard & Levassor 1899.jpg. The problem with using your tool was that it did not give the whole filenamn of the duplicate file because of the ampersand (&), instead adding just {{Dupe|Image:Panhard_}}. I'm not sure if anything can be done about it, and it is not a big problem as long as we are aware of it. Regards, Finn Rindahl 10:08, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


The author of the image is unknown to me. However, since the image, according to the sources known to me, was made about 100 years ago – see,[1][2] the image belongs to the category

Public domain This file is a Ukrainian or Ukrainian SSR work and it is presently in the public domain in Ukraine, because it was published before January 1, 1951, and the creator (if known) died before that date (details). (This is the effect of the retroactive Ukrainian copyright law of 1993 and the copyright term extension from 50 to 70 years in 2001.)

A Ukrainian or Ukrainian SSR work that is in the public domain in Ukraine according to this rule is in the public domain in the U.S. only if it was in the public domain in Ukraine before January 1, 1996, e.g. if it was published before January 1, 1946 and the creator died before this date, and no copyright was registered in the U.S. (This is the combined effect of the retroactive [1], Ukraine's joining the Berne Convention in 1996, and of 17 USC 104A with its critical date of January 1, 1996.)

Deutsch | English | suomi | français | italiano | русский | українська | +/−

Flag of Ukraine

. I marked the image with this template. --Dmitri Lytov 18:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


If copyright of this postcard has expired, it does not matter, where the digital image comes from. I could copy it from whatever website I like, I could photograph it in any museum without the need to ask anyone for permission, I could steal it from a computer of my friend, I could take a photo of it from a postcard album in a dark corner of a book shop making sure than none from the staff sees me. Because copyright has expired, all these methods are legal. What’s the difference? --Derbeth talk 21:55, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Your help is needed! …

… really? You are not able to check this tool, before you are going to take this edit? Okay, a long time ago (many month before you have started your way in Commons) I made a mistake. But you have marked the wrong map. So tell me, which person needs help?

Never once again touch one of my uploads, before you haven't made the right check. I hope that’s clear! Very angry, --Mikmaq 20:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

In my opinion you will get better results if you assume good faith and approach your fellow volunteers in a more friendly way, Mikmaq. To me the above looks like a good example of bad manners, which is likely to not get a positive reaction, if any at all. I suggest you rephrase your observation and make a polite request to Osama to change something he did you disagree with with his best intensions. Cheers! Siebrand 21:34, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Fresh dupes

I ran the dupicates query again and have placed another ~1.650 duplicate pairs on the dupes# pages. Please tag! :) Just remove the book pages and the empty pages without tagging. I am dealing with those… Thank you again for all your help. We're making Commons a cleaner place :) Siebrand 18:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi! You tagged one image as dupe where the other version had already been deleted and redirected: File:RKTanitimYeniHanCaravanseraiManisaTurkey.jpg. So the result was, the redirect page was replace by a redirect to itself, and the file it was supposed to point to was deleted. I'm not sure if that was because of an out-of-date dupes list or a bug in the duplicates query script. Anyhow, keep up the good work with tagging dupes, just make sure the other version isn't a redirect. Best--ragesoss 06:54, 6 June 2008 (UTC)


As you requested, you r now blocked. Hope this helps.

Thanks :D--OsamaK 17:21, 6 June 2008 (UTC)


Original Barnstar.png
Original Barnstar.png
This barnstar is an exact duplicate or scaled-down version of: File:Original Barnstar.png There should be only one copy of an image (except this one).
After getting rid of all the other dupes, you and the other helpers have been speedily awarded.

Commons is virtually duplicates free – Thanks for your efforts! Finn Rindahl (talk) 23:32, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

lol, that’s funny :). Thank you!--OsamaK 17:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


Thanks for the work you do tagging images & notifying users. When you notify a user, if is a new page, could you please add the {{Welcome}} template as well. It may not be perfect but it is one of the better multi lingual templates we have. Thanks & regards --Herby talk thyme 08:40, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm using "User messages" from the Gadgets. The possible messages come up on the "toolbox" on the side when on a user page. One issue is that I am very reluctant to block someone who has not had a welcome message as they may well not understand English. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 11:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Image Tagging File:Bashkirtseva Autimn.JPG

You have pasted the template to my talk but I cannot understand what is wrong with the image. The image is a 2D copy of the Painting Autumn by w:Marie Bashkirtseff who has died in 1884, more than 120 years ago. It is clearly indicated on the image. I have taken the reproduction from a CD published by w:Russian State Museum (that holds the painting). I happen to have the CD so I put the Russian name of CD and the year to the image.

Can you elaborate why you labeled it as nsd? If it is a work of a bot the code should be corrected. If it is a human work please be more careful Alex Bakharev (talk) 13:50, 29 June 2008 (UTC)