User talk:Pi.1415926535

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

A barnstar for you![edit]

Administrator Barnstar Hires.png The Admin's Barnstar
Thanks for deleting the many images I marked as copyvios today! 5 albert square (talk) 03:53, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Categorizing trolleybus images[edit]

I reverted one recent category renaming made by you, because it was made without discussion and I felt it was not a good change. You replaced "Category:Trolleybuses in San Francisco" (leaving it as a red link until I restored it) with "Category:Trolleybuses of the San Francisco Municipal Railway", but those two names are not mutually exclusive. A trolleybus can be "of" an operator, but now located far away from the city in which it originally operated; for example, the Seashore museum owns a San Francisco Muni Flyer E800 (although the last I heard, it was in storage in Virginia and had not yet reached the museum), and IRM has several ex-Chicago trolleybuses, but images of them there cannot accurately be categorized as being (taken) "in Chicago".

In my experience, when Commons categories of trolleybuses by make have been subdivided by some sort of geographic reference, it is most commonly by place (city), rather than by operator (and I'm not just referring to U.S. or North American content, since Commons has far more photos of trolleybuses in Europe and Asia than in North America). For example, the Category:Buses in the United States by operator has fewer total categories than the total number of "Buses in [city]" cats one would find if going through all of the many subcats within "Buses in the United States by state" category. In any case, your outright deletion of Category:Trolleybuses in San Francisco (rather than just creating Category:Trolleybuses of the San Francisco Municipal Railway as a subcat of it) without even leaving a redirect was unwarranted and should have been discussed. So I restored the cat.

I am aware that you (appear to) do a lot of categorizing for the Boston area, so it's worth my mentioning this: As far as I know, the only reason that the Category:Trolleybuses of the MBTA existed was the fact that there had been arguments among Wikipedia editors about whether content related to the MBTA trolleybus system could be categorized as being "in Boston", since the main trolleybus/trackless trolley network of MBTA is technically in Cambridge. I, among others, argued that "in Boston" was very common shorthand for "Greater Boston", almost universally in use among transit fans outside the Greater Boston area, and numerous transit publications covering trolleybuses (most of which nowadays are published in Europe, in the U.K. and Germany) refer to that system as the "Boston" system, not the "Cambridge" system, for that reason (to do so is not an error, as "metropolitan area" is clearly implied and understood). But to resolve the disagreement, "Trolleybuses in Greater Boston" was settled on. But virtually all other specific trolleybus systems with images on Commons – the vast, vast majority of which are in other countries – have "Trolleybuses in [city]" as the main geographic cat, rather than 'by operator'. The MBTA cat was an exception. Steve Morgan (talk) 13:18, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

@Steve Morgan: Thanks for the lengthy explanation! I did not mean to be rude by renaming that category - I've been attempting to standardize category names across the Muni system and that just happened to be one. (It was just a normal category move, but I suppressed creation of the redirect because they tend to accidentally get files in them.) At first blush, I believe that trolleybus categories below the "trolleybuses in XXX city" level should be named for the operator if multiple operators have been present. That's the way rail equipment in the US is categorized, and it works out very well. See for example the Boston categories, where the MBTA and its predecessors have separate categories.
The Market Street Railway did also operate trolleybuses (now the 33-Ashbury/18th line), though I haven't found any free-use images of the line during the MSR era. When I do, Category:Trolleybuses in San Francisco (which I didn't delete, btw) will contain both Category:Trolleybuses of the San Francisco Municipal Railway (and I would then have subcats "YYY model trolleybus of the San Francisco Municipal Railway") and Category:Trolleybuses of the Market Street Railway and so on. That's why I moved Category:Flyer E800 trolleybuses in San Francisco to Category:Flyer E800 trolleybuses of the San Francisco Municipal Railway - it makes the operator categories align neatly, and it also supports the museum-preserved equipment better than by-geography-only categories. Europe and the US will probably always have to have slightly different category structures - with less focus on operators in Europe, the geography is more important for naming.
I hope this pre-afternoon-coffee explanation makes sense! You're always a pleasure to collaborate with, so I'm sure we can figure out the best category structure. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:12, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Out of process deletion[edit]

Hi, can you please undelete File:Grand Rapids, United States (Unsplash 2c0midsQKe0).jpg and follow the standard DR procedure please? This is a high quality portrait and does not fall within Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion. Thanks -- (talk) 02:15, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

@: If you will agree to provide a useful language-coded description, useful categorization, and fix the inaccurate date information (the image was uploaded on flickr under an all-rights-reserved license previous to the date that the Unsplash file includes) and inaccurate geocoding (I'm pretty sure there's no pool in bankruptcy court), then I will gladly undelete it, and likely will not have a reason to nominate for deletion. Without that information, I can only assume that a file of a non-notable model that has remained uncategorized and unused for four months after mass upload, has a generic filename and no description, and has verifiably false date and location information, is at best out of scope and thoroughly duplicative of files with more information and likely educational use in Category:White lingerie and Category:White brassieres, and at worst is sufficiently harmful for having false information that speedy deletion is advisable. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:53, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
Could you please undelete? I am not an admin, so with no ability to look at the image page I have no opinion on the rest. Nothing here seems to turn the deletion into a policy based correct use of sysop rights. Thanks -- (talk) 02:59, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
@: The file has been restored. I look forward to you correcting and adding information, and I trust that since you obviously care about this file, you will do so quickly.
I also have a specific concern that you should take heed of. Given that the image was released under a non-free license on flickr, and only later under a PD license on Unsplash (which made it less than obvious that images were released into the PD), I'm not convinced that the author actually consciously released their image into the PD. While CC licenses are irrevocable, they require that the copyright owner be aware of the license, and this appears to not be such a case. I would treat Unsplash images very cautiously because of that; it is very different from flickr where images must deliberately be released under a CC license. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:39, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
He's a pro photographer with a commercial website and promotional Facebook account. The limited portfolio on Unsplash is clearly a taster in the same way as many other Pros use the site.
I have uploaded 30,000 photos from this source. No doubt questions could be asked about several thousand of them. If you think speedies are appropriate, I suggest first gaining a consensus on the VP or AN to support a deviation from standard policy, or more simply stick to DRs where at least I get a notification.
I'm mobile only until the end of the month, so any more complex analysis has to wait, getting Christmas lunch together takes a priority. -- (talk) 11:00, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
@: I may well seek such consensus - not really in response to your uploads so much as completely automated bot uploads like Panoramio, which has swept in tens of thousands of vacation photos and other OOS junk. Merry Christmas, and I hope the lunch came together well! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:09, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
@: It's now been almost three months. You have made no edits to the file to add a useful description or categorization, nor to fix the inaccurate information. I assume this means you have decided the file is not worth the effort to provide information to make it useful and in scope, and will not object to deletion? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:08, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

My concern was out of process deletions. If you put this up for deletion, correctly, using a DR, it would be a keep. I have uploaded nearly 4 million images to Commons and over 30,000 from Unsplash. Commons is a communal project. If you feel this particular image must have more categories, then add them. -- (talk) 20:35, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
@: Uploading files en masse with incorrect and missing information, and refusing to add it when questioned, is an affront to how Commons works. I'm quite sure you don't care, but you are responsible for your own uploads, and it is unacceptable to expect other users to clean up when you make a very large mess. If the image is useful enough to be kept, then please explain to me how users are supposed to find it without a description or useful categories? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:46, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
The file is not a "mess" and neither was this batch upload project. You are free to raise a DR if you wish but I see nothing to fix here. As a sysop with the right to delete files, please follow the procedure correctly for speedy deletions.
I reject your allegations with regard to my upload projects. Thanks -- (talk) 20:52, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas![edit]

Adding iw links to Commons Categories[edit]

Dear Pi.1415926535,

Thanks for creating new categories here on Commons as you did recently for Category:Junipero Serra and Ocean station. It would be great if you could as well add the interwiki-link to the corresponding page on en-wikipedia as you did recently for Category:St. Francis Circle station with this edit . As this would help together with the work of wikidata:User:DeltaBot help to keep a reduced number of pages listed on en:Category:Commons category template with no category set.

Many thanks if you could consider to do so as this would reduce my efforts on adding these iw links later through patrolling the pages listed on the pre-mentioned category on en-wikipedia. I would like to thank you for all the great work you are realizing on en-wikipedia and here on commons. Robby (talk) 06:20, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

@Robby: Sure thing. Which is more important: adding the link from Commons, or adding the Commons Category property on Wikidata? I'm not entirely sure how wikidata works in that regard. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:42, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
I always add the link from Commons (it's easier as you can do it from Commons without switching to wikidata and there is Delta-Bot who is adding automatically the Commons category property) although I suspect that there i sno general agreement which is more importment.From my point of view it's most important to have the link in wikidata without manual iw links on commons pages.Robby (talk) 21:30, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Deleted Image for Lauren Drain[edit]

I'm new to Wiki but you deleted an image for Lauren Drain Kagan as a copyright violation. I am the photographer and owner of said image and I'm the one that added it to her wiki page and gave her the image to use on her website. There are no violations but I am unable to re-upload the image. Can you undo the edit? What can be done on my end?

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cut drawing of an Ariane 5 ECA DE.svg[edit]

Why are you shutting off discussion before allowing a response?

M0tty is still modifying the license, and modification is not permitted by the GFDL. The new text is not clearly within the CC-BY-SA license as it may require a hyperlink or URL in the immediate vicinity; that precludes usual practice in books.

You should reverse your close. Glrx (talk) 02:46, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

DR was not the appropriate venue for this in the first place. You should have talked to M0tty first and/or discussed it at COM:VP/C with the intention of having the template modified, rather than going straight to DR to delete the image (and possibly many others). Unless M0tty refused to modify the license whatsoever, there was no need for you to go to DR. If you believe the changes to the template are inadequate, please go to the appropriate venue. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:28, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Untitled[edit]

I have a Better Photo, Sorry!

File:Texas State Capitol Dome .jpg

 - Out of this World Adventure — Preceding unsigned comment added by Out of this World Adventure (talkcontribs) 17:33, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Bridge[edit]

Looks like we both poked our cameras through the same hole in the fence recently. :) — Rhododendrites talk |  15:03, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

@Rhododendrites: It appears so! Quite the spectacular bridge. Are you local to Providence? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:05, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Formerly local. In NY now, but make it to RI a couple times a year. You? I decided to pop over to the bridge while driving around, trying to remember the easiest way to get from India Point Park to Bold Point Park to try to get a better picture for the Green Jacket Shoal article. I do love Providence. I think it took moving away to realize that. :) — Rhododendrites talk |  05:38, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Former Bostonian, now in SF for the foreseeable future, though I occasionally make it back to New England. Green Jacket Shoal is quite the interesting area - and I'd never heard of it before! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:52, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I just knew it as that part of the river with all the junk sticking out of it near India Point Park. Came across an article about the ship graveyard somehow and did some digging around. Wasn't really a good way to get a decent picture, unfortunately, without a drone and/or an underwater camera. I'm in SF fairly regularly for work -- let me know if there are good photography spots that a tourist wouldn't know about. :) — Rhododendrites talk |  22:46, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Will do if I think of any! Tank Hill is pretty close to Muni Metro (though those six short blocks get steep) and has quite a nice view. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 07:05, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

New Flyer DE60LFR buses of the MBTA[edit]

I see you created the Category:New Flyer DE60LFR buses of the MBTA in 2016. With all the buses in Category:Buses of MTA Regional Bus Operations, I've actually thought about making model-specific subcategories for that one. Unless you can think of some other way to diffuse that category. ----DanTD (talk) 04:37, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I highly recommend doing so (and I may be able to help sort sometime that I'm bored). Pi.1415926535 (talk) 07:05, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Good, because I've created six so far. Pick another model if you'd like. I thought about the Orion VII Next Generation, but if you grab it first, I can always search for another. ----DanTD (talk) 17:46, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
I also moved several subcategories to the parent category - I recommend keeping that category just for bus models, and perhaps for the shuttle bus categories too. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:36, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Makes perfect sense to me. ----DanTD (talk) 23:37, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Shore Line Trolley Museum[edit]

If you are able to, could you take a trip to the Shore Line Trolley Museum in Conneticut? I would like to ask you to take a picture of a specific car at that museum. That car is IRT Deck Roof Hi-V car 3662. I have asked so many times for photographers to take a picture of this car, but all of them have either refused to do so or never replied back to me at all. And the reason I am looking for a picture of that car is because I would like to use it in the Deck Roof Hi-V (New York City Subway car) article. Neither Wikimedia nor Wikipedia have a picture of this car whatsoever. Therefore, I would like to ask you to take a picture of car 3662 and upload it on Wikimedia, so it can be used on the Wikipedia article. I recommend taking pictures of both the exterior and interior.

Just a heads up: it may or may not be on display, depending on where the Trolley Museum decides to hide the car. See if you can ask someone to show you the car. If not, so be it. At this point I am pretty much helpless if you cannot get a picture of the car.

Here's a picture of the car for your reference: https://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?6891

If you need the location: 17 River Street, East Haven, Connecticut, 06512

Davidng913 (talk) 15:52, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

@Davidng913: I have been meaning to go for some time. Unfortunately, I now live on the opposite side of the country, so I probably won't be able to anytime soon. Regretfully, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:59, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
@Pi.1415926535: Oh...well, maybe one day if you take a vacation to the other side? It isn’t something I need immediately, but it is better to have it as soon as possible. —Davidng913 (talk) 03:07, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Procedural question[edit]

Procedural question for you. Via File:Long Island Rail Road2.jpg, I've run across a user, Mr-Shadow (talk · contribs), whose uploads should probably be deleted en masse. His talk page is a mess of unanswered deletion requests. Spot-checking turned up implausible claims, like threshold of originality for newspapers (File:Bevione intervento.jpg). Most of these don't have sources. Can I just do a mass deletion request and indicate that I think everything should go, without tagging each file? There's over one hundred of them. Thanks, Mackensen (talk) 22:10, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

@Mackensen: Go to Preferences-->Gadgets and activate VisualFileChange, then you can click "perform batch task" on the left sidebar. It'll let you perform mass tasks like nominating a user's files for deletion, with one deletion request and all files properly tagged. I wouldn't necessarily nominate everything, though - a lot of the old Italian bus images seem to be properly PD because Italy only had a 20-year copyright for a long time. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:38, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

OTRS query[edit]

This is obviously different than wikipedia. We had one person question the authenticity of Commons:Deletion requests/File:SIGNY.jpg. It looked fine per wikimedia rules to me. You said no OTRS, and though it didn't seem necessary, a request was filed and they have it. If one person requests a deletion it's carried out here? Just so I know for future additions. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:07, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Thierry de Montbrial.jpg[edit]

[1] Did you mean to write "Kept"? --GRuban (talk) 14:09, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

@GRuban: Good catch, my apologies for the error. I've fixed it. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:46, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Deleting SEPTA station categories[edit]

You do know I created categories like Category:Market–Frankford Line stations in Philadelphia to distinguish them from other SEPTA stations in Philadelphia, right? And that I did the same thing to the two MFL stations in Darby Township, as well as Subway-Surface Trolley Line stations and Broad Street Line stations? ----DanTD (talk) 23:02, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I understand why you created them. I deleted them because they were an utterly unnecessary level of categorization. Geographic categories are only useful at the system level, not the line level - when you're in the line category, you want to be able to see all the stations at a single level. What possible use is there to know which stations on a certain line are in a certain jurisdiction? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:25, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

False redirection[edit]

Good afternoon. I kindly ask you to please eliminate the redirection because it's connecting two regions of two different countries. It is as if a redirection of the United States flag redirects to that of France. Simply the redirection shows a false information, a lie. That is why I ask that you eliminate it, or I will simply be obliged to ask another administrator to do so, since I believe that this project should take common sense over the rules. More if it shows an obvious lie. Greetings. --Taichi (talk) 22:45, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Could you close a withdrawn nomination?[edit]

Hi, Pi. You closed my last deletion request, so I wonder if you could do me the favor of closing this request which I made and am now withdrawing? Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Panam2014: as written there, after looking into it further, it does look like the clip owner had the right to mark them creative commons. Thank you! --GRuban (talk) 19:49, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:38, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Was File:Cable car in SF July 2007.jpg not taken on Hyde Street?[edit]

Pi.1415926535, was my photo File:Cable car in SF July 2007.jpg not taken on Hyde Street? I was pretty sure that it was. Would you mind checking the geocode and comparing it to what is in the picture? If it was indeed taken on Hyde Street, I'd like to add the category back; however, if it was taken on a different street, I'd like to correct the description and add that category (if one exists on Commons). Thanks! Michael Barera (talk) 03:54, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

@Michael Barera: Don't worry, you're not wrong about the geocode - it is indeed on Hyde Street! I've been cleaning up the cable car categories over the last few days, and I'm still figuring out how the category scheme should go. Right now, your image is in Category:San Francisco cable car no. 22, which is in Category:Powell-Hyde and Powell-Mason cable car lines (because that car only runs on those lines), which is in Category:Hyde Street (San Francisco). I'm thinking of making Category:Cable cars on Hyde Street (San Francisco) or something similar, which would provide a more direct subcategory. If you have thoughts, I welcome them! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:11, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, Pi.1415926535, I didn't trace the category hierarchy of Category:San Francisco cable car no. 22 up far enough to realize that it made Category:Hyde Street (San Francisco) redundant. My mistake. Sorry again for bothering you about this. All the best! Michael Barera (talk) 04:21, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
Nope, no bother at all! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:25, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Models[edit]

Hi. I stopped uploading random flickr models to Commons on 2 March. Sorry for the inconvenience.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 00:28, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: I'm glad to hear. I understand you had the best of intentions in uploading them, so please don't take my comment to indicate I have anything but overall high regard for you as an editor. I also understand that I fall on the more deletionist side of Commons admins, and that many would have closed it differently. Regards, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 16:26, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. ...89793238...   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:30, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by J.mo obama[edit]

Hello Pi.1415926535, you did deleting the files. There was only one vote in the nomination. It was a keep. You wrote: "Deleted: per nomination". I do not understand? --DALIBRI (talk) 10:18, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

@DALIBRI: Please note the following from COM:DR: The debates are not votes, and the closing admin will apply copyright law and Commons policy to the best of his or her ability in determining whether the file should be deleted or kept. Any expressed consensus will be taken into account so far as possible, but consensus can never trump copyright law nor can it override Commons Policy. COM:SCOPE is Commons policy; the files were personal images with no educational use. A limited number of vanity images are allowed for users who do contribute useful content and wish to have their userpage reflect themselves, but this was a user who has contributed zero useful content - only self-promotional userpages - across multiple projects. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 15:36, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
Hello Pi.1415926535, you and I know, there is a broad margin of discretion. OK, you are the admin. But you should know, there are people, who don't believe, that a doing like this, is the right way, to encourage other people to contribute to this community. --DALIBRI (talk) 18:21, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
No, this isn't a matter of discretion - it is Commons policy: The uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal user page of Commons or another project is allowed as long as that user is or was an active participant on that project. (emphasis mine) The user in question has never been an active participant on any project, and never showed any indication that they were here for anything other than to advertise themselves. If you wish to encourage newly registered users to actively participate, please do it in ways other than questioning admins when they delete spam. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:37, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Possible reason for deletion[edit]

Hello, I've noticed you responded to my earlier deletion request. I'd like your opinion on a possible reason for deletion: In https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Spruceglen_(ship,_1983) there is some 100 images of one ship taking a turn on the sea (e.g. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Freighter_Spruceglen_employs_her_bow_thrusters_to_turn_counterclockwise_to_leave_Toronto%27s_harbour,_to_exit_through_the_Eastern_Gap,_2015_08_17_(53).JPG_-_panoramio.jpg), with negligible differences between each other. There is nothing wrong with any single image, but in my view such a high number is meaningless. I've seen numerous cases similar to this... JiriMatejicek (talk) 12:30, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

@JiriMatejicek: I speedily deleted a number of the files as duplicates. They were uploaded from Panoramio by a bot, which lacked the ability to distinguish pictures taken in bursts. A number of the remaining files are not exact duplicates, but certainly overlap each other to not be educationally useful to keep both. If you nominate those superfluous files for deletion, let me know, as I will likely be voting delete. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 15:56, 13 April 2018 (UTC)