Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive 64

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

Move locked file to correct category

Could you please move this file from Category:Czech Wikipedia logo variants to Category:Czech Wikipedia logo? --Dvorapa (talk) 10:23, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Taivo (talk) 11:17, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Sock account

I strongly suspect that these two accounts are by the same person: [1], [2]. In addition, USAQuidditch is a confirmed sock user on Wikipedia (English) [3]. Tamara787 might also be another account as well. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:31, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done I've blocked USAQuidditch. Tamara787 is already globally locked. Daphne Lantier 20:28, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi, This user uploaded too many copyrighted material as own work, please check.

Regards MohammadtheEditor 04:40, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked for a week by Materialscientist. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 09:26, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
DR created Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by علیرضا آقاجانی 1355‎. Yann (talk) 09:27, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Dulal Kisku

Could an administrator please delete these 2 files as clear copyright violations? I meant to speedy-nominate them but misclicked. Sorry for the hassle. GermanJoe (talk) 14:32, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Thanks for your help. Storkk (talk) 14:35, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

File:Unidentified Artist - Mathew Brady, Juliet Brady and Mrs. Haggerty - Google Art Project.jpg false positive in title blacklist

I got the following false positive when trying to overwrite with my crop via CropTool:

“ Upload failed! [api] Received error: titleblacklist-forbidden : The title "File:Unidentified Artist - Mathew Brady, Juliet Brady and Mrs. Haggerty - Google Art Project.jpg" has been banned from creation. It matches the following blacklist entry: " .*[НH]\W*[AΑΑ]\W*G\W*G\W*[EЕΕ]\W*R(?!ston).*" ”

  — Jeff G. ツ 06:14, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Template:GFDL-1.2

Apparently Template:GFDL-1.2 is somehow no longer recognized as a license. Category:Files with no machine-readable license suddenly contains thousands of files with this license? Could someone who is familiar with this technical aspects have a look at this? Jcb (talk) 16:02, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Questionable mass deletion requests by User:Pitpisit

Can an admin please check all of his deletion requests? This user has been tagging a lot of Philippine government related logos and pictures here in commons for deletion without providing a clear explanation why he nominated it in the first place. I encountered this user when he nominated this photo for deletion, saying that the photo is a "broken file" (1). When I asked what do he mean by "broken file", he changed his deletion argument, citing that the source website "cannot link" (2). When I checked his deletion requests for other files, its either not clear why he wanted them to be deleted or he just wanted to tag them for deletion. -WayKurat (talk) 13:40, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

User:Jcb - Wheel warring

Colleague Jcb declined to speedy an obvious copyvio of a highly visible work of art. When another user initiated a formal DR and I closed that after 18 hours and three unanimous statements for deletion, he wheel warred against my decision. Absurdly he accused me of wheel warring and claims that we could perfectly wait for five of six days while the copyvio is visible in articles and the image viewer without any tag of the deletion request. The image viewer makes this urgent! The vast majority of well intending (re)users won't notice disputes anymore. We can not wait any longer, the discussion is unanimously and my act to close and delete is the only possible reaction. Please restore my decision and delete the file ASAP. --h-stt !? 14:58, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

It's a well established practice to use speedy only if the file itself has been stolen from somewhere and to use a regular DR if a depicted object may cause a copyright problem. You have been warned several times for wheelwarring in the recent past. Please don't continue this behaviour. Jcb (talk) 15:00, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
link to an earlier case where they have been told not to wheelwar - Jcb (talk) 15:03, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
H-stt used his sysop tools multiple times (1, 2, 3, 4) to wheel war/revert other admins out of process. This is not acceptable, i urge H-stt to follow the existing procedure (DR/UDEL). --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:13, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
I also agree that Jcb is right here. Yann (talk) 18:19, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Well, both are partly right and partly wrong here, in my opinion: A speedy should be converted into a DR, not reverted, except in cases of vandalism. But a DR should stay open for the full duration if it is contested, as it was in this case. No need to rush. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 19:56, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

File rename

There are some files that need rename as suggested by User:Kintetsubuffalo at Category:Media requiring renaming - rationale 4 can any administrator help whether it may be renamed or no as I find it somewhat confusion in the rename suggestion of the images --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 17:17, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

POTD language

Need attention. Jee 07:00, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done --jdx Re: 07:42, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Possible multiple copyvio

Please check Special:Contributions/Viktor_Bilousov. I do not speak the language but it appears as if the user is not aware of Commons policies for copyright. For one file for which I am sure, I proposed its speedy deletion (Google Earth copyright). For the rest, please check. --FocalPoint (talk) 04:58, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Among his uploads, there are images (like File:Karta OVD tag okr 1899.jpg), which due to their reported time of print appear to be probably out-of-copyright. For the rest, I do not know. If I am wrong, apologies to User:Viktor Bilousov and thank you for the uploads. --FocalPoint (talk) 05:05, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request backlog

Would anyone have a few spare moments to look over Category:Commons protected edit requests? It currently has 31 requests pending. The earliest that I looked at was from April, and many are pretty routine like adding translations so I do not imagine it would be too time consuming. Thanks in advance! seb26 (talk) 00:43, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

I started a discussion at Commons:Translators' noticeboard#.7B.7BScan.7D.7D about {{Scan}} as an example of a fully-protected template that only has translations. seb26 (talk) 15:26, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Fleuron easy speedies

Example of correct fleuron, London 1762.

We have an upload project running for a large database of fleurons, which are 18th century printer's illustrations. The Cambridge University project that created the images used a process that was pretty reliable, but due to the large numbers, the ratio between true fleurons and other things, such as illustrations or damaged text, is higher than I would have liked. Unfortunately there's no obvious simpler way of doing this manually and visually pre-upload, though some filtering on key words in book titles has been added. Rather than creating individual speedies for the unwanted images, we are using cat-a-lot and putting obvious and non-controversial rejects in Category:Uploads by Fæ needing speedy deletion which can be mass speedied at leisure.

These should be an easy exercise for any admin that would like to practice doing mass speedies over the coming week. The uploads are deliberately slow, so the project may take several days to complete. If anyone wishes to help with categorizing, or identifying more obvious rejects, all uploads can be browsed at Category:Fleurons by year. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 07:47, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

I'll be keeping an eye on it. Daphne Lantier 08:14, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

requesting for personal storage to upload personal documents and files

i am requesting for personal as wikipedia user storage to upload and download personal documents which are not only pdf and files later use — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prince principal (talk • contribs) 08:06, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

 Not done. Commons is not host of personal files. I just deleted your only upload as advertizing. Taivo (talk) 08:49, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

File:Emmanuel Macron campaign poster in Paris 2 (cropped).jpg

I intend to copy-and-paste the "delete" template because the original version is also nominated for deletion. However, the image, File:Emmanuel Macron campaign poster in Paris 2 (cropped).jpg, is cascade-protected, so I'm unable to do so. --George Ho (talk) 18:48, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Obviously not OK, deleted. Yann (talk) 18:51, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

What about posters at Category:Emmanuel Macron and Category:Emmanuel Macron in French presidential election (2017)? --George Ho (talk) 18:56, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Deleted Yann (talk) 19:12, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

There appears to be a serious copyright issue with Arthur9675 (talk · contribs) as can be seen from their special log history. Six images have been reported for copyvio, as the user claims them all to be their own work - even though evidence proves differently. One would assume good faith after the first and possibly second incident. But when there have been 6 warnings about copyright images, then it does pose a problem. Would now be the time for admins to intervene and take what ever action is deemed appropriate? Wes Wolf Talk 17:00, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Last warning, file deleted. Yann (talk) 17:15, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Thank you Yann for the swift action taken there. I've added the user to my watchlist, so if ever they do upload more copyvios; then I can let you know promptly. Wes Wolf Talk 17:22, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Translations

Can someone create MediaWiki:Welcome/sr etc. or somehow translate Main Page text "Welcome" into "Добро дошли", "Village pump" into "Трг" and "Nominate for deletion" into "Номинација за брисање"? Thanks.--Obsuser (talk) 19:19, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Request for remove some file history

Please remove the versions of User:ㅇㅡㅇ and User:천사(1004) in file history of File:南北国时代.jpg. The image of that versions is copyvio, because it is from National Institute of Korean History's book. Thanks. --Idh0854 (talk) 10:38, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Taivo (talk) 14:33, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

"Bad Old Ones" / The Usual Suspects

When trying to take care of files in various deletion categories (e.g. CAT:CV, Category:Media missing permission as of... (transcluding {{UnknownHeader}}), admins are advised to try using the tool that is now known as The Usual Suspects. I have never been able to figure out how or why to use this - is there an explanation or documentation anywhere? At best, I get screenfuls of php warnings when running the tool. If the advice is deprecated, should we remove it? Storkk (talk) 10:48, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Maybe it should be removed because deprecated. --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:04, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
@Magnus Manske: --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 16:06, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Gawthorpe Hall 26.02.2012 (6990302811).jpg

File:Gawthorpe Hall 26.02.2012 (6990302811).jpg has had me scratching my head for a little while and I'm unsure how to proceed. Although I didn't realise when I first saw it, looking more recently I became positive it isn't Gawthorpe Hall. As it was uploaded by a now banned user and the Flicker link is broken, I was going to request deletion. However it did look familiar, and after a little digging I've confirmed that it is the old footbridge from nearby Nelson's Victoria Park, which was demolished some time before 2011. old new I guess from a license point of view it is probably going to be a delete, but maybe rename? Trappedinburnley (talk) 19:34, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

 Not done. No reason to delete the file: there's broad freedom of panorama in United Kingdom. You can request renaming. Taivo (talk) 14:38, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks @Taivo: I will do. What about the date issue? Will something like C.2000s do?Trappedinburnley (talk) 18:26, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
Yes, try {{circa|2000s}} in date field. Please add categories and write into description, that the bridge was demolished before 2011. Taivo (talk) 18:32, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Two different files wanted

I would like to have the two images in the version history of File:Johann Christoph Gottsched.jpg as two different files, for the two images show different paintings and need different comments as to painter, year and location. Both users are no longer active. Could an administrator do that the right way? --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 14:20, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

 Support. Moved to Commons:History merging and splitting/Requests. --Achim (talk) 15:02, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done here for now. --Achim (talk) 15:02, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Uploads by User:JUANPA853

I marked one file for speedy deletion as being a copyright violation from a user on Flickr (here), and was interested to just do a run through and verify if the other files uploaded by JUANPA853 (talk · contribs) were also legitimately licensed as CC work, or originated from other Flickr users' copyrighted content.

However I now have to dash so I leave this task to someone else.

Well, I did just find one more which suggests they all are worth looking into... File:Edificio de la gobernación del Quindío.jpg, uploaded in 2016, is marked as own work CC, but also appears on this blog [4] in 2010 (no author information but no CC notice either). Does not quite add up.

I will notify the user and ask if they can provide any information in regards to this. seb26 (talk) 01:37, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by JUANPA853 Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 01:42, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Cool, thank you! (yay teamwork) I left the message on Juan Pa's talk page, now I dash seb26 (talk) 01:45, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Deletion request

Hi. I need the help of Admin as soon as possible please to delete all files in this Category. The length of some of the audio clips means they are not covered by the permission submitted to the OTRS team. I need to take all the files down and start again with shorter clips. Thanks Jason.nlw (talk) 13:26, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Deletion request here
In progress Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:50, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
@Jason.nlw: ✓ Done Certainly upped my deletion count by about 50%. Thank heavens for batch tasks! :-) Ronhjones  (Talk) 18:45, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
@Ronhjones: Many thanks for taking them down so promptly! Jason.nlw (talk) 18:49, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

These 4 images

If these 4 images are free below, can someone give the correct license for them and pass them. I don't know if they are free.

Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:30, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

@Leoboudv: The images (since they appear to be works of the US Forest Service) are presumably {{PD-USGov-USDA-FS}}. - Reventtalk 14:50, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

potentially sockpuppeteer

Hi, imho there might be a potentially sockpuppeteer of, maybe, User:Co9man (quite same flickr content and India-related 'fields') – as so far I did initiate any related requests at Wikimedia; which is a respectful procedure as I do not wish to blame a co-Wikimedian ? thank you for your advices, Roland zh (talk) 13:06, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/undefinedMoyan brenn

A supposed courtesy deletion. Since this DR affects several hundred high quality files that have been on Commons for 2 years in most cases, I wanted to make sure we get attention from experienced admins and editors. Thanks. Daphne Lantier 19:17, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Daphne Lantier, Yann, Rodhullandemu - I've recieved this email from Moyan:

(Redacted)

(Redacted) –Davey2010Talk 19:47, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
A deletion request for uploads that might be demonstratively problematic would be understandable. But we have several hundred simple nature photos in this DR. Why these were nominated is anybody's guess. Daphne Lantier 19:54, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
They are saying something about "private property" / "property owners". I assume this means COM:FOP? But what's copyrightable about nature? The photograph is a copyrightable DW of non-copyrightable scenery, and the former's copyright has been freely licensed. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 20:05, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Could be something to do with Commons:Non-copyright restrictions#"House rules", which could be relevant for files like File:Art (5952279908).jpg and File:Architecture (6365093661).jpg. In order to foster good relations with content creators, I believe we should be receptive to photographers who express concerns about getting into trouble over house rules even if they do not affect us or reusers – but the concerns have to be real and specific enough to be actionable. Aside from a valid copyright license (which we have), there is no release whatsoever needed for photos of the moon. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
I think it would be helpful to discuss this at the DR rather than in two places. Daphne is correct to request experienced admins help. Davey2010 did you get permission to publish that private email on Commons? If not, then you cannot and should not have posted it here. -- Colin (talk) 20:45, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
(Redacted) –Davey2010Talk 21:19, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Removed. –Davey2010Talk 21:48, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

OK the DR has now been closed. Despite some clumsiness in approach by User:Moyanbrenn and by several users who responded, it does appear this user is genuinely concerned they have photographed subjects that they cannot apply a CC licence for. We all know that Flickr is very lax about copyright concerns and many photographers will upload photos there where they are technically not allowed. Freedom of panorama issues or photographs of product packaging for example. I think Moyanbrenn panicked and looked for a quick solution. I don't think it is helpful and courteous of us to simply close the DR and expect Moyanbrenn to become a copyright expert and identify all the problem images themselves. We have 900 of his images here, and many are excellent. If we handle this right, Moyanbrenn may continue to release his images under CC and we may continue to enjoy hosting them on Commons. Who knows, perhaps Moyanbrenn will upload his new images directly to Commons and join the community. Can we encourage that desirable solution by offering to help Moyanbrenn identify which images might be a problem. Perhaps they can be listed here, or on his talk page, or some other place and then a new DR created. I think it is too much to expect a new user, unfamiliar as many of us are with the finer points of FoP and global copyright issues, to handle this all by themselves. -- Colin (talk) 20:55, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

I've closed it and Moyanbrenn has agreed to file a DR for those files that are directly problematic. One issue with the original DR is that 897 files would be extremely time consuming for anyone to go through one by one, admin or not. From what I saw after a cursory review of these images, hundreds of them are high-quality nature photographs. I don't think it will be difficult for Moyanbrenn to take those off the list. I would also point out that these images have been on Commons for 2 years in most cases, and were transferred from Flickr by The Photographer and others. A sweeping courtesy deletion wouldn't be fair to them and the time they spent on the transfers, and the time others spent on categorization. We also have the real concern that many of these images have been used outside of Commons in the 2 years they've been hosted here. In the end, if all Moyanbrenn does is take the nature photos out of play, we'll have a much more workable DR to focus on. Daphne Lantier 21:14, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
I think it has become clear that a courtesy deletion is not what was being requested. Instead I think a genuine concern that they had taken images that are not legally allowed and so could get Moyanbrenn into trouble. I think Moyanbrenn lacks the knowledge of the finer points of FoP and copyright that has been built up here over the years. It would be really great way of saying "thank-you for 900 images" if the community helped this newbie on Commons. -- Colin (talk) 21:22, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
"Despite some clumsiness in approach by User:Moyanbrenn and by several users who responded," - Nothing clumsy in my response - I'm not a mind reader Colin and they'd only gone in to further detail after my responses so therefore calling my actions "clumsy" is to put it bluntly bs, Now all that aside had Moyan stated there were FOP concerns then we would've worked with him to resolve it however instead at the time of replying and even through the DR we were all under the impression he just wanted them gone because of a mistake on his part ...... Again as I said none of us are mind readers. –Davey2010Talk 21:40, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
  • @Moyanbrenn: First I want to thank you for having such a positive and mature attitude regarding this situation. As someone who does a lot of sorting through new and uncategorized images, I can tell you that the images in Category:Photographs by Moyan Brenn are of much better quality than our average uploads, which is why I want to be extra careful with any proposed deletions. (Redacted) Daphne Lantier 21:51, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

MOYAN RESPONSE @Colin: @Davey2010: @Daphne Lantier: Good day guys, firstly i want to thank you very much for your prompt response and for understanding my problem, and for your intention to help me. I also apologize for the wrong way i'm adding my comments, since i have not clearly understood how to tag myself inside these conversations. Regarding my issue, today after your support i feel more safe, and wanted to let you know that yes, as you suggested, i find to be a good idea to make a new DR request where i will include ONLY the images including private property or human faces, just to be sure that in the future, not only me, but also people won't have any problem. Ok so, next hours i will try to make the new request with the list of such unsafe images, by also trying to firstly read some guidelines to do everything correct. I apologize if i will commit some mistakes, unfortunately for me is very difficult to use Wikimedia, i'm not really skilled. Thanks to everyone of you Moyan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moyanbrenn (talk • contribs)

User:Tm

Hi, I blocked Tm 2 days ago for edit warring after warnings. They appealed the block at their talk page almost 2 days ago with the appropriate template, but no admin yet handled it. Regardless whether their appeal may be or may not be convincing, it should be handled at least. I think every blocked user deserves to request a second opinion by another admin. Could someone have a look at the unblock request? Jcb (talk) 21:26, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

I'll czech into it. Nyttend (talk) 22:37, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Donated CC-BY-SA photos to be deleted?

This is in relation to an ongoing issue (here and here) about a problem with the permissions for photos that were donated under CC-BY-SA by the Fremantle Society. I'm creating a new topic for this here, because another bunch of these photos have just been tagged (by User:‎JuTa) as being deletable in a couple of weeks, and I'm worried that I won't be able to download all the photos before then. As far as I understand things, the problem is that User:Jcb and User:Revent don't think the Society ever had ownership of these photos in order to release them under a free licence. There seems to be agreement that the permission granted by the Society in otrs:2012011210014367 would be sufficient otherwise. So here we are, more than five years later, with hundreds of photos scanned and uploaded, and maybe they're all going to be nuked. User:Jcb has emailed the Society asking for clarification, but hasn't got a response, and I suspect never will; I also wonder what response could suffice. I'm fairly sure there's no written statement from all the photographers, handing over their copyright, because they all thought they were taking the photos for the Society (and there isn't even any record of who they all were, that I've seen; and probably some have since died).

This was basically a 1970s "wiki takes..." event, but with shoeboxes instead of Commons as the final repository.

Anyway, I know that I can't fight copyright law, so all I'm asking is that these photos not be deleted until I've downloaded them all. I'm off to the MediaWiki Hackathon for the next fortnight and so won't have a chance to work on this. Please don't delete any more! They've been sitting here for five years; give me another few months.

@Gnangarra and JarrahTree: can you add anything to this?

Thanks (and sorry if I'm coming across as grumpy! I'm trying to remain calm.) — Sam Wilson ( Talk • Contribs ) … 05:42, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

@Samwilson, Gnangarra, and JarrahTree: Please get a written statement with the text of a specific declaration of consent (per OTRS) and the mechanism for copyright transfer (what the photographers agreed to) from the Society, scan it, and email the scan via OTRS with [Ticket#: 2012011210014367] in the subject line.   — Jeff G. ツ 06:38, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks @Jeff G.. That ticket already has the declaration of consent; it's the transfer of copyright that is being questioned, and it doesn't exist and isn't possible to get because these are orphaned works (if one takes the stance that the Fremantle Society isn't the copyright holder — which is wrong, but whatever). That's why I'm not sure what to do here. I suspect the current president of the Society has no interest in engaging about any of this, but anyway even if he did get involved as I say it's unlikely that he can provide the required proof. :-( What if I get a statement from him that the Society is actually the copyright owner? But that's going to take a few weeks at a minimum. — Sam Wilson ( Talk • Contribs ) … 07:07, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Of course we can help you getting the files saved before they get deleted. Files already deleted can also be temporarily undeleted so that you can download them. It would be great if a valid permission could be established, but I am afraid that's not possible in this case. However, we are not in a hurry to get them deleted, we can do so in a coordinated way, to give you the opportunity to download them all. Jcb (talk) 07:39, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
I would request that editors involved in this conversation desist from any further action due to a few real life issues that require patience, and adequate good faith while involved parties have room to sot out some issues. Meanwhile, please leave the files alone as there is the possibility that the OTRS ticket issue is being misinterpreted, as well as other issues still in process.

I am taking to comment However, we are not in a hurry to get them deleted, as being relevant for all editors involved here. JarrahTree (talk) 07:42, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

User:JuTa as undeleted the recent deletions; thanks. Now there's just the ones that User:Jcb deleted before; could they be restored now please, at least temporarily? I'm also trying to talk to the former Fremantle Society president (who lodged the original OTRS ticket) about getting written proof of FS copyright ownership. Would this be sufficient? A statutory declaration, if need be. I've nearly got my download script working, but I'm realising that there are lots of annoyances so it might take a bit longer and I'm getting on a plane in a few hours. — Sam Wilson ( Talk • Contribs ) … 01:25, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
The files to be undeleted are here: https://quarry.wmflabs.org/query/17503 (except the last of them; that was a duplicate section map). — Sam Wilson ( Talk • Contribs ) … 04:55, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
In the meantime we have received a response from the FS. Unfortunately, it has become clear that they are not the copyright holder and were never in a position to release the pictures into a free license. We can gif Samwilson the opportunity to download them, but then they will have to be deleted. Jcb (talk) 15:17, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

(ec) If the restored files are going to be re-deleted, could we see a deletion request for these files please, which summarizes the evidence in a public record rather than claims about emails that the community is unable to assess? This will enable an open community discussion. The situation as presented by Jcb is not as clear cut as it seems, and I have been following this case after a couple of off-wiki emails about this copyright. There is an excellent case to justify hosting the images on Commons based on the formal statement by the organization that has legally claimed copyright, and the authority to reject that claim appears absent. The consequence being that the risk is in my view well below what is normally interpreted as "significant doubt" per COM:PRP, which does not require a complete absence of any doubt whatsoever for us to host images in good faith.

My concern is a personal one. Having uploaded literally hundreds of thousands of images based on the statements of institutions that are not the copyright holder, and do not make original release statements available, it would be a crushing blow to the Commons' mission to start a deletion campaign based on cases such as this one. We are in danger of wikilawyering our way into putting a large proportion of our most educationally valuable collections at risk of deletion in the future, when there are no clear and irrefutable copyright grounds to do so. --Fæ (talk) 15:39, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

There is no room for such a community discussion here. We have contacted the organization (visible to any OTRS agent with access to the Permissions queue) and it has become clear from their response that they never became the copyright holder. You know that we cannot publish the OTRS conversation. These files will be deleted for missing a valid OTRS permission. Jcb (talk) 15:35, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
We certainly can publish emails or their content with consent. I doubt that the organization giving the statement via OTRS is all that concerned with keeping all the correspondence a secret, as we already are publicly discussing precisely who they are, and then rubbishing their statements with assertions such as "they are not the copyright holder and were never in a position to release the pictures into a free license". --Fæ (talk) 15:39, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
You can ask another OTRS agent to have a look if you don't believe me. Jcb (talk) 15:49, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
No thanks. Let's have a proper deletion request, where the community gets to have a proper public and open discussion about this copyright case, rather than being challenged to trust that your judgment on copyright, or that of another random OTRS volunteer is better than everyone else's on this project. No number of anonymous OTRS volunteers, who for the most part remain unaccountable and untested on their IP law assessment skills, would be better than an open discussion about the publicly available files, the facts of the case, and the history of the publicly identified organization making copyright claims.
Why on Earth does all this have to be done in the shadows? It looks like completely unnecessary information hoarding from where I'm sitting. --Fæ (talk) 16:26, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
I must say that I agree that this whole thing could have been handled better than me waking up one day to find a dozen of these photos deleted! I'm very much in favour of this going through a normal nomination-for-deletion process. I hope that there is still the possibility that the FSPS photos could stay on Commons. In the meantime, I'm getting all the data downloaded, and will report back when I'm done. — Sam Wilson ( Talk • Contribs ) … 04:29, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Rename Request

File:Taiwan-army-OF-7.svg is the insignia for Lieutenant General (OF-8) of the Taiwanese army, not for Major General (OF-7), and File:Taiwan-army-OF-6.svg is the insignia for General (OF-7) of the Taiwanese army. There is not an equivalent rank of Brigade General (OF-6) in Taiwan. So, please help to rename File:Taiwan-army-OF-7.svg to File:Taiwan-army-OF-8.svg, and rename File:Taiwan-army-OF-6.svg to File:Taiwan-army-OF-7.svg. I tried to rename them by "Remove", but the system forbid removing to an existing name. Thanks a lot.--Akira123 (talk) 23:28, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done. Keep or delete File:Taiwan-army-OF-6.svg as the leftover redirect?--Jusjih (talk) 00:57, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
@Jusjih: If possible, please delete File:Taiwan-army-OF-6.svg since there isn't such a rank. Thanks a lot. --Akira123 (talk) 03:10, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done Daphne Lantier 03:31, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Rename discussion

I had renamed File:Train at Azad Nagar station, Mumbai.jpg to File:Mumbai Metro train at Azad Nagar station, Mumbai.jpg but User:FDMS4 reverted back claiming it as not meaningless on my Talk page. I am a resident of Mumbai where we have this metro facility. I have changed the name because almost 2.77 lakh passengers call it mumbai metro rather than a Train. In Mumbai the train is referred to local train or express trains. My request is that the name may be again changed to Mumbai Metro train at Azad Nagar station, Mumbai.jpg in order to have a clear view of the subject rather than incubating confusions. --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 02:30, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

I was about to say "it is located in Mumbai says the filename, why another 'Mumbai' again?", but you're right thanks to your explanation. Also, "unnecessary 'improvements'" should not be reverted back. I am going to rename it back to your version. ★Poyekhali!!! 05:13, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

@Poyekhali: Thanks for the same. The first Mumbai is the metro name Mumbai Metro second is the place Mumbai India The discussion can be marked as resolved--✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 05:18, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

First of all, this is absolutely the wrong venue to discuss such content issues, you should have continued the discussion where I left you a message (or alternatively on the file's talkpage). Secondly, this is a minor improvement at best, which is prohibited by our filemoving guidelines. Metro trains are obviously trains, consequently there's nothing wrong with the filename and it can be retained without causing any harm. There is absolutely no reason why invalid filemoves shouldn't be undone, restoring a stable filename and respecting the uploader's wishes, hence it is beyond me why you, Poyekhali, felt it was necessary to make that "unnecessary 'improvements'" again when it must have been obvious to you that it was disputed and no consensus whatsoever in favour of the change has been established.    FDMS  4    07:06, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
I renamed it to Tiven's version because I don't think it is a "minor/unnecessary improvement", but a clarification. And that's why I said that "unnecessary improvements" (note the ") shouldn't be reverted because it doesn't do any harm (unless the uploader doesn't like it), and that it may cause a move war. But that's my opinion, and apologies if I sound it like it is policy. If you disagree with the new filename, then go ahead and revert me, because this is a wiki, and I am fine with it. And that you have a point, because I made such controversial move. ★Poyekhali!!! 07:54, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

I have renamed it inorder the subject gets the proper name. Mumbai metro is the name of the train which is better than just Train and this I don't think is a minor improvement. We too respect UPLOADER'S wishes but also we respect the 2.77 lakh commuters to it. W.r.t trains checkout the trians exist in India and I think the rename made by me is appropriate and as per my knowledge not against any file moving policy --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 08:26, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

I have restored the name before the start of the rename war and protected the page for now. @Poyekhali: Renaming back and starting a rename war while the discussion was still ongoing was totally inappropriate and can lead to file mover rights being revoked. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 09:16, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

TimedText vandalism

Hi, could an admin please delete TimedText:Aruba Dushi Tera instrumental.ogg.en.srt? Thanks, Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 10:01, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done by Taivo. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 10:43, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Subtle spamming

Hi, I just came accross subtle spamming by 6 different accounts: Special:Contributions/Ericaomeier, Special:Contributions/Shirleywmojica, Special:Contributions/LauraSmith6808, Special:Contributions/Albertabarnes, Special:Contributions/Jamesmejia, Special:Contributions/Kimjcastille. The means are the same: uploading a few files from a US gouvernement Flickr stream, and inserting spam in the description. Any idea how to prevent and correct this generally? Regards, Yann (talk) 11:03, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

As this appears to be concerted edits and not misunderstanding of Commons policies, I blocked all accounts indefinitely. It would be useful if checkuser could be done to find other accounts doing the same. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:08, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Speedy closure of LRR

I have noticed that User:Poyekhali has speedy closed my LR request before prescribed time of 48 hours. A person who has his own bad records has been repeatedly doing the same inspite of several times notified. As per discussed on my talkpage it reads Your responses to the deletion requests made by FDMS4 is not what I would want to expect from a license reviewer.. Do I dont have a right to voice your opinion about the deletion? What this has to do with the License review This time I haven't been asked any questions directly I am rejected. The first time I was rejected due to No consensus but on his request there were no even supports and now he states LR is definitely not for you. isn't it against COM:AGF. I am not disappointed that I haven't got the right I am disappointed because there is no scope of others who are willing to have themselves in that and it's like a joke that even pixabay images are in backlog. The main reason me on the AN so that admins have a look that at least there is Discussion for the prescribed time rather than non admins closing it before prescribed time for personal intensions Thanking you. --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 12:32, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

  • Support closure - To be absolutely blunt Poyekhali was in some respects putting you out of your misery - You only applied for LR 2 months ago and even that failed so it was clearly obvious you wasn't going to pass this time round either especially when the timing was so close to the previous one, It's no different from someone running for RFA - It failing - so they try again in 2 months time....,
In short the LR was doomed from the start and I personally applaud Poyekhali for closing it which IMHO was the correct procedure. –Davey2010Talk 13:10, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment While I agree that Tiven2240 would almost certainly not have passed, I think the comment in the closure is toeing very close to the line of an AGF violation, and I also would like to see Poyekhali explain their rationale for a speedy closure at all given the text "Requests will be open for a minimum of two days (48 hours)", let alone one they were personally involved in. I think Poyekhali's behavior in a number of fora here (COM:REFUND comes to mind especially) is leaning towards the officious, and that's not pleasant for anyone on the receiving end. Storkk (talk) 13:22, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Poyekhali really needs to stop acting like a wannabe admin. (Yes, my choice off words is harsh.) While Tiven2240 likely wouldn't have passed he still deserved a fair change too present and defend himself. This was taken from him. I consider Poyekhali's behaviour to be rude and disruptive. And Poyekhali, please change your signature. The colour and !!! at the end make your posts extra aggressive. Natuur12 (talk) 14:44, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
  • What happened to COM:AGF ? - She/He did what they thought was best ofcourse you're entitled to disagree but calling someone "a wannabe admin" over something so trivial is extremely bad faith and is rather unbecoming of any admin, That aside they had plenty of time to defend themselves and instead they chose to edit other things - Hardly Pokes/our fault, Their sig is fine and it shouldn't be changed just because of your disagreement with it - If you perceive it as aggressive then that's your problem not theirs. –Davey2010Talk 17:07, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
    • Poke has recently started closing discussions and resolving issues that are traditionally closed by admins, especially in the Undeletion Requests, but also in this case, and the rename case above. While resolving these issues is generally fine - none of them are admin only - non-admins are not elected by the community and should take extra care when performing those actions. On this page we have two examples where Poke used elevated privileges for contentious actions and not following guidelines. I find Natuur's comment entirely appropriate. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 17:28, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Ah okay in that case my apologies, I knew Poke closes LRs however I had no idea they were involved in other admin things so ignore my comment entirely which I've now struck, Thanks. –Davey2010Talk 18:14, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Agree with Natuur and Sebari. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:48, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
  • First of all, I would like to apologize to Tiven if my closure comment became rude. The reason why I speedy closed the LRR by Tiven is because it was obvious where the LRR to go. I thought that if I don't close the said LRR, it will just receive more opposes, and to be honest I don't want that to happen to Tiven because it may discourage him. I am completely familiar with the text that LRRs will be open for a minimum of 48 hours. But if you feel I am wrong, I am fine with it. And whether the community will accept the closure or not, I would like to resign my LR privilege for two reasons. First, this issue. And the second, I am not very active on using the LR privilege. I am not gonna reapply for that privilege again, ever. I also would like to apologize to FDMS4 for me acting out of consensus, I should have just simply supported Tiven without doing any action. If you don't want me to close undeletion requests, then I would agree with it. Lastly, I have no idea why my signature became a problem, that's why I made my sig red because the famous "poyekhali" word was made by Yuri Gagarin, a Soviet cosmonaut and the first man in space. The color of the Soviet flag is mostly red, that's why I thought of making it red. I also don't think there is a problem with the three exclamation mark at the end of my sig, Yuri said it with an exclamation mark (Poyekhali!), but I add two more exclamation marks because I like to. But I changed my sig anyway, because someone has a problem with it, and our guideline says that signatures should not be confusing. ★Poyekhali 01:02, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Also please remove all my privileges. Thanks, ★Poyekhali 01:14, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
@Poyekhali: I've removed your Image Reviewer right. I don't see any reason to remove your other rights. I'll do so if you insist, but please give it a bit more consideration. Daphne Lantier 01:24, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Please remove the all other rights too, I will request them back (except the LR and filemover) when I come back from my wikibreak. Thanks, ★Poyekhali 01:32, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
@Poyekhali: I've removed them. Feel free to ask for their return on my talkpage when you get back. Daphne Lantier 01:37, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

License Review backlog

Resolved

Hi, Not sure if any admins are aware but there's a huge backlog over at Category:License review needed (1,994 files), There's no rush but didn't know if anyone was aware that was all, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 14:51, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

I was keeping it down pretty well until this started happening. Daphne Lantier 19:17, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Good god those blue buttons look bloody awful!, Anyway back on topic - Okie dokie no worries I know admins can't be everywhere so things can be forgotten :), Anyway thanks for your reply, I'll mark this as resolved, Thanks again, –Davey2010Talk 19:30, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Translation request

The {{Template:Not done}} hasn't translated into Bulgarian. Translate from "Not done" to "Не е готов" into Bulgarian language. Thanks! --185.73.237.229 17:03, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

The {{Template:Info}} hasn't translated into Bulgarian. Please, translate from "Info" to "Информация" on Bulgarian language. Thanks! --185.73.237.229 17:06, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Hi 185.73.237.229, I added both. For future reference {{Not done}} is stored on {{I18n/not done}}, which has no page protection. seb26 (talk) 17:15, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Embedded data question

Embedded Data Bot tagged File:HK 維多利亞公園游泳池 Victoria Park Swimming Pool 第六屆全港運動會 The 6th Sport Games May 2017 IX1 10.jpg for speedy with the following rationale:

{{embedded data|suspect=1|1=After 1.6MiB (1696112 bytes, via Ending): Identified type: audio/mpeg (MPEG ADTS, layer I, v2, Monaural)}}

Is this reason to delete the file? It's a JPG photo of 2,592 × 1,944 and just 2.12 MB; I'm surprised that the file size isn't larger. Nyttend (talk) 22:43, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

See also User_talk:Zhuyifei1999#Looking_at_embedded_data --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 01:20, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Threats

User:Cdg428 is blocked on en.wiki and I revoked their talk page access, and now they're threatening, on my Commons talk page at User talk:Boing! said Zebedee, to track me down in real life and are being abusive. It's obviously childish nonsense, but I'd be grateful if an admin could take whatever action is appropriate. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:13, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Done. --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:17, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Great, thanks. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:27, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Please be careful with CommonsDelinker bot

Two other images were replaced inadvertently. I fixed them at fawiki. You may want to check bot's contributions at other wikis and fix the possible mistakes. Thank you. 4nn1l2 (talk) 18:15, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:SVG_road_signs_in_the_UK

I'll copy the explanation from IRC here :-

For some reason, VFC can't at present check if a file in any given category has already been nominated for deletion in a different categories mass DR previously...As I was going through a number of categories with VFC per category on something this has resulted in what are effectively a vast number of duplicate filings. It would be appreciated if someone with AWB could find these duplicate filings and Ensure there is ONLY one nom per file....To do this mannually as I have been doing would take forever , and so the usage of a tool like AWB would be desirable. Thusly your assistance in "cleaning" up something that was unexpected would be appreciated.. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:UK_traffic_sign_557.4.svg was where I'd got to in respect of the DR mentioned, but it seems this one get nommed 3 times. Related to this was the issue of duplicate notifcations on talk pages (mine excepted).

Having cleaned this up, I would appreciate it if an admin could review my recent contributions with a view to enforcing a temporary block, because I appear to have again lost my competence to work effectively. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:46, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

I don't really see the issue here. So a few pages are tagged twice. Let the discussions run their course and then remove the notices. I've seen pages on -en Wiki tagged with CSD, PROD, and AFD notices. Doesn't make each individual tag any less valid. Primefac (talk) 16:13, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm following up on the technical concern raised here, MediaWiki_talk:VisualFileChange.js#Regarding_an_issue_noted_whilst_using_VFC_at_CommonsShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:15, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

File:Pg-38-enya-1.jpg

Please delete the differing version. Overwritten, unclear copyright. GermanJoe (talk) 12:39, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done - while I typed :). Thank you. GermanJoe (talk) 12:48, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

mass deletion request for (NSFW) Special:ListFiles/Omid_wiki82

Low Q. No category. And most likely just penis pics for his own amusement.--Tobias "ToMar" Maier (talk) 17:23, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done, ping Tobias "ToMar" Maier. Please comment, Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Omid wiki82. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:36, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done Deleted. Yann (talk) 09:45, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. I was not aware that there is a instruction page for mass deletion request.--Tobias "ToMar" Maier (talk) 22:28, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Uploads from User:Vu-0001

All uploads from user User:Vu-0001 looks like copyvio, but not sure. i.E. here you can see this is a scan. A valid source (book/magazine) is not given. Can't be own work. --91.221.59.26 06:30, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done, Materialscientist marked them all as missing source. Taivo (talk) 07:03, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Yes, and there are a few recent images copied from Youtube - those might well be copyvios (tagged as missing permissions). Materialscientist (talk) 07:08, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
I've deleted them — not because they didn't have sources ({{Own}} is an accepted source), but because all but one was a blatant hoax and thus not in scope: some claimed that the photo was taken decades after the locomotive was scrapped, and the rest that the locomotive was scrapped literally on the date of upload, which is impossible. And I deleted one of them on COM:PRP, since when all but one of your images is deleted because they're significant problems, there's no reason to retain just one of them. Nyttend (talk) 03:18, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
I've also blocked the account. What's an appropriate duration for the block? I don't do much blocking here; according to [5], this is only the sixteenth block I've ever levied, and some of them were situations with obvious indefinite lengths (e.g. sockpuppetry), plus two blocks of a test account. If I should have done indefinite (or if a month is too long), please reset the block. Nyttend (talk) 03:23, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

User:Panoramio upload bot

Please stop this bot and block him indefinitely. There are ~10.000s automatic worthless uploads per day, with no educational use - nobody needs all this trash, 99,999% are not needed and cause only efforts to view and categorize. Thanks a lot! --Frze > talk 06:39, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

 Not done, discussed before. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 06:59, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 64#User:Shizhao --Frze > talk 08:15, 24 May 2017 ‎(UTC)

Frze: You will not distort other people's comments again as you did here. Is that understood? —LX (talk, contribs) 20:19, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done Und? --Frze > talk 01:29, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
What do you mean "and?"? Editing someone else's comment, like changing Srittau's comment above to say "✓ Done" instead of " Not done", is very disruptive. Don't do it again. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:33, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Copyvio​

User:FlickrWarrior who is a sock puppet has uploaded many images from the website www.nehrumemorial.nic.in which are copyrighted as per their copyright policy. There are many such images which are press images and are found in Category:Jawaharlal Nehru. My request is that such images that are copyvios may be deleted asap.I have tagged a few for deletion and many more are remaining. Thanking you --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 10:07, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

I just checked one random one, and with this specific image, I see no problem. File:Jawaharlal Nehru and Rajiv Gandhi on horseback.jpg depicts Nehru with en:Rajiv Gandhi, who was born in 1944. As noted by {{PD-India}}, all images created before 1958 are in the public domain, and Gandhi quite obviously is younger than 14 in this image. At worst, it's an awkward/complicated situation, but at least with this image, it's not a blatant copyvio, since at least in India, this image is owned by nobody, and any claims to the contrary are en:copyfraud. Nyttend (talk) 03:33, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Yann: "I am a victim of homophobic people"

Yann's parody of me on the Village Pump (diff) as someone randomly complaining about homophobia is disruptive and I consider it harassment, purely on the basis of my open sexual orientation. There was no need for Yann to deride me as someone falsely complaining about homophobia, no such complaint ever being mentioned in that discussion, or the related Deletion Request, or in fact anywhere in relation to Yann. The uploads by the same photographer under discussion include heterosexual pornography, it should reasonable to mention that fact, without that then being disruptively thrown back as if it were an allegation of homophobia, a claim or parody that Yann would never have made against an editor that was not openly gay.

This behaviour is not a joke, it is not acceptable parody. It is unacceptably hostile, doubly so for an administrator to behave this way. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 12:44, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Fae, I would not have used such a sentence, but to be honest, the comment is not that weird in context of the discussion. You are provoking such comments by the way you abuse Commons to play your drama game. You are wasting our time all the time for random reasons and as soon as somebody responds somewhat unfriendly, you enter every noticeboard you can find to punish them. Jcb (talk) 15:56, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Presumably, unless this is just tangential rhetoric, you have in mind a list of noticeboard requests I created from earlier this year where I "abuse Commons to play [my] drama game"? Links please. I doubt you mean to defend behaviour from an administrator that derides a fellow volunteer with false claims about the h-word, in a discussion that has absolutely nothing to do with the subject. --Fæ (talk) 19:25, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Jcb, I consider this comment "you abuse Commons to play your drama game." as ad hominem attack. Please, retract that comment. BTW...I can't deduce anything sensible from your comment above. Jcb, Yann is right for making such horrendous comment and Fae is wrong for reporting the issue here? Fae, if you had not said " heterosexual extreme pornography", I don't think Yann would have introduced any word such as homophobia but directing it to you is what I would considered a personal attack. To be honest, you should have tried to resolve the issue on talk pages before the report here. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 20:30, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
To clarify, there is no need to doubt what Yann wrote. The exact words used are "Again you fall down to usual rant: "I am a victim of homophobic people"... *sigh*" (diff). I made no claim about homophobic people, nor said any such thing about other contributors to this project. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 08:05, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Je confirme l'imitation de Yann. C'est habituel chez vous, et c'est pénible pour les contributeurs qui vous lisent. --Classiccardinal (talk) 11:03, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
E é isto: Chegou-se ao ponto em que a acusação de homofobia (ou de várias outras fobias) é de tal forma grave que esgrimi-la é falta bem maior que merecê-la. A motivação deste caso específico (por parte do Mhhossein, não do Yann) é claríssma, e mais ainda quando considerada no contexto de tantas que tais da mesma origem, mas ninguém faz nada por que ele evita ser desbragado e vai pela sonsa. A malta ou aguenta (as chamadas microagressões) ou lhe salta a tampa. E depois acontece o que se sabe… -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:12, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Tuválkin, your comments do not survive Google translate very well. Since you can use English, and User:Mhhossein makes no claim to speak Portuguese, I think it would be polite to make accusations about his motivations on the project in a common language. It is also customary to ping another user if making negative comment about them at AN. If I understand you, you claim Mhhossein's motivations are clear, but do not appear to give specifics, yet make this comment in a paragraph about homophobia. To avoid two and two being put together unfairly, it would be helpful to clarify if you are accusing Mhhossein of homophobic motivation or not. Wouldn't want you to be blocked along with Fae, on a misunderstanding. -- Colin (talk) 16:19, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Colin for pinging. Tuválkin's comments really seems odd to me. He made another similar comment and now I understand why he had answered my good faith question in that manner. To be honest, I did not think the disputed photo could have a sexual aspect, too. I was just considering the trade logo and that the photo was probably put of scope. I'm asking the admins to take care of accusations and let me know if I'm doing wrong. --Mhhossein talk 18:35, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Fae claims "it's odd that the focus should be on my upload of this modest portrait with neither nudity nor sex". So he's directly accusing others of bias of some kind. He then explains what Yann's bias might be by saying "If you believe files like this need to be "fixed", then fix them yourself rather than making your preferences everyone else's problem. I suggest you start by fixing the identical "problems" with all the heterosexual extreme pornography that that were uploaded by others from this photographer, which apparently you have yet to notice or put any effort into sorting out.". This is a clear accusation that heterosexual imagery is being permitted/ignored whereas non-heterosexual imagery is not, and more so that extreme heterosexual imagery is permitted/ignored whereas a very tame photo of a male model is targeted. It is only at this point that Yann accuses Fae of the "usual rant: "I am a victim of homophobic people"".

It should be noted that User:Mhhossein queried the file initially, not Yann. There were indeed issues with the filename/description, though I'm not sure that a DR was the way to sort that. We are all experienced enough here to know that "other crap exists" is a poor argument in a DR, and since we are all just volunteers, nobody should be pressured into any kind of "if you delete this, then you also are obliged to delete all that".

We have seen this sort of bad faith anti-gay-bias accusations from Fae too many times. Going back years ago when he accused others of censorship wrt a Featured Picture Nomination, using very similarly worded complaints and accusations. Continued with repeated accusations of bias at Featured Pictures and PoTD. Each time he denies making any claims, yet there are there for everyone else to see. When someone complains about Fae, they are attacked, their words twisted and repeated. Fae's false claim above: "I consider it harassment, purely on the basis of my open sexual orientation" is worthy of a block. This has happened too often where clearly false accusations of anti-gay bias and harassment are used as weapon in an argument. Time for this game to end.

A side note: why is this on AN rather than AN/U? -- Colin (talk) 12:02, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Recent events, lapses of judgment, etc...

I relation to a number of recent events, which I am not going to discuss further, I made some very serious errors of judgment and of understanding of where precisely certain issues lay, and in regard to where certain claim arose from.

I would therefore like this to serve as an apology to the entire Wikimedia Community, and that I feel I've lost the competence to be an effective member or contributor at this time.

I could request an immediate block, and my personal feeling that the community based on certain comments expressed both on this project and on others would be entirely reasonable to impose one.

However, it may be more useful if this is deferred until certain DR's are fully resolved. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:09, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00: Why not just consider it all a learning experience, and move on and continue editing? Daphne Lantier 19:09, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
I have something of a a history, a long history on Wikpedia/Wikimedia projects, I definitely don't want to sleepwalk into being the next meltdown contributor,. of which there have been a few examples...ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:11, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
You can choose to do things differently. Take a break for a few weeks and see how you feel about it then. No need to make a quick decision, especially after 10 years of editing. No need to do anything final either. Maybe that feeling of competence you refer to will be back after a refreshing break. I doubt there's anybody here who wants to see you gone for good. I certainly don't. Daphne Lantier 21:33, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

ShakespeareFan00, please be aware that we all make mistakes. In principle it's good enough if you are a good willing and constructive contributor, willing to learn from your own mistakes. To be honest, I cannot remember any bad experience with you. Please feel welcome to stay. None of us is perfect, your contributions are appreciated anyway. Jcb (talk) 21:59, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

What about doing something different here for a bit? I think Commons is always happy to have people who want to work with categories; without them, no one would be able to find any of the images. So maybe try your hand at some organizing for a while. ;) We hope (talk) 23:33, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Category:Media needing categories has 1.5 million images that need sorting. There's all kinds of good and bad material in there. Daphne Lantier 00:13, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
I was planning on continuing with the adding of basic descriptions to images that lacked them. However, given the speed with which this was progressing I am awaiting feedback, on high-speed (albiet manual) editing needing a bot flag, see Commons_talk:Bots#In_regard_to_high-speed_manual_editing.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:10, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

KINARUT station.svg

Need an admin to perform the move of File:KINARUT station.svg to File:Kinarut railway station sign.svg as a different file was accidentally put there before the rename request. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:12, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done by User:Marcus Cyron. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 11:17, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

I goofed

I meant to upload this as another poster. It's pre-1923 and for the same film but a different version. Would someone please delete the wrong version and I'll upload it separately later. Thanks, We hope (talk) 16:24, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Daphne Lantier 17:13, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! :-) We hope (talk) 17:29, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

revert vandal please

According to vietnamese wikipedia, User:Unserefahne is a sockpuppet of User:C, and he was Blocked indefinitely in vi and en wiki because it's an "Abusing multiple accounts".

he move Category:Emperor Thiệu Trị to Category:Nguyễn Hiến Tổ, Category:Emperor Tự Đức to Category:Nguyễn Dực Tôn, Category:Emperor Minh Mạng to Category:Nguyễn Thánh Tổ, Category:Emperor Gia Long to Category:Nguyễn Thế Tổ, without discussion, and he said it's "false", but actually these name are both used in vietnamese and english (according to vi and en wikipedia), and much more popular than the names he used. is it abusing? so please move back to the former title. thank you.--El caballero de los Leones (talk) 16:32, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

 Comment Unserefahne has not edited Commons after his/her block expired more than month ago. Taivo (talk) 06:44, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikidata

Ich habe das File:Garytennis.jpg gelöscht. Allerdings war es noch auf wikidata verlinkt. Vermutlich sollte das Bild von Gary Tennis (File:Secretary of Department of Drug and Alcohol Programs.jpg) dort erscheinen. Wie kann man es machen? Hystrix (talk) 15:44, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: Ich habs eben zu Fuß auf d:Q21063173 eingetragen. Gruß, --Achim (talk) 21:52, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
@Achim55: Danke, jetzt weiß ich, wie es „zu Fuß“ geht. LG Hystrix (talk) 07:40, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Need a second pair of eyes

could someone please take a look at User_talk:Judgefloro#File_tagging_File:02054ajfAdamson_University_Marcelo_V._Manimtim_J_Florofvf.jpg? I'm not sure if I fully understand what this user means. I merely converted a speedy deletion nomination into a no source nomination. Perhaps this file can be safed. Natuur12 (talk) 15:54, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

@Natuur12: It seems the uploader doesn't care, gone in 7 days.   — Jeff G. ツ 21:34, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Which US states images are free?

Dear Admins or trusted users,

Can someone point me to the Commons page which states which US states official flickr account images are free and which are not? All I know is that images from North Carolina, California and maybe Florida are free but I don't know where the Commons page which states this fact is located. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:04, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Commons:Copyright tags#US States and Territories should list the known ones. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:23, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Unter Werkzeuge

sehe ich bei manchen Bildern folgende Links: Urheberrechtsverletzung melden, Keine Quelle, Keine Genehmigung, Keine Lizenz, bei anderen Bildern nur Löschung vorschlagen und die anderen Links nicht. Wovon hängt das ab? Hystrix (talk) 15:53, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Deine common.js düfte einige Fehler verursachen, damit ist das Verhalten der Skripte nicht mehr wirklich vorhersehbar. --Didym (talk) 21:55, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
Hallo @Didym: „Da steh ich nun, ich armer Tor, und bin so klug als wie zuvor.“ Trotzdem Dank für dein Rat. Hystrix (talk) 08:31, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Manchmal hilft Neuladen. Aber zu dem, was Didym sagt: Wirf mal aus Deiner common.js die letzten 4 Zeilen raus (vulgo: behalte nur die ersten 2) und aktiviere VisualFileChange als Gadget unter den Helferlein und lies Commons:Forum, da war das mehrmals Thema. ;-) Ob Magnus Manskes Skript, das Du außerdem noch lädst, selbst problematisch ist, kann ich nicht einschätzen. — Speravir – 23:44, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
Hallo @Speravir: , danke für die vielen Hinweise. Alles neu geladen oder sogar neu gestartet – funktionierte trotzdem nicht. In meiner common.js sehe ich nur 5 Zeilen (4 2 ≠ 5). VisualFileChange habe ich erst gestern ohne Probleme verwendet. Und lesen soll ich auch noch? Ist das nicht seit den Nullerjahren so etwas von out? -;) Ich erinnre mich ('nee, Opa erzählt jetzt nicht vom Krieg) an eine Zeit vor ca. 10 Jahren, da sollten alle de:wp-Artikel OMA-tauglich werden; sollten diese common.js-Scripte dies nicht auch sein? LG Hystrix (talk) 08:31, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Upps. Ja, es waren 5 Zeilen – die auf meinem Monitor aber als 6 Zeilen angezeigt wurden, da eine lange Zeile umbrochen wurde. — Speravir – 16:58, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Geht es nach dieser Änderung wieder? VFC müsstest du eventuell in den Einstellungen wieder aktivieren. --Didym (talk) 14:08, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Hej. super, lieben Dank! Es funktioniert wieder alles. Falls ich Probleme mit VFC haben sollte, weiß ich ja nun, an wen ich mich wenden kann. Nochmals vielen Dank. Hystrix (talk) 14:25, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
@Hystrix: Hättest du deine Einstellungen entsprechend der Nachricht auf deiner Disk angepasst, dann hätte man sich diese Diskussion zur Gänze ersparen können. --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:07, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Hallo @Steinsplitter: , auf diese Nachricht hatte ich sehr zügig reagiert. Ich habe einen Link in dieser Meldung angeklickt, weiß nicht mehr welchen, dann ratterte mein Rechner ein Weilchen, und am Ende erschien eine Meldung, ungefähr so: Alles ok. Hystrix (talk) 17:57, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

File:Babaji.jpg

Please delete the differing overwritten version (image has been re-uploaded separately as File:Baba Gurinder Singh Ji Dhillon.jpg, possible copyright issue). GermanJoe (talk) 01:25, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Daphne Lantier 06:27, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Uploads by Sourenarahmani1377

Hi, I'm an eliminator in fa.Wikipedia and I encountered User:Sourenarahmani1377 uploaded screenshots of a pdf copyrighted file, he provided a link of that file but placing the link here is violation of copyrighted material. MohammadtheEditor 17:41, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

@MohammadtheEditor: I doubt the link itself is copyrighted, you can post it here or email it to me. What are the filenames of the screenshots?   — Jeff G. ツ 20:05, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Jeff, the images seem to be grabbed from here. --Achim (talk) 20:52, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Here's the link I've found the pictures in [6] MohammadtheEditor 04:47, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
@MohammadtheEditor and Achim55: Should we even bother with a DR? This user's uploads seem to all be copyvios, just nuke 'em.   — Jeff G. ツ 07:57, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
I created Commons:Deletion requests/Files of Sourenarahmani1377. Feel free to comment. Taivo (talk) 07:18, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

{{D}} should not be listed in abuse filter #71

It's just a vote template, so please remove it in the abuse filter (see also the log). --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 13:34, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

And {{Dr}} has been deleted, please remove it as well. --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 13:36, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Special:AbuseLog/2038838 is not a valid use of {{D}}. As for {{Dr}}, unless it is demonstrated that keeping it has any downsides, I see no need, as some users from other wikis may be accustomed to using {{Dr}} as their speedy template. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 14:08, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
@WhitePhosphorus: Zhuyifei1999 is right. There is no good reason for a request to marked as "Done" in the File namespace (#6).   — Jeff G. ツ 14:21, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Okay I see. Thanks to both of you. --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 14:36, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Double redirects in <username>.js pages

Hello. Could an admin please fix Special:DoubleRedirects with regards to redirected user script subpages? They can be safely deleted. Thank you. —MarcoAurelio 10:42, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done--Steinsplitter (talk) 14:20, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Incorrect deletion requests

Hi, I have just had a user FunkMonk, put every single Loch Ness Monster photograph up for deletion for example on this [7] file he writes "This was first published in the UK, not US. No indication it would be PD." Yet the source is an article in the Popular Science magazine, 1934. An American Magazine. I have taken that photograph directly from that article, so it is American in origin, not from the UK. He has done the same for many of the other photographs I uploaded. These are incorrect deletion requests because the photographs I uploaded are from American sources. If I take a photograph from an old American magazine like Popular Mechanics, Popular Science etc then it is American in origin. It is ridiculous why all these have been put up for deletion. I can justify why most of them should not be deleted. Rebecca Bird (talk) 17:41, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Most, if not all, of these photos were first published in UK newspapers. The fact that they were later republished in the US makes no difference here (though it means they could be uploaded locally on Wikipedia, which goes by US law). Also, when you revert deletion request notifications (which is not allowed) on the individual file-pages, the requests are still open at the dedicated DR page, so it makes no difference. And by the way, I am an administrator. FunkMonk (talk) 17:50, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
"The fact that they were later republished in the US makes no difference". I have not seen anybody else claim that on here or in Wikicommons policy. If I take a republished or altered photograph directly from an American book or magazine, then it is American in origin, it has nothing to do with the UK. By your logic thousands of the photographs on Commons should be deleted then because they are republished American photographs from other countries. This whole thing is ridiculous. I dont think you have thought this through properly. Other admins need to weigh in here. Rebecca Bird (talk) 18:17, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
All media at Commons need to be free both in the country of origin and in the US. If a work was first published in the UK then this is the country of origin and UK copyright law with a protection term of life of the author plus 70 years does apply. Anyhow, if such a photograph was republished in the US, it may still be in the public domain in the US and also in the UK if the author is known and died early enough (anonymous works in the EU become PD after 70 years of their first publication). The individual publication years need to be checked according to the Hirtle chart, section "Works First Published Outside the U.S. by citizens of foreign nations". De728631 (talk) 00:39, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
We are talking here about alleged Loch Ness sightings that were all taken in the 1920s or 1930s or early 40s. The people that took these photographs are all dead. It is over 70 years ago. Many of these photographs were altered slightly or reprinted in American publications, these are the images I am citing. I think it is a bit over-the top to suddenly submit 15 images for deletion without talking to me about it first or trying to sort them out. Rebecca Bird (talk) 10:46, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
The country of first publication (defined slightly technically, but that technicality is not likely relevant here) has always been the criterion for determining copyright status. This follows directly from the Berne convention. Author's death dates are needed (and need to be pre-1947) for all UK photos that aren't special status for some other reason (e.g. Crown copyright), regardless of where they were republished. In short, I agree with De728631. Storkk (talk) 11:46, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
 Comment Old anonymous UK pictures are OK with {{PD-UK-unknown}}. Yann (talk) 12:42, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
@Yann: in principle, that is of course correct--if the authorship is not ascertainable; but does that apply to any of the uploads in question? Being generous, it might just apply to a crop of File:Loch_Ness_June_1934.png, maybe... but it appears all of the others are either already of known authorship or relatively easily identifiable with reasonable certainty. Storkk (talk) 12:55, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Assignment of admins

Warm regards, I am the lead coordinator of Wiki Loves Uniformed service (India) 2017. Wiki Loves Uniformed services (India) (WLUS) is a public photo competition on Wikimedia Commons for use in the project websites of the Wikimedia Foundation. With the support from Wikimedia India Chapter, this is the first iteration of its kind in 2017. The contest commenced on 15 May 2017, has been running since then. But unfortunately, some of the users mistook the purpose of the campaign and have been uploading irrelevant photographs which even out of the commons scope. The problem is these pictures must be immediately deleted because they may taken as examples by other participants and similar images may be uploaded, which is the case now. So I request the noticeboard to assign 2–3 admins to the campaign. Though @Dharmadhyaksha: has been doing a wonderful job by tagging the files which don't fall in scope. But these take atleast 3–6 days to get deleted, before which they may be considered as examples by others. These admins will be required to be deleted as soon as possible so that they don't effect the campaign. --Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · mail) 08:21, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Scope-related deletions are not speedy deletion candidates, see Commons:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#File. Perhaps you could un-categorize or re-categorize them as appropriate, or add a parameter to your template, so that they don't show up as examples? As an aside, and just FYI, admins (or indeed any other users) aren't "assigned" to anything by anyone except themselves. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 09:23, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: As @Storkk: suggests and as I did here too, you may simply create a different category of unqualified images and move them into it. Qualification of images is based on various criteria set by you guys and all coordinators can start segregating images accordingly. (This would also help judges I guess if the count is brought down.) After disqualifying some entries you should drop a note to contributors (like this one) and let them know what the problem is in case it can be fixed. (eg. if the problem is a low res file uploaded you may request them to upload a high res one if they have it. Or if description isn't sufficient you may ask them to edit it.)
I have noticed that maybe due to advertisements of the competition, many new comers are participating and it would be good for the project overall if these newcomers find interest in the project and become regular ones even after the competition ends. To get that done, it would be good to not curtly disqualify but also to make them explain why it is so. I wont see you need to give special treatment to new users if their uploads do not even qualify our COM:SCOPE, but only to those who fail in your competition. (Too much of work? Well, that's how editor retention and competitions should work.) §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 05:07, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

cover photo of a book issued in 1978

may I upload the photo I took from the original book printed in 1978? This action to support a notice I made about the book itself mentioning author and publisher — Preceding unsigned comment added by MA squared (talk • contribs) 10:21, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

@MA squared: It depends on the book cover, but probably not. If the cover is simply text (something like this maybe), then it would likely not be copyrightable (depending on the jurisdiction), meaning you would have the sole copyright interest in the photo, and it would be OK. If the cover is complex enough to be copyrightable, then because your photo is a derivative work of the cover, the copyright holder (likely the publisher) would need to send us a license via the procedures outlined at OTRS. If the publisher no longer exists, then it is likely an orphan work, which we do not accept under the precautionary principle. Storkk (talk) 11:09, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Review requested of two week block of User:Tm for vandalism

This is a user problem, moved to COM:AN/U. (See the AN header/intro!) --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:59, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

PD licensing questions

I want to verify a few questions on PD licenses. From a legal standpoint:

  • 1) if someone releases a photo under PD, can they ever revoke that and change it to a CC license? (my understanding is no)
  • 2) if someone releases a photo under CC, can they later change that to a PD license? (my understanding is yes)
  • 3) if someone releases a photo under PD on one website and CC on another website, does the PD license trump the CC license? (my understanding is yes, the PD release is the governing license)
    • For Commons photos, as a practical matter, most of the time no one would ever notice or care. But I'd like to know for sure from a legal standpoint. Thank you. PumpkinSky talk 15:10, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
      • Someone posted an answer here: User_talk:W.carter#Licensing. PumpkinSky talk 00:15, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
        • As to point 1), I'd like to note that this depends on your local jurisdiction. There are several countries where you actually cannot waive your copyright at all; see also the disclaimer in {{PD-user}}. So when you can dedicate a work to the public domain in the US, you give up any and all of your rights meaning that you're not in a position to control your work afterwards. E.g. in Germany though, you would legally still retain your copyright, so you could later terminate the semi-PD status of your work. This is why Commons has the irrevocable solution of "<user> grants anyone the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions" for self-made PD works. De728631 (talk) 00:36, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Move Map_of_New_Mexico_highlighting_DeBaca_County.svg to Map_of_New_Mexico_highlighting_De_Baca_County.svg

Hi,

I tried to move the map of De Baca County, New Mexico to its correct spelling (from DeBaca to De Baca) but failed. Earlier I corrected the spelling of the article on Swedish Wikipedia and the map won't show there anymore (since Swedish Wikipedia county maps of the United States are automatically generated via the county template from Commons depending on how the file is named here) because there isn't a map corresponding to the correct spelling of the county name here. English Wikipedia does have a map with the correct spelling but that one is not available here. The reason why I couldn't move the file was that the new file name already existed as a redirect to the old file name.

Prematureburial (talk) 05:01, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

File:Map of New Mexico highlighting De Baca County.svg already exists – as redirect to File:Map of New Mexico highlighting DeBaca County.svg. So, an admin has to fix this. Note also en:DeBaca County is a redirect to en:De Baca County, New Mexico. — Speravir – 22:32, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done but I can't help with en wiki. Suggest you post on their admin board or contact an en wiki admin directly. PumpkinSky talk 22:49, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
 Info All is fine, I’ve added the enwiki links just for comparison. — Speravir – 18:36, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Influx of files with embedded data (CSD#F9) – continuation

Once again we appear to be getting a large influx of bad files. Fortunately the user:Embedded Data Bot is going a grand job (Log Here) - we block all these users, but it's obvious they just create username after username. Previously we had issues with Telenor ISP, and this was (eventually) resolved by Telenor agreeing to have a Fair Use Policy to restrict the traffic - this slowed the bad files to zero. Now we are getting back to a high number. Is there any way we find out if all these new unloads are from a select few ISPs? Maybe we can work out a FUP with them as well? Ronhjones  (Talk) 14:46, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

CU needed? This is tiring, and by the look at some of the filenames (eg. Slow DNS), they are still using proxies. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 05:41, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
CU would be helpful to see from which ISP all the socks are coming. --Steinsplitter (talk) 06:45, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Second opinion requested

Could an Italian-speaking admin cast an eye over this this please? I'm pretty sure this guy knows that he is doing. I converted his response to me into an unblock request. Rodhullandemu (talk) 21:30, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

 Comment I don't speak Italian, but I doubt the claims by this account. This account uploaded 14 files, among which 12 were deleted for various reasons. Then the account didn't stop creating DRs after a warning. The requests for deletion are on files completely unrelated to files uploaded by Antoni_Nomen or Comtessadeldia. This is probably a sock of Comtessadeldia (talk · contribs), which is another reason for a block. Another weird thing: this account is named after ca:Antoni Nomen, a Catalan poet, but speaks Italian. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:01, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, I was unaware of the connection between the two accounts until now. In which case, I see no reason for an unblock. Rodhullandemu (talk) 22:07, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

File:V1 40 years Model List of Essential Medicines.001.png

I can't nominate this image (File:V1 40 years Model List of Essential Medicines.001.png) for deletion because it's cascade-protected. There are no sources verifying the licensing and permission of this photo. What to do with it? --George Ho (talk) 00:07, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done I nominated it for deletion myself. Taivo (talk) 08:21, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

account-name inappropriate?

Today a new user-account was created, using the name Reich fuhrer (talk · contribs). As it clearly resembles the title of the infamous Reichsführer-SS, it is inappropriate IMO. (Not surprisingly, his first upload was a screenshot of a war game.) Other opinions? --Túrelio (talk) 15:02, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Agree, inappropriate. --Achim (talk) 15:18, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
Blocked and notified on talk page. PumpkinSky talk 16:59, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
et:Kasutaja:Djreichsfuhrer is a respected community member in Estonian Wikipedia, but he was speedily indefinitely blocked in English Wikipedia (en:User talk:Djreichsfuhrer) with incorrect reason "obvious troll". That said, I support blocking Reich fuhrer. Taivo (talk) 06:56, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Sock puppet of User:Arthur Brum

ThmPedro (talk · contribs) is a new sock puppet of Arthur Brum (talk · contribs) and has just uploaded another copy of the previously deleted File:Dom Luiz.jpg as File:Luiz orleans bragança.jpg. DrKay (talk) 20:10, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Image deleted & sock blocked. Daphne Lantier 20:16, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you yet again, but Sar-real (talk · contribs) is another obvious sock puppet, uploading basically the same files that have already been deleted before. DrKay (talk) 20:57, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked. Yann (talk) 21:12, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Forgotten deletion requests

Dear administrators,

First of all, I’m very sorry if I’m writing on a wrong place. My problem is that there are 2 old deletion requests which were started on April. They don’t appear on the “deletion requests” page already therefore they are probably forgotten. Could somebody check and close them?

Best regards, Bencemac (talk) 07:58, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

They are listed on the 22nd of May - see i.e. here, why ever. Depending that they are not too old. --JuTa 20:44, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Xmendel

Looks odd: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles/Xmendel --Іоахимъ (talk) 17:10, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

DschwenBot malfunction

User:DschwenBot keeps geotagging files despite the presence of the {{Bots|deny=DschwenBot}} code on their pages. The owner, Dschwen admits he doesn't know why this is so and I have seen no readiness to fix it. I'm asking to block the bot until a solution is found. — Kpalion(talk) 20:20, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

I've blocked the bot and notified the operator. He hasn't edited in a week, so a solution may not come fast. Daphne Lantier 20:37, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Newarticletext/pl

Consider removing unnecessary end of div or update translation in MediaWiki:Newarticletext/pl --Wargo (talk) 11:58, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

@Wargo: OK, as a quick&dirty fix I have removed the redundant </div>, but the proper way is translation of MediaWiki:Newarticletext. Unfortunately, recently I have been quite busy in real life. --jdx Re: 06:13, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of the old version

Hi I have noticed that there is a dublicate of Commons:आजचे छायाचित्र at Commons:आजचे चित्र. The new version is properly translated and I request deletion or redirection of Commons:आजचे चित्र(old) as it is even not properly in the marathi language. Thanking --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 09:22, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Daphne Lantier 19:08, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

James.ville

Could someone delete the contributions of User talk:James ville and close the DRs listed on his talk page? This is a cross-wiki vandal/imposter; at en:wp, he impersonated a longtime user (see this edit and the discussion that it closed), here he impersonated a bot, and most or all of his images are spam and/or his own personal stuff, so I've deleted some stuff, but Special:Nuke crashed after trying for a while to get everything all at once, and I'm about to be on the road for a drive of 1,100 km today. Nyttend (talk) 10:47, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

PS, turns out that Special:Nuke worked (it just didn't load the "successful" screen when done), so I've gotten all his uploads; all you need to do is close the DRs. Nyttend (talk) 10:49, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done --Achim (talk) 14:46, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Move request

Hello.Please move File:شعار كنيسة أبي سيفين والأنبا مقار، التجمع الأولل.jpg to File:شعار كنيسة أبي سيفين والأنبا مقار، التجمع الأول.jpg.Thank you ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 19:13, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

{{Declined}} Sorry, two different images. -- User: Perhelion 19:24, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
@Perhelion: I mean:to the redirect name because the correct name is the redirect name (make sure).Thank you ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 19:38, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done @ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2: File:شعار كنيسة أبي سيفين والأنبا مقار، التجمع الأول.jpg has now 2 redirects from today, can they deleted too? -- User: Perhelion 19:45, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
@Perhelion: Yes, no need for them.Thank you so much ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 19:52, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done You could also tag the redirect with speedydelete and then normally set a {{Rename}} tag, next time. ;-) -- User: Perhelion 19:59, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Automatically identified non-identical duplicates

20,741 R Faebot identified duplicates

Based on behind the scenes experiments with image hashing, some PD US uploads are being tested to discover digitally non-identical duplicates, but with identical resolutions and being perfect or near perfect visually identical. Often these have been created due to changes to the EXIF data or minor changes of colour saturation. The tests run at around 1 to 3 seconds per image to generate the hashes. It's not known what the discovery rate of duplicates per number of images tested would be, though I would hope under 5%.

It is still experimental and non-exhaustive, for example the hashes are on 160px wide thumbnails rather than eating up more bandwidth and processor time, a compromise that theoretically should not noticeably affect the quality of matches. For the time being, rather than adding {{duplicate}} or other templates, the results are being placed in Category:Faebot identified duplicates ordered by the pHash value (so duplicates will appear next to each other). Feedback is welcome if there are oddities or suggestions, see Discussion.

Not all of the duplicate files will from my upload projects, some photographs have been hosted on Commons for several years, and some may have one or both duplicates in use on other projects. If administrators are deleting obvious duplicates placed in the maintenance category, they would need to take a view on whether standard duplicate templates can be skipped, and exactly how merging should be done to avoid disrupting other projects. If the experiment works out, with accuracy near 100%, then we can look at automatically adding duplicate templates to which ever are the most recent versions, potentially skipping those in global use, just to avoid automatic processes becoming contentious.

Thanks --Fæ (talk) 02:45, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

This looks like a useful tool, though I think this discussion should be posted/moved to the VP rather than AN, to get more appropriate community input. As a photographer I know that one can end up with a set of images that are very similar, particularly now we have DSLRs capable of firing 20 frames a second. Of course most of us upload only the best one, but there may be other streams of images where the change between images in a set is rather small. This may be important if in one frame someone has their eyes open or smiling, and another not, for example. At 160px that is too small to detect such minor changes. Useful for an experiment, or a first-round perhaps. It may also not spot minor crop changes (which don't always result in the JPG changing size, e.g. if the crop frame is moved withing the source, or if the image is downsized when exported as JPG). Other minor changes are as colour balance or dust spot removal. It is not always true that such "duplicates" should be resolved by deletion. Also consider restoration work for example:
(In the above, Adam did actually change the brightness, so it may show as different from the GIF even at 160px, but if he hadn't then I'm sure his other restoration work would be invisible at that level). I wouldn't assume the later image should be the one tagged for deletion as a duplicate. EXIF data is one factor that we might wish to choose one image over another (especially one where EXIF data has been discarded). An embedded thumbnail within the JPG can affect size, but may or may not be important. But most importantly is image compression. Unless you are looking at extremes of very high compression (sadly many of Nasa's images are highly compressed) vs low compression, then the differences between the images will be hard to spot unless compared near to full resolution. Filesize is one clue though the image dimensions are also a factor in how much information is recorded, so both are needed to judge which image is "best". Another complication is noise reduction -- if I carefully reduce the noise in my photo (e.g. in the sky, where there should be no fine pixel-level noise) then the resulting JPG will be significantly smaller as the compression can work better. This, paradoxically, means the JPG appears more compressed but is actually potentially a better image.
So I think it would be useful if any "duplicate reviewer" was armed with handy data such as the %match figure, image dimensions, EXIF data size, JPG size, estimated JPG compression level. I suggest the tool uses 160px as a first-match and then repeats at full size (or at least, larger than thumb) to improve the accuracy. -- Colin (talk) 08:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Spamming

Just FYI: There is a new scam of spamming. An image (from the web or from the orderer) is loaded up to flickr using a free license. Afterwards it is moved to Commons adding advertising text and a web link. I suggest indeffing the uploaders, deleting the files and blacklisting the flickr account. For examples see here and here. --Achim (talk) 16:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Good catch. I'm going to watch out for similar uploads, and I'm with you in terms of blocking/blacklisting. De728631 (talk) 17:14, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Mass message to participants of WLE Germany 2017

Dear administrators, could one of you send User:Blech/WLE-Danke2017 to the discussion pages of User:Blech/WLE2017Teilnehmer. These are the (1063) participants of WLE Germany 2017. Best regards, --Blech (talk) 22:12, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done --Didym (talk) 22:45, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

hide change logs

Hi, i uploaded my personal photo for commons and haven't any problem with it, but i forget to log in in last time and i edited some of them, now in change loge i see my ip addresse, please hide my changes with ip addresse in change history, if you want you can check my username ip addresse to verfy that both of ip and username changes are me, my reason for asking this is my privacy.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Diagonal_method.jpg&action=history

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Diagonal_method_Right.jpg&action=history

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Rule_of_thirds_portrait_lighting.jpg&action=history

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Diagonal_method_Left.jpg&action=history

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Diagonal_method_Center.jpg&action=history

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Portrait_photo.jpg&action=history

thanks, Aswaran (talk) 07:12, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Daphne Lantier 18:40, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Short galleries report broken?

For about the past week, I have been unable to access Special:ShortPages. Is there something broken? Jcb (talk) 15:23, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

I have reported it to the phabricator. Jcb (talk) 20:19, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Vandal overwriting images

Can someone stop user Special:Contributions/Hakuli? He is overwriting numerous maps with politically disputed maps, removing Kosovo from maps of Serbia, while we already have those versions of maps anyway. Can some admin react please? --Anastan (talk) 17:19, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

 Comment I added a warning. The edits were already reverted. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:06, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 Comment Might be a sock of indeffed User:Mapclean, similar behavior. --Achim (talk) 18:23, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Bravo, good catch, i also think it is. Yes, its the same subject, same area, same style and same attitude. And the same images!! Should we report it somewhere else to stop it? Its just pure vandalism. --Anastan (talk) 00:49, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
I wouldn't call it "vandalism' per se. Inappropriate behavior, certainly, but I'm willing to grant that he thinks he's doing the right thing. DS (talk) 01:57, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
He may be thinking that, but if you purposely violate COM:OVERWRITE just to prove your point, you are actually vandal. :) --Anastan (talk) 09:41, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
See Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mapclean. Yann (talk) 10:36, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Wrong filenames

I just uploaded a group of files from the Wittelsbachergruft in Munich. The names all start with "WIttelsbachergruft" instead of "Wittelsbachergruft". Could you please move the files to the correct lemma and delete the redirects. Thanks. --WolfgangRieger (talk) 06:37, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done by User:Hystrix.--✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 07:49, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. Sorry for the trouble. --WolfgangRieger (talk) 07:55, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

File:Bengbu District.jpg

Please delete the second revision (uploaded by DKMcLaren in violation of Commons:Licensing and Commons:Overwriting existing files) of this file and revert the file description. As a non-free DigitalGlobe image from Google Earth covered by their non-free terms and not {{PD-USGov-NASA}}, it is a blatant copyright violation. Thanks, —LX (talk, contribs) 19:53, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done History cleaned. Daphne Lantier 20:05, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

File:Fusion_in_the_Sun.svg

In this diagram it shows tritium as having two protons and one neutron. I was always taught that hydrogen atoms contained only one proton regardless if it was h1, h2 or h3

Tritium should have on proton two neutrons and on electron to match the proton

File:Fusion_in_the_Sun.svg — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 162.157.199.133 (talk) 15:31, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Tritium does not figure in that diagram, as far as I can tell. Were you confused by Helium-3 (which should of course, and does, have 2 protons), or am I confused? Storkk (talk) 16:24, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 Not done. No action is needed, the image is correct. Helium-3 is depicted, no tritium here. Taivo (talk) 17:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

remove my uploads,

Hi, please remove my uploads,

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Portrait_photo.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Clipping_(photography).jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Diagonal_method.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rule_of_thirds_portrait_lighting.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Golden_triangle_photography.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Long_sideburns.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Highlights_and_Blacks.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Overexposure.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Diagonal_method_Center.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Diagonal_method_Left.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Diagonal_method_portrait.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Diagonal_method_Right.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Designer_stubble.jpg

Aswaran (talk) 18:24, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Daphne Lantier 18:36, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Confirmed socks

Please indef the above users as they have been confirmed by checkuser and are evading blocks. I've nominated their uploads for deletion.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 18:42, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Daphne Lantier 18:44, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Dresden by district Category:Non-empty category redirects

Hello admins. User:NeverDoING moved a lot of categories. He didn't notice the warnings: 

You are about to move a category page. Please note that only the page will be moved and any pages in the old category will not be recategorized into the new one.

Please rollback all categories in Category:Non-empty category redirects beginning with Cultural heritage monuments in Dresden-...

Please give this user a warning. Thanks a lot. --Frze > talk 05:52, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Ich denke, User:NeverDoING sortiert die Dateien und Kategorien unter den in der de:wp verwendeten Namen ein. Hystrix (talk) 06:25, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Bevor User:NeverDoING hier weiter Kategorien - im Commons-Kategoriesystem möglicherweise durchaus sinnvoll - durch Verschiebung umbenennt, bedenke er bitte die weitreichenden Konsequenzen:

  1. Alle Unterkategorien sind vom Verschieber in die neuen Kategorien einzuordnen !
  2. Alle Dateinen sind zu verschieben !
  3. Alle Weblinks {{Commonscat|...}} in den Artikeln der deutschen Wikipedia sind anzupassen !

Bitte den Benutzer administrativ auf seiner Disk darauf ansprechen. Dank & Gruß --Frze > talk 09:07, 19 June 2017 (UTC) CC Hystrix

Hallo Frze, User:NeverDoING ist wohl erfahren genug, um die drei Punkte und noch weiteres mehr zu beachten. Dass das Abarbeiten der drei Punkte nicht sehr zeitnah geschehen kann, ist ein Problem. Auch die fehlende Kommunikation über eine solch große Änderung der Kategorien verursacht Missverständnisse (konnte zumindest keine finden; Link wäre hilfreich). Falls in ein paar Tagen noch ein paar Punkte nicht abgearbeitet sein sollten, frage bei NeverDoING oder mir nochmals nach. Hier, denke ich, ist das Problem ✓ Done. LG Hystrix (talk) 20:33, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

COM:OWN

Hello. I have been uploading new versions of some SVG files where I significantly reduced file size in bytes with no change in appearance (or noticeable only in microscope) by cleaning (removing part of code which are not used) and optimizing them (one copy and many references to it instead of the same code written over and over again), but User:Inkscape'r keeps reverting those new versions of files (1, 2, 3) claiming that I have no right to change "his" files. I see it as a violation of Commons:Ownership of pages and files. --TohaomgTohaomg (talk) 06:24, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done. I reverted all 3 files and fully protected them against re-uploading for a year. Taivo (talk) 11:06, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Magelan44

Magelan44 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Somebody probably needs to poke through this user's uploads. They all seem to be available online, some from many sources, but most/all seem to have something to do with this Xavier Liébard guy. Possible that this user is him and this is all square, but I think we'd need a French speaker to sort that out. TimothyJosephWood 14:45, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

I guess I should ping @Magelan44: , TimothyJosephWood 14:46, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done I deleted a few obvious copyvios, and added a message in French to the talk page. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:01, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

About an email I received after doing my first uploading

Hi - I received an email from Amqui saying that there were problems with the descriptions of the images that I uploaded onto Commons. Specifically, that the images were missing the Parks that they were taken at and the Wikidata item Qnumber. If someone can tell me how to find and add this info to the images, I will do that. Trshfsh — Preceding unsigned comment added by TrshFsh (talk • contribs) 23:53, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Responding at the user's talk page. Nyttend (talk) 00:40, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

File:منارة الحدباء.jpg

This image was cropped, and smaller version was use to overwrite the old one. This is an unnacceptable information loss, old one was more panoramic. I cannot revert/edit this as it is ITN on Wikipedia, and protected. Can an admin sort that out - I suggest restoring old one, reuploading new one as new, and then changing links on en wiki to match. The crop may be good for a thumbnail, but the old one was showing a bit more of the mosque - and there are precious few free photos of it. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 01:19, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done I've reverted the crop and deleted it. I would've considered doing a split if the file wasn't so widely used. I don't want to risk an error and loss of the whole image. If a crop is needed, it would be much faster and easier to do a new crop with the crop tool which will automatically upload it under a new name with all the info and licensing in place. Daphne Lantier 01:25, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

File history

Hi,

could you please hide the history of this file ? I forgot to upload the cropped version like the original author requested, and as a result the image showed the face of a technician, which was potentially damaging to the guy's privacy. I fixed that, but I'd need the previous version to be hidden in the history so nobody can see it. Thanks a lot ! JJ Georges (talk) 07:47, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done it would, however, have been courteous to warn that the image is NSFW. Storkk (talk) 08:21, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
@Storkk: thanks a lot. Sorry, my bad : I actually didn't know that we had such a template so I'll add it immediately. Please take note that most images of this kind that I uploaded are SFW as far as porn is concerned. This must have been the only really NSFW picture or the lot. JJ Georges (talk) 08:43, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
@JJ Georges: I didn't mean tag the image as being NSFW, I meant warn here so that an admin who clicks on it in order to fulfill your request is not caught unawares. Storkk (talk) 08:46, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
@Storkk: ok, I get it, sorry. I hadn't thought of that, it must be the first time I have ever uploaded an image of this kind. JJ Georges (talk) 08:50, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
@JJ Georges: No worries. I thought about taking the ticket, too, since the OTRS agent may be caught unawares as well, but I can't find any ticket in the system that matches "explicite-art", "John Root" or "John B. Root". Do you have a ticket number already? Storkk (talk) 09:00, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
@Storkk: nope. All these images belong to a French director/producer (Jean Guilloré AKA John B. Root, fairly notable porn auteur in France) who is new to wikimedia commons. He agreed to send the OTRS authorization, and I sent it to him last night so he'll send it back to commons, but I have no idea if he has had the time to do it yet.
I've also been dealing with another French pornographer (Frédéric Goureau AKA Fred Coppula, whose images must be credited to "Fred Coppula prod") and the situation is identical for him. Coppula told me that he has already sent back the email. There are much fewer images from him and they only show the faces of his actors.
Take note that I did my best to select SFW images from John B. Root's website. This one must be the most "NSFW" of the lot, and maybe this one too. The others are quite mild, like this one. Actually, I had to browse through such stuff in order to make my selection that the image you saw seemed almost wholesome to me : I guess that explains my blunder, sorry again. JJ Georges (talk) 09:14, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
@Storkk: in case you want to do it, and if it makes it easier for you to find their messages, I can tell you - via private message - which email adresses John B. Root and Fred Coppula have used, or will be using, to send their OTRS permissions. JJ Georges (talk) 11:47, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
I found Coppula's email, but I think it may require a back-and-forth to establish that the email address belongs to the person, and there's no real need to jump the queue. Storkk (talk) 12:20, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
@Storkk: oh dear, please let me know what needs to be established so I see if I can help. The email he has used belongs to a pretty serious company (in that field of activities, that is) and a simple google search with his name and the name of the company shows that he does work with them. What else do we need ? If necessary, I can ask a third party (a French specialized journalist, who will use his professional email) to confirm that, yes, the professional email you saw does belong to the Fred Coppula, but that may be a bit too much. I hope you can validate it, because otherwise it would be a bit embarrassing (not to mention a waste of time for me and him)
As for John B. Root, he should be using an email from his website so I guess there shall be no doubt about him. JJ Georges (talk) 12:29, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
@Storkk: Seriously, I don't know if you're familiar with the name of the company, but since you read French you'll easily find that they're very, very notable in France. Actually, they're almost synonymous with porn in France. One wouldn't use an email from that company to violate copyright, especially if it's the copyright of someone who works with them. So I can really guarantee you that this is bona fide. Let me know if there is a problem : I asked a busy professional a bit of his time to donate a few images, and I'd hate to have disturbed him for nothing or, worse, for him to be called an impostor. Thank you. JJ Georges (talk) 12:41, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
The fact that I personally am unfamiliar with the domain name of a French pornography studio should not be taken as evidence one way or the other. The French agents will be able to sort this out, possibly with no further emails. Storkk (talk) 15:14, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
No problem at all. JJ Georges (talk) 17:13, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Category change

Can someone please deal with theis category change request Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 03:16, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

User:Глинистый сланец

FYI: I've just locked Глинистый сланец (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) as a sockpuppet of A1cb3 (talk · contribs)'s. As usual lots of his uploads have wrong licenses or unclear copyright status. --Vituzzu (talk) 13:06, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Sockpuppet of blocked user

Good day. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Mcclellandryan184 who I believe to be a sockpuppet of blocked https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:McClellandRA has begun uploading radio station logos claiming these to be his/her own work. Clearly, they are not. Regards, Aloha27 (talk) 12:54, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done. I blocked him indefinitely. Uploads are nominated for deletion. Taivo (talk) 16:06, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Files by User:Blaine Sun

All the files this user has uploaded are clear copyright violations, and there's about 30 of them. Guanaco (talk) 04:42, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Christian Ferrer took care of it. Thanks --Ruthven (msg) 07:35, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Crediting supplier of picture for Paralichthys albigutta. The Author is shown as "Aiowazc" and I would like to Credit the Author / Photographer for the picture. Your site appears to have lost this information.

The Author is shown as "Aiowazc" and I would like to Credit the Photographer for the picture. Your site appears to have lost this information. The name "Aiowzc" appears many times on Wiki pages but I can find it nowhere else. Please Help!!! Best Wishes Dennis Polack [email protected] www.fishwisepro.com — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.192.182.158 (talk) 14:52, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

"Aiowazc" is how the photographer wishes to be credited. You are free to use the image (I presume you mean either this one or this one) following the terms of either the GFDL or the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, credit should go to Aiowazc. I'm not sure I understand your confusion... if this did not help, could you please elaborate a little? Storkk (talk) 14:58, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Are you perhaps confused by the red link behind the username? This is simply because the user did not create a userpage. The only activity her on Commons consisted in uploading of 3 files (the third is this one about another fish species). Around the same dates the user was also active in Enwiki in the articles for these fish species. Everything happened in April 2012, and afterwards the user never did reappear. — Speravir – 00:50, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Copyvios

Hi all, following the administrative election in Italy, the Italian user Luigiverrecchia24072001 uploaded many images about politicians. Unluckily all of them are copyrighted. I am slowly checking each image and I will explain him what's mistaken (in Italian). Please give a second look because I am not sure I can check all of them tonight. Thanks. --Lucas (msg) 22:53, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Last warning sent, files DRed: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Luigiverrecchia24072001. Yann (talk) 07:26, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Thank you Yann, I am currently checking each image, and slowly reporting them for speedy deletion when/if I find the copyrighted source. --Lucas (msg) 03:29, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Swap file names

Can an administrator swap the file names for File:Manti Utah Natl Guard Armory.jpeg and File:Manti Utah Motor Company Building.jpeg? The armory is the white, partially obscured building, and the the motor company building is the Liberty Hall building. It looks like the uploader confused them, especially since they are just around the corner from each other. I would normally do one of these moves as a filemover, but I don't think any redirects should be left over, because then they would both have confusing redirects from the other building's name. kennethaw88 • talk 00:24, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done. Seems like you did it yourself. Thank you! Taivo (talk) 06:36, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Deletion request

Can an administrator please close this deletion request ? The person who started it has obviously confused the image with another one. He has admitted his mistake, but he hasnt't closed the request yet. Thanks. JJ Georges (talk) 14:50, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Daphne Lantier 17:09, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Shana Shana

Hi, please block Shana Shana (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  for evasion of block of AkoAyMayLobo (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  also known as Bertrand101 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  who is a long-term Wikipedia vandal. Thanks. 91.194.10.95 20:37, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Daphne Lantier 23:20, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

No puedo subir el logo de la empresa en la que trabajo

Hola soy Rosario Puertas, coordinadora de comunicación digital de la Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja, estamos modificando la información que se tiene publicada de la Universidad y no puedo subir el logo, sale un error, y que debo contactarme con ustedes. Por favor ayúdenme.

Gracias — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charitojph4 (talk • contribs) 15:17, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

@Charitojph4: Un responsable del la empresa debería enviar un correo a COM:OTRS, para publicar el logo bajo licencia libre. --Ruthven (msg) 16:09, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

CommonsDelinker/commands

See Category:Non-empty category redirects to move >50.000 files by command

{{move cat|Metropolitan Museum of Art by department - European Sculpture and Decorative Arts|Department of European Sculpture and Decorative Arts, Metropolitan Museum of Art}}
{{move cat|Metropolitan Museum of Art by department - Greek and Roman Art|Department of Greek and Roman Art, Metropolitan Museum of Art}}
Thx --Frze > talk 06:01, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done Daphne Lantier 06:06, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

WLE Brasil - Mass message

Hello guys, we are going to the last days of Wiki Loves Earth Brasil 2017.

Until now we received near 11.000 pictures and we are 2.000 pictures away to broke our 2015's record.

So, I would like to request someone with massmessage permissions to help me to invite the participants of the last year's editions through a message.

Here is the message and the list of users to be contacted.

Thanks Rodrigo Padula (talk) 14:11, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello guys, today is the last day of WLE Brasil 2017, if no one is able to send that message during the next few hours, it will not be necessary later. Thanks Rodrigo Padula (talk) 16:26, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Upload problems

I had problems when uploading this File:Demon Rider lobby card.jpg with the file not displaying. I then uploaded a copy of it here File:Demon Rider 1925 lobby card.jpg They're both identical and now both are displaying, so could someone please delete File:Demon Rider 1925 lobby card.jpg? Thanks, We hope (talk) 16:04, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

@We hope: I’d suggest you add yourself the template {{Duplicate}} to one of the images (judging from what I see I would add it to the first version, but your mileage may vary). — Speravir – 23:58, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Just tagged one-thanks! We hope (talk) 00:21, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done by Hystrix. — Speravir – 17:43, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Changing attribution template in a category

Hello,

would it be possible to replace the attribution template for all the images in Category:John B. Root and its subcategories with the following ?

"{{self|author=John B. Root|attribution=John B. Root/www.explicite-art.com|cc-by-sa-4.0}}"

Warning : some of the images are NSFW.

Thanks a lot. JJ Georges (talk) 15:03, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

As long as you know, how to use it, you can do it yourself with Visual File Change (VFC) which can be activated as gadget. If others with more experience should do it for you: Do you have an overview, which the license tags are to be replaced? Is it a simple CC license update? — Speravir – 21:28, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
A bit difficult is though, that you have uplaoded around 6000 photos, but in VFC only 100 are loaded first and another 100 in a subsequent step and so on. On has to click about 60 times to get all photos. — Speravir – 21:48, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Mmmh, I've tried it but it does not seem to work for what I want to do, or maybe I didn't understand something. What I'm trying to do is to remove the current template and replace it with the new one, like this. With VFC, I found myself with two templates instead of one. JJ Georges (talk) 22:05, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
With VFC first you have to select all the files which you want to be altered. Then you have to input which pattern should be replaced. That’s why I asked for the active license tag. On the right side you have to insert th epattern you wish as replacement – this is here the one you added above. Before you actually let execute the replacement you can check the changes with some example files (press on “Examine scheduled changes”). When there is now something doubled you can execute VFC again, but do only the removing i.e. you do not enter anything on the “Text to insert” side. — Speravir – 22:20, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. JJ Georges (talk) 22:49, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Rename page

Hi! The Dialectiki script was just renamed to DebateTree. Thus I request that Help:Dialectiki be renamed to Help:DebateTree. Also, please mark the changes for translation, and also please DELETE MediaWiki:Dialectiki.js and MediaWiki:Dialectiki.css (they are currently redirects to MediaWiki:DebateTree.js and MediaWiki:DebateTree.css) as they are no longer needed. Thanks! --Felipe (talk) 23:34, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Daphne Lantier 01:53, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

That page is protected from placing requests?

{{Edit request}} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fight 20000 (talk • contribs) 08:24, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

@Fight 20000: Which page? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 08:40, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
@Zhuyifei1999: User talk:Wikimedia Commons Welcome. User wants to delete their own talk page. ★Poyekhali 12:24, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
 Info: I suspect this user to be a sock of User:Yunoselect. --Achim (talk) 12:32, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done: Made a COM:RFCU, so we can close it here. --Achim (talk) 13:15, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Protection

Hi, please protect this user page User:JJMC89 bot/config/BSiconsReplacer/replacementMap : it's used as a configuration dictionary for replacements on enwiki, and probably frwiki too in few weeks. link; ping @JJMC89: --Framawiki (please notify) (talk) 10:01, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Please protect this page too : User:JJMC89 bot/config/BSiconsReplacer/global --Framawiki (please notify) (talk) 10:03, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Requests for checkuser

Hi, please move Commons talk:Requests for checkuser/Case/Sakurai Flash to Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Sakurai Flash. Thanks. Regards, 153.207.0.12 21:40, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Daphne Lantier 22:11, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Please delete a file

Please delete this file: [8].

I didn't see the "NoDerivs" in the Creative Commons license notice.

Thank you ! Sagecandor (talk) 17:38, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done--Steinsplitter (talk) 17:40, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

File:Katheryn Winnick.jpg

Please delete the differing version. Overwritten file, unclear copyright. GermanJoe (talk) 02:22, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Daphne Lantier 02:27, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Correctly merging duplicates which have been automatically identified

I would like to remind all administrators of the non-identical duplicates task that has been gradually going back through our collection of mainly U.S. DoD images. So far more than 16,000 potential duplicates have been identified with a greater than 99% measured reliability, and a separate process to identify digitally identical images apart from EXIF data has also successfully identified several hundred files which have since been deleted.

There is no rush to delete duplicates, so before deleting, administrators should take sufficient time correctly to merge information, such as categories, identification numbers and ensuring that the remaining file has a reasonable filename. There are some pointers to this effect in the description at Category:Faebot identified duplicates. Not only is there no rush as some of these collections and duplicates have been on Commons for several years, and could happily persist here for several more before being resolved, but in the longer term leaving them alone enables us to do further automated housekeeping or reporting, better to identify which file should be deleted, such as working out which files are in most global usage, which have link rot and which have better looking filenames or more complete descriptions.

As per the discussion today on Jcb's talk page diff, though there may be several hundred files identified in a day, this may wind down quite soon and we will be able to see this as a static backlog. Should the WMF ever take action on Phab:T167947, then we might be able to build in testing during the upload process and avoid creating these types of duplicates altogether, something that is currently unrealistic.

It is worth reminding administrators deleting duplicates that per COM:Dupe, redirects should be left behind and effort has to be made to ensure all the relevant information is merged into the copy to be preserved. Any administrator deleting several files per minute, as we have seen in recent deletion logs, is not complying with official policy and should seriously reconsider their approach.

Update
reviewing recent duplicate deletions, I feel we have been losing information unnecessarily which risks damaging the value of project content. For that reason I have suspended automatically adding the {{duplicate}} to identical duplicates. I have routines that can measure global/local usage, categorization and link rot, so will consider how to use those better to weight how duplicates should be managed and reduce our reliance on an individual administrator looking at the files before deletion. When I'm confident those work well, I'll restart the process. --Fæ (talk) 17:10, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
@Fæ: I think it would be much better if the files could be prepared before being tagged as duplicates. Links could be fixed, info transferred, etc, and then admins could quickly perform the deletions. When you're talking about hundreds of duplicates, expecting a few venturesome admins to carefully inspect each one is a very labor-intensive process, especially because we only have a few admins interested in deleting duplicates. Most admins only handle daily DRs and copyvios. They don't tend to work with dupes much from what I've seen. Daphne Lantier 00:04, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
@Daphne Lantier and Kelly: There is a related discussion on the Village Pump.
I have started some test runs which analyse the duplicate and leave a note with several pointers to aide the deleting admin or anyone else who wants to help out with file merging. See Category:Faebot analysed duplicates ready for review. I'm not going to do a 'blitz' on the duplicates with this method, as it can improve with feedback. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 13:47, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
@Fæ: , it looks like the notice on the page has the filenames of the source and target in the {{Duplicate}} template reversed - i.e. if you follow the instructions you mark the file as a duplicate of itself. Example File:100414-N-5549O-019 (4525965937).jpg. Kelly (talk) 17:30, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, pre-fixed, e.g. here it's the right way around. --Fæ (talk) 17:48, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

User:Visaswises harrassed me

I am very concerned about the behaviour of User:Visaswises . He harrassed me on his talkpage in German. Yesterday, he blanked his talkpage and replaced it with 'This user is dead' so I reverted his edit and gave him a warning and he started to say inappropriate comments in German. He said that I 'can not judge' his posts and the fact that he is 'disappointed by Wikipedia' all in German. I was very upset by this. This user is also a very troublesome user and he was reported at Commons:Village pump a few days back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pkbwcgs (talk • contribs) 08:07, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

 Disagree I see really no harassment (but why you are blocked indef on En?). Next time please go to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems (link on top and sign please). -- User: Perhelion 08:39, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
 Not done. No harassment here. Taivo (talk) 10:23, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
(after edit conflict) There is a huge difference between this account is dead and this user is dead Pkbwcgs. There was no harassment, only you being disruptive. You had no business reverting his talk page blank , let alone accusing this user off vandalism. The decent thing to do would be you apologising for wrongly accusing Visaswises. Natuur12 (talk) 10:25, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done PS: I undo the reverted by Pkbwcgs. -- User: Perhelion 12:36, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Protect File:WikiNews-Logo-el-3000.png

Please protect File:WikiNews-Logo-el-3000.png which is used as a temporary logo in el.wikinews. I guess 3 months will be enough. -Geraki TLG 10:25, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Natuur12 (talk) 10:36, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Category:Sculptures in Sweden

Müssen die jetzt alle gelöscht werden wegen [9] und [10]? Die Gerichtsentscheidung (in Schwedisch) [11]: Hystrix (talk) 19:11, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

remove my upload

hi, please remove my upload.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Portrait_photo.jpg

Mr.Alireza.A.F (talk) 20:31, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done - next time you may add {{speedy|Uploader request}} to the image description page to get it deleted. This will only work within a week after upload. Jcb (talk) 20:33, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
i'm sorry, i'm new but OKAY, next time :) Mr.Alireza.A.F (talk) 20:36, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
No problem. Welcome and good luck! Jcb (talk) 20:39, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

User:Yann threatening to wheelwar again

Hi, Yann is threatening to abuse his admin tools, see here. It's unacceptable for an admin to wheelwar. He can use COM:UDR is he disagrees with a DR closure, but wheelwarring is a no go. Because of the many Yann issues from the past, I request that the colleagues keep an eye on him. After a time of silence he is apparently in a recalcitrant mood again. I don't feel like being the subject of his behaviour again, so that's why I think it's appropriate to draw the attention of the team to it in an early stage. Jcb (talk) 10:09, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Lol. You deleted the files against the consensus, and then you post here when required to restore your wong deletions. That's not how this project works. Yann (talk) 10:26, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
Hopefully by now every administrator realises that Jcb is an problem for the Commons community. Their responses when their actions are questioned are defensive, unhelpful and aggressive. Everyone who wishes to work collegiately on this project should be able to do so in a non-hostile environment and per COM:Administrators anyone with sysop rights must be able "to work constructively with others". Jcb's long, long history of complaints about their behaviour is available in the AN archives, with their associated unpleasant defensive behaviour is not appropriate for any administrator. The last time the community had a "pre-desysop" vote it was completely clear that most other editors prepared to express a view were against Jcb continuing as an administrator, it was bureaucracy that stopped the community from having a proper desysop vote that could have set the record straight and either removed sysop tools, or set a firm requirement for Jcb to change in order to remain an administrator.
I no longer expect Jcb to ever apologize when they get it wrong, but this incident is just another in a ridiculously long history of disruptive actions, poor understanding of the guidelines for administrators and a complete refusal to learn or adapt their problematic behaviour rather than blaming everyone else for simply putting them right.
Jcb may statistically be "productive", but their use of their status as a trusted user is not acceptable. If we must, we can recompile the last 2 years of evidence of complaints and problems. I'd much rather just see Jcb apologise for once, or we save a lot of volunteer time and run a "no-fault" desysop vote to test whether the community still trusts Jcb to hold the tools. Based on Jcb's past comments, they will never agree to run a confidence RFA voluntarily. --Fæ (talk) 11:14, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
Agree with Fae, and I think it's about time we had a simple vote of no confidence in the form of a DRFA. -FASTILY 20:17, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
  • While I am not a fan of reckless administrative actions, I don't think Jcb's intention for deletion was to "increasing their deleting count" as claimed by Yann. Yann asked Jcb "How can you take such a decision against the opinion of everyone else?". Well I am struggling to seeing where everyone agreed that the images be kept. BTW... I can't find where the WMF-Legal made any official comment in favor of keeping those file, perhaps Yann would point me to where such discussion took place. DR is not a vote and we do not determines images copyright by personal opinion. Wikicology (talk) 12:25, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
    I agree, the DR could have been collegiately reopened, or become an UNDEL discussion. Administrators should be capable of mellow responses rather than being unable to resist inflaming debate into arguments. There are several collegiate ways for administrators to agree how to proceed. Instead, we have yet another Jcb thread on AN. --Fæ (talk) 12:35, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes, this report is utterly nonsense. I see it as "Mummy... he said he would beat me". Lol. Wikicology (talk) 13:19, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Yann came into action

After first starting and revoking an UDR, Yann has now started to vandalize the involved DR. Jcb (talk) 15:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

I have boldly reverted Yann's edits as such edits are not constructive to me. If anyone disagree with it, they are welcome to restore the edits. Wikicology (talk) 16:23, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Personally, as a participant in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Daniel Cande, I think that the case is rather complex and although it may superficially look as if there was a tendency towards keeping the files, there are actually good arguments (and I don't mean just mine) for deleting as well, in line with COM:PRP. So, on the one hand I would have absolutely accepted any closing admin's decision to keep these files, but I think that likewise Jcb's decision to delete should also be accepted. Jcb is certainly right in pointing out that the correct approach by Yann, if they disagree with the deletion, is to use COM:UDR, pointing out there why they think that deletion was in error. Gestumblindi (talk) 17:18, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

“Fatal” use of VisualFileChange as a result of a meeting at the village pump

Though for certain different good reasons every single file in general should be checked individually if its name has to be changed User:Revent (who appears to be on holiday while his talk page is archived permanently for I'm posting here) on June 12 from 9:12 to 15:18 tagged thousands of files in one go as to be renamed. He signed the template used as User:Alex Great presumably following his nonproven assertion.

As a matter of fact according to commons:file naming nearly all of those files – except the first few containing the term “nojhan” – already had suitable filenames that don't meet the criteria given as the reason for renaming. Unfortunately as the result of this “flooding” the corresponding maintenance list is overcrowded and the real problematic cases get lost in the shuffle for an expectable indefinite time. Hope there's a batch/rollback tool too that helps to execute the necessary reverts automatically... sincerely --Jotzet (talk) 10:58, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

I don't interested anymore in renaming of this files. And I don't know why Revent use my name as a author in Rename template. I don't request all if it. I just ask it on vilage pump. If it possible, you can revert all of him edits. ← Alex Great talkrus? 11:39, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
This doesn't look like it was the most careful way of going about this problem, there are other more practical methods to mark mass numbers of files as needing attention, especially when those files are directly related to each other or from the same set. For example, categories can be used like Category:Files from WTK with bad file names, or perhaps one single page with a list of wikilinks to the files, like User:Seb26/Bad file names and then place that page in the category itself. seb26 (talk) 12:53, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
@Alex: Really? Come off it!
@Seb: Indeed that are useful hints if one wants to implement such purpose again but sad to say those do not help to redress the problem already created. Anyone any idea how to roll back the batch-mode processed edits done for the purpose of coming off that scrolling "orgy"? --Jotzet (talk) 15:13, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

<FYI> Though rather uncomfortably it was possible to change most of the edits by using VFC as well so that the problem should be fixed at the end. cheers Jotzet (talk) 03:55, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

File:En-us-cloche.ogg Doesn't work on my iPhone.

File:En-us-cloche.ogg doesn't work on my iphone. I wanted to hear the correct pronunciation of cloche, but tapping the link for pronunciation got me to a page that was not titled and there was no sound. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.74.180.8 (talk) 19:09, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Service link: File:En-us-cloche.ogg. This is wrong on Administrators' noticeboard (where we are now), this should have been posted to Commons:Village pump. But nonetheless: Which browser do you use on your phone. Safari? Do other OGG files work? — Speravir – 23:56, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
As far as I'm aware, Apple devices/software don't support Ogg Vorbis per default, I think? Gestumblindi (talk) 17:26, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

I don't want my personal information found there

In File:Bergwerk Peissenberg.jpg has my name and the place where I live "Thomas Fürst" "Hohenpeissenberg". I don't want that Information in there any more. Is it possible to remove that information?--Thmsfrst (talk) 09:17, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi, The information is not there now. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:42, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
This information is still at the bottom at the discription visible of the inital upload and this can be found via google as well.--Thmsfrst (talk) 09:59, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
OK, information hidden now. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:27, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
I also hided the relevant log entry --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 10:34, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
Thank you.--Thmsfrst (talk) 10:29, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

remove this upload

hi, here i requested for delete, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:AlirezaAF.jpg plase remove this upload: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AlirezaAF.jpg Alireza.AF (talk) 11:36, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

This is a brand new and joke/vandal account. See Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:AlirezaAF.jpg PumpkinSky talk 11:42, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
that is my comment, also i want to change this username, where i can do it?
You just changed your username yesterday by way of creating a new account. PumpkinSky talk 11:51, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
This is my username, please remove that upload,Aswaran (talk) 13:02, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
i used {{speedy|Uploader request}} Alireza.AF (talk) 13:09, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of image

File:The Third group - Ущедшие.jpg The picture had been taken by my own, now it used as album cover. Album is self-made, self and freely distributed. I want to use it on the article page, so i want it to be undeleted. Thank you --Nwcdd (talk) 18:54, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

  •  Oppose This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS.  — Jeff G. ツ 19:44, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Protect a user talk page

(Attention, NSFW content). There is a user account Alexkhandria2k only used one time, when he contributed 5 files. These are apparently images of the vulva if his wife. Though the file descriptions meanwhile are neutral, one still can read this in the upload comments. This triggered over the years some very inappropriate comments on the user talk page (and a rotation request for one of them). I just deleted them (Special:Diff/33198360/250729495), but perhaps it would be better to raise the protection for this page (and also the file talk pages?). — Speravir – 00:09, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Daphne Lantier 00:41, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Protect a file

I just a reported a vandalism on a file, but this is not the latest edit. There is another one requesting rotation by an obscure amount. In spite of this I am not fully sure whether this counts as vandalism or we should assume AGF, cf. Special:Diff/246805954/250474262. The user is Guydenbond. In view of these questionable edits the file and the descr. page should be fully protected. Note it is used in several projects. — Speravir – 01:27, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Eehm, the file: Collection Extension - Create a book box.png. — Speravir – 01:30, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done File protected and user VOA blocked. Daphne Lantier 03:41, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

"Eigenes Werk" ("Own Work") (erl.)

Sorry, ich kann leider kein Englisch. User:Caroclassic hat praktisch alle hochgeladenen Bilder als Eigenes Werk deklariert, alle Bilder bis auf zwei wurden inzwischen als Urheberrechtsverletzung gelöscht. Offenbar hat der Nutzer nicht begriffen, was das heißt. Vielleicht sollte jemand, der sich besser auskennt und weiß, wie man hier konstruktive Hilfe leisten kann, ihn mal ansprechen und mit ihm zusammen die Bildrechte der letzten verbliebenen Zeichnungen klären: File:Aston Martin DB4 zeichnung.jpg und File:Mercedes w113 Bleistiftzeichnung.jpg. Das sind die einzigen Bilder, für die ich keine URV-Belege im Internet finden kann. Danke und Gruß --H7 (talk) 18:23, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

H7, das hast du auf de:Benutzer Diskussion:Caroclassic doch schon sehr schön gemacht. Gruß, --Achim (talk) 20:37, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Hallo. Ich bin noch nicht lange aktiv da passieren Fehler.Danke für die Löschung der Fotos. die gennanten Bilder sind allerdings eigene Zeichnungen . Gruß--CAROCLASSIC (talk) 22:18, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Name of Files

I am not sure if this is absolutely the right place to post this, however merely mentioning this in Village pump or Help desk does not seem the right place. Is there any violation against Wikimedia commons policies like COM:BLP or COM:NPOV, by using these names in the concerned files at Category:Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump at the 2017 G-20 Hamburg Summit ? Does the file names can or even have to be changed? Thank you. --Joobo (talk) 18:52, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

This is a genuine question, in case that is no the right place please let me know. However i believe that the above mentioned guidelines do somehow sometimes serve a purpose, possibly now it does. So i look forward for an answer--Joobo (talk) 08:38, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Is this in reference to File:The Master meets the Apprentice (4).jpg and the other 9 files with the same name? seb26 (talk) 13:11, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
@Seb26: Yes, these photos i am referring to. --Joobo (talk) 16:33, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Joobo, looks like they have now been renamed: Special:RecentChangesLinked/Category:Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump at the 2017 G-20 Hamburg Summit. seb26 (talk) 22:08, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Wondering whether we should revert this...

Wondering whether we should revert this on the Village pump. Anonymous and, to my mind, kind of nasty, but likely to view it as Big Brotherism if we revert. - Jmabel ! talk 06:01, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Comment removed and long term heckler on static IP blocked for 1 year. First edit was not the usual, so we can pretty safely say this IP has a blocked acct somewhere around here, or is too afraid to heckle people while logged in. Either way, nobody wants to listen to the old "toxic atmosphere" spiel. I know I don't. Daphne Lantier 06:26, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. Yann (talk) 07:57, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Bewertungen in QIC - Consensual Review

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
No administrative action can or will be taken here Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:18, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Hallo miteinander, ich bitte Euch, sich anzuschauen, mit welchen Argumenten ein Commons-Administrator (?) aktuell Fotos von Fahrzeugen negativ bewertet. Betroffen bin nicht nur ich - was ich vielleicht aus Gründen verstehen könnte, die ich hier nicht darlegen möchte -, sondern auch die Benutzer Ralf Roletschek und Ermell sind es. Siehe unter anderem hier. Oder ist es tatsächlich richtig, Fotos von Fahrzeugen negativ zu bewerten, weil nicht exakt angegeben ist, wo das Bild aufgenommen wurde? Wohlgemerkt: Es geht nicht um die Darstellung von Verkehrssituationen oder um Bilder von Straßen, auf denen Autos oder Motorräder zu sehen sind. – Man kann freilich sagen, QIC sei nur ein Spiel und es sei gleichgültig, ob Bilder für gut befunden oder „zerrissen“ werden. Trotzdem bitte ich darum, diese ärgerlichen Aktionen zu unterbinden. Freundliche Grüße -- Spurzem (talk) 16:30, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

  •  Comment The QI guideline is sufficiently explicit "(...) Quality images shall ... be properly categorized...". This is quite the right of User:A.Savin to think that some images are not sufficiently "properly categorized" to be promoted in this label. Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:05, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment I fail to see what Administrative action is required. Nor is the fact that A.Savin is an admin in any way relevant to whether his reviews at QI are fair. This is something to discuss (1) with the reviewer in person and (2) with the QIC reviewing community. People disagree about what are important features of the image/metadata at QIC and that's what the "consensual discussion" is for. FWIW, I think it is valid to take a QI-worthy photo of a car and abstain from giving location for privacy reasons or even because you forget exactly where it was taken. The subject is the car. However, here the location was supplied in the description and a geolocation supplied, so a more specific category than "2017 in Bavaria" is a reasonable request. Whether it is a reasonable demand for QI, is what the discussion at QI is for. Not here. -- Colin (talk) 13:42, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Abuse of the noticeboard. --A.Savin 14:44, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

User:Mutter Erde

Hi, I'm back. Anyone here who wants to unblock me? See User:Mutter Erde. 2003:45:5C27:9C31:39F5:464:FEC7:7029 15:52, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

If you are serious, User talk:Mutter Erde is the place to use {{Unblock}}.   — Jeff G. ツ 02:12, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
I've removed the block of talkpage access, so you can now post an unblock request as Jeff suggests. Pinging the blocking admin @Yann: -- just to let you know this user who was blocked 8 years ago may be posting an unblock request. Daphne Lantier 02:57, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Daphne. I could agree about unblocking. What other admins think? Pinging other involved admins still active: @Herbythyme, Diti, and MichaelMaggs: Yann (talk) 11:34, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
(FYI, I am not a Commons admin any more, from lack of time.) Although Mutter Erde’s blackmail 8 years ago left unpleasant memories, I am afraid about a potential conflict of interest on my part, and I believe my opinion shouldn’t matter today—that, and also the fact I am currently not an administrator. Regardless, there’s also one thing to take into consideration—people change; this contributor might have reformed. Diti the penguin — 22:16, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
No, he hasn't: uses legal threats in application for unblock on dewiki, with the result the unblock being declined. 77.12.76.176 22:48, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for that ridiculous link. I gave an comment on this talk site. [12] (Lachen oder weinen)
@ Yann. According to the block log it was YOUR idea [13] to change my block from one year into infinite, which are now 8 years. 2003:45:5C27:9C1D:85B8:6434:4132:B59D 07:35, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Do not use IP's to edit commons or comment here while being blocked. Please add any comments with your account to your talkpage as per COM:BP. --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:59, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
No.   — Jeff G. ツ 01:07, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: what do you mean by saying No? Lotje (talk) 09:31, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
@Lotje: User:Mutter Erde asked if there was "[a]nyone here who wants to unblock" that user almost three days ago. Obviously, if there was one, that user would already have been unblocked, rather than being admonished for block evasion. So, my answer to the question was "No." I moved your reply/question and reindented it for better flow.   — Jeff G. ツ 15:44, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

See [14] for background. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:03, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Vandal

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
User:Sam Arnold was blocked indefinitely by A.Savin (talk | contribs) 15:27, 14 July 2017 (UTC) for being a Vandalism only account.   — Jeff G. ツ 16:12, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Would somebody please be kind enough to sort out this one - Special:Contributions/Sam Arnold. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:49, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Sorted, many thanks. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:46, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


Nomination for deletion

I tried to nominate for deletion, but failed to create subpage for deletion request for File:2.60mbistooheavy!!!-.jpg.

.*[!?]{3,}.* <autoconfirmed> @Commons:Deletion requests/File:2.60mbistooheavy!!!-.jpg 185.73.237.229 16:47, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

We have created it for you.   — Jeff G. ツ 18:23, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Advertising

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The user changed the text, and without the link Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:51, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

I think this is advertising. It used on file namespace. Is that legal in Wikimedia projects?--Andriy.v (talk) 10:56, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

@Andriy.v: It's a little much.   — Jeff G. ツ 16:01, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
I removed the store link, but it's just supposed to be a credit for providing time and access. My project involves a lot of outreach to gather materials for photographing, so mentioning people who've helped is more of a courtesy and disclosure rather than advertising.Evan-Amos (talk) 04:43, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


User:Kickmichael

Uploads well-known images of Maria Sharapova from officials photosets falsely claiming copyright ownership. Contributions should be removed, the user – warned (I have already did it on wikipedia–ru where he uses the images). Thanks. --Levg (talk) 08:54, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Copyvios tagged and user temp-blocked. --Túrelio (talk) 08:59, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Delition of a file

User:INeverCry had mentioned that the image has been deleted at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dunkin'Coffee Barcelona.jpg, But I see the image still exists. User:Andreuvv has many warnings on his talkpage please have a watch on it's uploads. Thanking --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 09:11, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

It's not the same image, though similar. However, the new image might be o.k. per Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Spain. --Túrelio (talk) 09:22, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

File:Juan Pablo Carrizo.jpg

Please delete the differing version (overwritten file, unclear license). Thanks in advance. GermanJoe (talk) 19:25, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done It was a copyvio of Corbis/Getty Images anyway. De728631 (talk) 20:29, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

File:Macaca nigra self-portrait (rotated and cropped).jpg

Category:Tangkoko Nature Reserve >>> Category:Tangkoko Batuangus Nature Reserve thx --Frze > talk 06:06, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 06:16, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

MrZimmerman

MrZimmerman (talk · contribs) is trolling categories and uploading copyrighted images. Acroterion (talk) 00:57, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done VOA blocked. Daphne Lantier 02:39, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! I'm keeping an eye on them on enwiki. Acroterion (talk) 02:50, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Mass rename

I don't know where/how to request mass rename (and I obviously don't want to tag every single file manually), so I'm putting it here. Please move to appropriate place if applicable, thank you.

All files Special:PrefixIndex/File:Chlečice should be moved to File:Chelčice … .jpg - please notice the typo (swapped letters) in name which needs to be fixed, the extension is just cosmetic change along.

Thank you.

— Danny B. 13:56, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

I also have a mass rename request: correct spelling for "Muesum" --> Museum. Is that an option here? Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 15:39, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
@Lotje: Most of these are obviously true mistakes, and I later will try to fix these, but it is nonetheless a bit dangerous to rename automatically. Muesum regularly exists – two fast search results: https://themuesum.org/ and http://www.muesum.org/. — Speravir – 18:49, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
@Speravir: Thank you every so much. In the meantime (when I have a spare minute!) I will go through the list and see if I can do my little bit. Lotje (talk) 19:26, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
BTW, this is apparently intentional: Bristol muesuM.jpg. — Speravir – 20:37, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done as far as I see. — Speravir – 22:17, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Danny B., since there are only 8 of them, would you mind adding {{Rename}} but also with a suggestion of a better, more descriptive name for each? This is because, even with the error correction, the names of the files do not state what the images actually represent, i.e. churches, different buildings. I was about to rename this (as a filemover) but did not know what local names to suggest. seb26 (talk) 16:23, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
@Danny B.: You could ask at the village pump, as well. It needs the file remover right, which have more people than admins. In addition to Seb’s advice an example: Instead of a fixed Chelčice (1).jpg you could request to Church of Saint Martin (Chelčice).jpg or Chelčice - Church of Saint Martin.jpg or, if you want to preserve the numeration, Chelčice (1) - Church of Saint Martin.jpg, or you could chose the Czech name of the church. — Speravir – 18:48, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Recreation of deleted content

Hi. I've come across 3 images which are reuploads of deleted content, but I wanted to post here instead of speedy because they are related to each other and it'd be good to explain the reasoning together.

Delete because (a) recreated deleted content and (b) no OTRS permission confirms them
Background

They were the subject of ticket:2017060110005334 and were discussed at otrswiki:2017060110005334. A claim of ownership was made for "Tristan Prettyman 5.jpg" and "9.jpg", but it was found that the claim was not accompanied by sufficient evidence. A request was made to the person to provide formal copyright registration from a regional authority as one of the only trustworthy methods of assuring us of the validity of the free license claim. That has not yet been received and so I don't think the free license claims can be trusted until that time. For "Tristan prettyman 6.jpg", no claims of authorship were made by the person (unlike the others) and no information about their source when asked was provided. This file was also uploaded by the user with "Unknown" in the author field.

Note, the uploader L0gick (talk · contribs) also posted on COM:Undeletion requests/Current requests#File:Tristan Prettyman 1.jpg.

seb26 (talk) 14:07, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

OK guys, TL;DR: 3 images were uploaded to en.wiki/Commons (a mix), were deleted on both sites after OTRS couldn't confirm the license, have been reuploaded by the uploader ignoring what OTRS told them, and should be deleted until some actual evidence is received by us. One file was even specified as having an "unknown" author by the uploader. seb26 (talk) 12:04, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
I added to the discussion there.   — Jeff G. ツ 15:58, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
@Seb26: , your comments would be welcome there.   — Jeff G. ツ 04:55, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
Jeff, thanks, I responded. seb26 (talk) 12:41, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Bump: would an admin be able to delete the above files, and the file listed at the above UDR discussion? They should be deleted as recreation of deleted content. If not, please let me know if I should take them to a DR. There remains too much doubt over the claim to ownership contained within the OTRS ticket to keep them. seb26 (talk) 11:27, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

@Seb26: Given the long ticket story and the OTRS investigation on otrs-wiki could you please convert this request (and list the specific files) as a DR (jut or the record, and clarity which files we are talking bout) and I'll (speedy) delete them as copyvios . --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 22:36, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
Jonatan Svensson Glad, thanks, I have made the DR here. seb26 (talk) 23:31, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
Resolved--Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 00:10, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

WP0 abuse

FYI Zakoiuya zakaria (talk · contribs) uploaded 2 manuals how to game the system, now deleted. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:48, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

@Yann: Thank you for your quick action. I suggest the following revision, though: "Wikipedia Zero abuse: misusing Commons by sharing nonfree files" instead of "Wikipedia Zero abuse: using Commons as a file sharing site". We are all "using Commons as a file sharing site", you see.   — Jeff G. ツ 17:10, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
Hey all, I'm alive and kicking again, and just wanted to see how the WP Zero abuse fight has been going. I am going to be a lot more active so if you need any help, just shoot me a message on my talk page. TJH2018talk 18:23, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done Yann (talk) 20:23, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
Amin00rajate (talk · contribs) again. Yann (talk) 16:16, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Addition of flag filemover

Please assign me the flag filemovers. --NatigKrolik (talk) 14:27, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Your request on COM:RFR was declined 3 days ago, so please wait at least a few weeks before reapplying for this right. --Didym (talk) 14:45, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Requested. --NatigKrolik (talk) 14:56, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Did you even read my comment above? And by the way: do not remove parts of comments by other users. --Didym (talk) 15:04, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
User's most recent rename request. Proposed title: "File:Defense Secretary Jim Mattis greets Secretary of State Rex Tillerson before a meeting of the National Security Council with President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence July 20, 2017, at the Pentagon in Washington, D.C (35875442602).jpg" Just a bit long. Also, neither Trump nor Pence appear in the image. --GRuban (talk) 15:35, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
 Not done No need to go forum shopping. Requests for rights belong at COM:RFR. Daphne Lantier 19:44, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

File:White horse.jpg

I guess Humayun1919 hasn't read Commons:Overwriting existing files, so this one needs revision deletion or history splitting. The upload comment might contain enough information to keep the upload if we believe the authorship claims of a user whose other uploads were copyright violations by a ratio of 7/7 and if we can assume that {{PD-Pakistan}} (which obviously isn't applicable to self-created works) was intended to be {{PD-self}}. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:06, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done I've done a history clean. Daphne Lantier 19:41, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

This File:The Rike-Kumler Co., Dayton, Ohio (1925).jpg image

What would you as an Admin or trusted user do with this 1925 US image? Is it PD or not. If it is not PD, is a DR an appropriate? Thank you, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:50, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I changed the license to {{PD-US-no notice}}. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:31, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Commons doesn't deliver the last version

Several days ago I updated File:Ante Batalla de Chorrillos.svg (a thicker orange line and bigger types) to Batalla de Chorrillos.svg this one but the server delivers still the old version to es:Batalla de San Juan y Chorrillos. Seldom because in es:Combate de La Rinconada de Ate is presented the new version. I tried with Ctrl R but it doesn't get the right one. Can anyone of you do something?. --Juan Villalobos (talk) 08:54, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

It happened to me in the past. I just wait for several days.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:37, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Try holding down Shift as well to bypass your browser's cache. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:57, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

License review under backlog

There is a huge License review backlog at CAT:LR. Can few admins take time to review the same Daphne Lantier is working hard on it but it would be thankful if some do help her in review work. Thanking --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 12:06, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

User:柳ワラバー

柳ワラバー (talk · contribs)

His vandalism does not stop. Please manage it.--Y.haruo (talk) 12:54, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done. With help of Google translation I can confirm, that this is vandalism-only account. I blocked him/her indefinitely. Taivo (talk) 15:18, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your response.--Y.haruo (talk) 17:10, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Not translated into Bulgarian

The template {{Vk}} is not translated into Bulgarian. Please, translate to Bulgarian Изтрий from English Delete. Thanks! Vladimirrizov20 (talk) 16:57, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done. Template  Delete translated. Taivo (talk) 07:06, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Mass move of images in Category:Metropolitan Museum of Art by department - Islamic Art

I have a feeling that the thousands of files in Category:Metropolitan Museum of Art by department - Islamic Art are putting a heavy load on RussBot (the one that moves files from category redirects to the actual categories). Is it possible for an admin to move all of them to Category:Department of Islamic Art, Metropolitan Museum of Art in a few clicks? If not, I will cat-a-lot them in batches of 200, which might take a while though. --HyperGaruda (talk) 17:05, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

You can do it with Cat-a-Lot as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:45, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
I mentioned cat-a-lot at the end of my opening post, but I was just wondering if admins maybe had a quicker way, because cat-a-lot is still limited to one page of images at a time. --HyperGaruda (talk) 17:58, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
No, we do not have a quicker way. I have ✓ Done it though with cat-a-lot and somebody's help.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:57, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
I helped with VFC, but encountered a rate limit.   — Jeff G. ツ 20:04, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, much appreciated.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:09, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Thank you both :) --HyperGaruda (talk) 20:14, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

File:Bill Aalto.jpg

If this image is PD, perhaps it could be passed. The author is not named...and the source account only has 2 images. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 01:12, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Secondly all this user's uploads appear to be derivative works. There is a watermark on them. This edit removing notices of previously unfree images does Not inspire much confidence. Without COM:OTRS permission, I doubt Commons can keep them. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:24, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Indian books uploads

There is influx of uploads of books on Indian languages on User:OgreBot/Notable uploads/2017 July 22. Descriptions don't contain link to author or Wikidata item, so public domain status is hard to verify. Help of person who know Indian languages is needed to review uploads. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:20, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

@EugeneZelenko: The books in Telugu language has no issues as all are from archive.org the books in Urdu needs to be reviewed by someone. @Hindustanilanguage: your assistance can help. --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 14:55, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
@Tiven2240: Hi, Beware that files on IA are not always OK. There is no assessment about their copyright status there, and they could still be under a copyright. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:13, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
As I wrote, date of author/illustrator death is needed to find out if book in public domain or not. Link to relevant Wikipedia articles, Wikidata item or plain text with this information need to be added into each book description. Fact that book is available on internet is not proof of public domain status. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:09, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Improved search in deleted pages archive

During Wikimedia Hackathon 2016, the Discovery team worked on one of the items on the 2015 community wishlist, namely enabling searching the archive of deleted pages. This feature is now ready for production deployment, and will be enabled on all wikis, except Wikidata.

Right now, the feature is behind a feature flag - to use it on your wiki, please go to the Special:Undelete page, and add &fuzzy=1 to the URL, like this: https://test.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Undelete&fuzzy=1. Then search for the pages you're interested in. There should be more results than before, due to using ElasticSearch indexing (via the CirrusSearch extension).

We plan to enable this improved search by default on all wikis soon (around August 1, 2017). If you have any objections to this - please raise them with the Discovery team via email or on this announcement's discussion page. Like most Mediawiki configuration parameters, the functionality can be configured per wiki. Once the improved search becomes the default, you can still access the old mode using &fuzzy=0 in the URL, like this: https://test.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Undelete&fuzzy=0

Please note that since Special:Undelete is an admin-only feature, this search capability is also only accessible to wiki admins.

Thank you! CKoerner (WMF) (talk) 18:36, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

File:Mug shot of O.J. Simpson.jpg

Dear Admins,

If this image is really free, please consider passing it. If not, it has to face a DR. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:02, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

You gave the correct license. No "passing" is needed, because the photo is in public domain independent of Flickr license. Taivo (talk) 07:29, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Unfounded rotation request for an image: File:Centauros a-spc.png

Hallo zusammen,

a new user, User:Terra29, has requested a rotation of this image without giving a reason for this. This is probably inappropriate and should be rolled back. MHardcastle seems to be the original author of the image, if you feel to check that. Please check this matter, correct it and, at least, answer me on that. --Blauer elephant (talk) 11:05, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done History cleaned. Daphne Lantier 21:29, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

File:Esa.jpg

Please delete the differing version. Misplaced redundant upload with unclear license, new stand-alone version is at File:Escola de Sargentos da Armas.jpg. GermanJoe (talk) 20:13, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Daphne Lantier 21:26, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Please delete the M4A1 carbine and the Heckler & Koch G36 that i uploaded because i failed to ask permission. Nikiboy16 (talk) 13:40, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Hystrix (talk) 14:35, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Interesting template transclusion

Using the format {{Collection of quality images|country=usa}} to generate a template header produces an unexpected result in the flag icon field - can somebody more adept than I with templates figure out what's calling a pirate flag? Acroterion (talk) 11:54, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Template:Country-flags, you want to do Special:Diff/253366958 --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 12:21, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
I did. The question is, why does a pirate flag appear for "usa" and doesn't that seem like a problem? Acroterion (talk) 12:23, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
No. "usa" is not a country code. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 12:25, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Similarly, {{Country}} won't accept this input. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 12:30, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
I realize it is not a country code, but it is a plausible error (I made it, for instance), and right now using "usa" in that field produces a pirate flag. Doesn't that linkage seem like a fixable bit of vandalism? Acroterion (talk) 17:02, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Acroterion, usa is not a recognised parameter so it will have the same behaviour as if somebody had typo'd and put in an incorrect spelling of a country's code. According to that template's documentation, any unrecognised parameter automatically gets a pirate flag. There's no intentional vandalism here. There are two solutions, always use us, or add usa to the template as a alternate keyword. seb26 (talk) 17:09, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, that's the answer I needed. Would it be possible to use a less cute, more user-explanatory image, like a slash/circle that is a universally-obvious error code? The pirate flag is an inappropriate easter egg - we should give users a clue that they've made an error. Acroterion (talk) 17:21, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
You're free to implement your change. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 17:35, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll work up a default that's less startling. Acroterion (talk) 01:03, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
I’ve replaced the pirate flag with File:Location map of None.svg and also improved the documentation. If there is a better suiting default replace again. — Speravir – 04:41, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Hey all. I'm fairly heavily involved in copyright concerns at Wikipedia, and I've written a page there that targets an issue probably even more relevant here. You seem to be absolutely swimming in people uploading images as their "own work", with many of them genuinely believing that scanning an image, taking a screenshot, etc. somehow creates ownership in them. The page is w:Wikipedia:Scanning an image does not make it your "own work". I thought it might be useful to link to this essay as an adjunct at some policy or guideline page here, maybe in a "see also" section. Since I am not involved in admin tasks here I wouldn't know where to suggest. If anyone agrees, please go ahead, or tell me where you would suggest. Or if you think it belongs nowhere, that's fine too. Just a thought. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:44, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

File:Fetullahgulen.png

Please delete the differing version. Copyrighted press photo - no evidence of permission from photographer. GermanJoe (talk) 14:04, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 14:09, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

File:Javad Mojabi.jpg

Please delete the differing version. Overwritten file, probably copyvio (taken from Mojabi's official site per comment). GermanJoe (talk) 01:09, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Daphne Lantier 02:37, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Can a Bureaucrat/Administrator who has a very reasonable understanding of legal English, and perhaps has expertise in images uploaded in good faith that may be of difficulty, and may be contentious regarding privacy, urgently respond here so that I can forward, with explanation, that Bureaucrat/Administrator a personal email to me detailing and copying a legal communication to me for removal of a batch of my images that indeed could well need removing. Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 22:34, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

@Ankry: Thank you Ankry for your email. I have sent an email to you in response detailing the way forward in this. Acabashi (talk) 13:46, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
@Ankry: I have added speedies to the files as you suggested... could you or other admins deal with these cats: Berden Hall / Berden Hall garden / Berden Priory ?
What irks is that the complainers have used mine and other Commons files on their official web site without the courtesy of acknowledging authorship. Acabashi (talk) 17:12, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

The OTRS team has been notified of concerns as to privacy laws of the UK regarding the following images. WMF legal has been put in the loop as a courtesy as of now by OTRS agents. Whether or not they will get involed as a courtesy or legally required is as of yet unknown. This OTRS agents and Commons admin do not see a reason to delete these files, however, has chosen to make the community aware of this ticket, and encourage the community to discuss freely regarding possible issues whic may prevent these files be kept. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 04:28, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Undeletable file

File:Literature II tom, Harutyun Surkhatian.djvu is a broken file and was first speedy nommed on July 12. It has the following bug:

API request failed (backend-fail-internal): An unknown error occurred in storage backend "local-multiwrite".

This file has been undeletable for almost 3 weeks now. Any ideas? Daphne Lantier 02:24, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

I don't really know what that error means. Maybe @Anomie: knows or, if the error persist, a Phabricator task might be required. —MarcoAurelio 18:03, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
FWIW, this was noted in phab:T154780#3462876. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 18:20, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Protect a template, please

Template:Lang-format-SVG needs some kind of protection, cf. version history. Full proection should not be needed, though. — Speravir – 20:12, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Daphne Lantier 23:07, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

All images uploaded by Milanistapersempre (except the "Los serrano-logo.jpg") are obvious copyright violations (images from movies/TV shows taken from internet). I wrote here instead of using the copyviol templates because I have very little time right now (sorry :)). Nice day, --Supernino (talk) 08:45, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done. I categorized and licensed all trivial logos. All non-trivial logos and other copyvios are either deleted or at least nominated for deletion. Taivo (talk) 11:21, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Category:The Potter's Wheel

So... bit of a story here. There are a few online archives of this 1904-1907 publication. It didn't initially look like uploads were going to be easily automated, so I started uploading manually, and got to probably around 100 or so images. But lo and behold, automation worked out just fine, and even better, is pulling from higher quality originals than what I uploaded. So, a lot of these need to go the way of Template:Duplicate.

I'd personally rather not spend an entire morning on tagging entirely uncontroversial deletions, and the duplicates are easy to spot, since the naming conventions are exactly the same with the exception of the extensions (the higher quality ones are all jpg and the lower all png). So if someone with unfathomable godlike buttons would care to clean up behind me a bit that would be much appreciated, and sorry for the mess. TimothyJosephWood 12:39, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

If you have informally assessed them, you could also just add them to Category:Uploads by Fæ needing speedy deletion and an admin can knock them off based on your good judgement as the uploader. Though it's not suitable if a redirect is needed, this would be okay for files not in use on other projects and where no derivatives have been made. TBH, 100 files for housekeeping is not that big a problem. :-).
BTW, the upload has finished the run, so the collection should be stable now. --Fæ (talk) 12:46, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
(You... have your own category... of course you do.)
Does it matter that the ones needing deleted were made irrelevant by you, but not uploaded by you? If not then cat-a-lot and too easy. TimothyJosephWood 12:53, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
(And yeah, it's not monumental, but I'd rather than spend the time copying and pasting when it's a forgone conclusion and I could be doing something else. TimothyJosephWood 12:54, 2 August 2017 (UTC))
It's fine, I'll amend the category description to make it explicit. --Fæ (talk) 12:54, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi, With Visual File Change, it would be easy to add the necessary tag or category. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:02, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done I've done that for you. I deleted the PNG files using the VisualFileChange tool (which allows deletion for administrators) simply by selecting all the PNG files via the Advanced Select Files option. If there's anything I've missed or I've accidentally deleted, please do let me know so I can fix it for you. Nick (talk) 13:03, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Looks good to me. Much appreciated. TimothyJosephWood 13:05, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive_64&oldid=371842559"