User talk:Billinghurst/Archives/2012

Category rename vs delete

Thanks for the advice, it makes sense, I will do where relevant in future. regards, Rod. Rcbutcher (talk) 11:52, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Excellent. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:00, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

KT "Beatniks" Title

Hello Billinghurst - The title of the file "Beatniks.jpg" may indeed be misleading, and I am sure that it was intended as tongue-in-cheek humor by copyright holder Bob Shane, depicted in the photo and the last surviving original member of the group. I am not at all sure that Shane would consent to a title change, which may have been from the original photographer and transferred to Shane with the rights to the corporate name and copyright holdings in 1976. I am a bit uneasy about a unilateral title change, which certainly would be justified and appears to be permissible. Wouldn't it be advisable (not to mention courteous) to check with Shane (which I can do) to secure his assent? He may not care or prefer the more descriptively accurate title, but it seems to me that checking would be the right thing to do. regards, Sensei48 (talk) 14:57, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

The file was moved by another, presumably following a request for a rename, I was just the administrator doing the final tidy up. I am going to need to look into this further and get back to you. So please consider this a question on notice ...  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:22, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Beatniks.jpg renamed to File:Kingston Trio.jpg [1]. The reasoning seems sound, and in line with the renaming guidance. If there is a concern from the copyright holder then we can open a discussion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:29, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I doubt that there will be a problem, and Shane was supportive about releasing this file/photo to Commons. I've contacted him and will convey his reply. Sensei48 (talk) 17:14, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Roman Dacia map duplications

Hi, thanks for the note. I replied on my page. --Codrin.B (talk) 22:19, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

reason for move?

hello;

was just wondering why you decided to move my outline of the options to the talk page, in the uraa discussion.

dcoetzee & i have already had an exchange over this; the discussion is occurring on the main page, & whether you agree with my analysis or not, the discussion page is where it belongs.

Lx 121 (talk) 21:25, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

The page itself is about the substance of the deletion, not about how we manage the process. Talk pages are traditionally about the ancillary discussion of process, which was why it was moved. There was no other motive and not due to having any opinion on your analysis. Just like other discussions about process, eg. the recent blackout discussions at Wikipedia. If there were components in your discourse that were about the logic of the topic, then please feel welcome to move them back, however, if it is process, then please continue that discussion on the talk page. It really helps those of us who have chosen to stay outside and to remain neutral when it gets to the point of closing.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:34, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

RfCU

Thank you for your support and kind words.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:08, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Well as undeserving that you are, the bribe came through as promised, and we had a deal. <huge wink, just kidding folks!> Hey, if the truth hurts, so be it, welcome to the CU world, and see you over there. When you are notified to WMF let us know and will get you an account on the wiki and subscribe you to the list. Addendum you've been got. Nice.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:37, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Arab's parents

Hello. This user appears to recently have deleted the mistakefully-titled Category:Arab but all parent-categories of that one cat, which are needed still, have gone along with it... And I can't recall all of them. Kindly take a look at the ancient, deleted Category:Arab and put the list on my Talkpage. Thank you so much. Orrlingtalk 13:43, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

It went through a move request and can now be found at Category:Arab people  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:17, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

No, no. That move request (=the original one) was mine and it was successfully fulfilled by User:SieBot and then just shortly after, the cat's entire content was reclassified thus merging the newly-retitled "Arabs" into "Arab people". If you take a look at the deleted cat you'll see its parents were different from those of Category:Arab people, this is due to the reason that "Arabs" alike with "Jews" and "Native Americans" is a different, broader perception than "Arab people"/"Jewish people"/"Native American people". Thank you in advance for posting the deleted Category:Arab's parent list on my Talkpage or here on this one. Orrlingtalk 14:56, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

√ Resolved
Thanks Orrlingtalk 22:43, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Documentation for gadget authors

I saw you had done some work on a few gadgets. We are trying to start a library for gadget authors to use. Please check it out and post any questions or comments there. -- ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣ 17:32, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

BTW

You screamed at me today, and made a bad personal attack against me, but I was right. Not only on commons, but also on wikipedia I could not find any account that was blocked after the rename. As a matter of fact russavia did not block an account renamed tonight. And really there's no need in blocking a renamed account because in never could be used and it never could be recreated.

I believe you should behave much more politely and much more calmly than you did today with all the jobs you're holding at WMF projects you should be an example of politeness and calmness. Screaming about paranoia, and insisting on adding the word after I removed it, advising me to go far away, and then asking for my block left a very bad taste in my mouth. Please have a nice day.--Mbz1 (talk) 03:54, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Screamed? No, I was quite calm and matter of fact, and I stick by what I said; blunt, yes. I believe that you are a poison to wiki communities, whether that is intentional or accidental I have no idea. In this case at Commons Russavia followed the guideline to the letter, whereupon followed another of your spiteful and vindictive attack spectaculars predicated on your persecution complex, and your belief that you can say what you like, when you like, and that is okay and everyone has to like it. Now someone says something back and they are the person at fault. Interesting approach. Have a nice life, I truly wish you well in it, just somewhere else.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:04, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

"Screamed?" Of course you did. I felt myself as a girl from the image at my talk...

When exactly did I become a "poison" for wiki communities? Was it, when I was uploading thousands of images, hundreds of which became featured pictures? Was it when I was writing tens of popular DYK? Was it,when two of my images were selected for Wikimedia Foundation annual report 2008-2009 Wikimedia foundation File:Artcarfest in San Francisco 1.jpg and File:Canada Geese and morning fog.jpg See page 9? Was it, when on the same day 4 articles I wrote w:La Pelegrina pearl; w:Clubfoot George;w:Jafr alien invasion and w:Sayyida al Hurra were used at the DYK section of the Main page. Together they were viewed 64,900 times? Or was it, when I exposed an admin who bullied 16-years old kid to the extend he felt as killing himself?

"wiki communities"? What communities are you talking about? Maybe the one that voted to ban me, when I was not even allowed to say a word, not even at my talk page? Well, let's see: here's a user page of one of the good standing members of that community (please see the history for the last 10 days. Some of it was deleted, but you are an admin and you'll be able to see it, and here's what another good standing member of that community said about you,Billinghurst (because you are an admin at Meta too), edit summary: "the lunatics are running the asylum";edit summary: "fuck this site and the abusive cowards that for the most part administrate it." Any more examples? Do you really believe that such community could be poisoned?

No, I do not believe I could say whatever I like without providing evidences to support what I am saying. I have never ever accused another user in anything without evidences (in wiki situation, differences), and if I realized I was wrong, I had no difficulties in admitting it.

I said russavia used the tools on me while heavily involved after I asked russavia do not use the tools on me, and in the last episode russavia treated my request not like all other requests were treated, and did not respond for hours after I asked for an explanation on its talk page. I understand a user could be busy, but to write something like "I get to you later" takes only a second.

There are more empty words, more screaming and more PA in your response. I do not believe you will make a fair steward, if for nothing else simply because you do not understand what "involved admin" means.

Anyway...there's no use in talking to you. I am unwatching you talk. Bye.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:40, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

So many things that one can say. I will keep myself nice and say goodbye.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:15, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

User:Яндекс

I don't understand why this user's votes are being reverted. If he is a banned sockpuppet or whatever, why hasn't this account been blocked, and why hasn't notice been left on his talk or user page?--Prosfilaes (talk) 13:52, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm about to.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:56, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Is there any easy way for me to see if an account has been globally locked if I'm looking at a user page?--Prosfilaes (talk) 13:56, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

I am going spare, it was another that was g-locked, and I did have to block it locally (brain slowing at this hour). To answer your question Special:GlobalBlockList and nothing shows up on user page. Architecture issue. :-/  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:01, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

File:PS-01.jpg‎‎ DR

if u revert the DR on file should u not also close the DR?--Sanandros (talk) 13:57, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

When I looked, it already is closed, though I will have another look.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:58, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

File replaces

Hi Billinghurst, something went wrong here. Now we have the same image twice in the article. -- Firefox13 (talk) 03:52, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Resolved

deWP has a local copy file of the same filename. I have reverted the change though I would recommend that deWP looks to move de:Datei:Sereina Trachsel.jpg to Commons with a new name, so that filename is cleared, then undo my change so we can align filenames.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:00, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

move cat requests at User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands

As far as I can see, you replies about "create language templates under the existing name". I am sorry, I cannot understand the idea. My aim was to check if there is any policy on Commons about the languages. When I tried to create category in Russian, people explained me that Russian and other non-English categories are prohibited. Now I see the non-English categories, try to rename them — and wow, there is no reaction. This means that non-English categories are allowed, but only Russian categories are prohibited.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 09:21, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks a lot for your intervention in stopping the vandal and thus protecting Greek Wikipedia. Unfortunately he acted in an hour (early in the morning) that no admins were present to stop him. --Ttzavaras (talk) 11:04, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Yep, the vandals are painful like that. I hope that recovery wasn't too ugly. Glad to be able to assist.  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:01, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipédia:CheckUser/Candidaturas/Jbribeiro1, Teles and Viniciusmc

Hi. I marked their votes in these polls that you do not have 300 edits on Wikipedia in Portuguese as official policy Wikipédia:Direito ao voto. Thank you.Érico ^msg 21:58, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Fair call, I looked for a minimum count requirement but didn't see one.  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:49, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Dr. C. W. Saleeby, obituary, 1940.png

File:Dr. C. W. Saleeby, obituary, 1940.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Prosfilaes (talk) 21:36, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I would disagree. Out of copyright in 1991.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:44, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Creating uncetegorized categories

I am doing some clean up of unusual categories related to Creator templates and run into a few uncategorized categories created by you. See Category:John Bagnell Bury or Category:Henry Montagu Butler. I assume it is some king of malfunction. --Jarekt (talk) 13:24, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

only malfunction would have been one of the brain synapses.  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:08, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Those are the hardest to prevent due to their randomness ;) . I was pointing it out, mostly since if the malfunction was with some automatic process, than those can be fixed or retired. --Jarekt (talk) 17:08, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Can files proposed for deletion here be transwikied to enWS?

Hi, I've been notified of Commons:Deletion requests/File:A Treasury of South African Poetry.djvu. I think the file is acceptable to enWS under our copyright rules. Can the file be transwikied, or should I re-upload? Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:48, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

After spending some time looking at and attempting this from a wide range of tools, I have done to the inclusion that this can only be achieved manually or going to system administrator. So the answer is MANUALLY. <shrug> You could import the template through the import tool, however, that is next to useless in this circumstance.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:10, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Bots/Requests/SDrewthbot

Bot approved, enjoy. --99of9 (talk) 02:01, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I had next to given up.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:09, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it seems we had a pretty severe shortage of Bureaucrat attention. I think I've nearly got the whole queue back in action. --99of9 (talk) 04:23, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Very nice. Thanks for your efforts and your attention to the detail. Appreciated.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:47, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Removal of external links

Hi, could you please shortly explain this edit? The pages linked contain interesting and appropriate additional information on Somali.--Schreiber (talk) 16:03, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Looks/ed like a crosswiki paste of external links to a commercial website by someone only interested in promoting a commercial product, by appearing pasting links and not improving articles m:User:COIBot/XWiki/morgannilsson.se and sulutil:BaddaCad, high potential for a conflict of interest. If the bibliographic links are interesting and relevant, then they can be added to the respective pages, or the commercial site can be linked to from the respective talk pages so the relevant links can be added to the articles as appropriate.  — billinghurst sDrewth 16:22, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!--Schreiber (talk) 16:45, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Parma - In the lee of the port bow, while becalmed.jpg

Why do you delete an uploaded picture of me and replaced it with a later uploaded file? --Botaurus (talk) 15:52, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Is it really that important for an externally sourced flickr'd photo of the same dimensions and quality which continues to exist? It was going to take me five steps to go through a replacement in the reverse for little value. If it is really that important, it would be helpful that you reverse the addition of {{duplicate}} where you know that it is back to front. That was many administrative actions taken in a place with a backlog, so please excuse me if things were not perfect.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:07, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

You have deleted the image with the correct descriptions and links. So I had this work done at the picture again who remained. So this is not the same. --Botaurus (talk) 14:00, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

I have added the answer on my page

You can delete my message from your page. Good morning. Natkabrown (talk) 09:39, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

New (ans wrong) [[:Category:Transgender Christopher Street Day in Berlin (2010)]] instead of old (and correcht) [[:Category:Transgenialer CSD 2010]]

Hi Billinghurst, do you know why somebody renamend [[:Category:Transgenialer CSD 2010]] into [[:Category:Transgender Christopher Street Day in Berlin (2010)]] ? There is no transgender street day, the alternative to the so-called "commercial street day" is named Transgenialer CSD as can be proven by the websites. Cheers --Sargoth (talk) 05:41, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't remember specifically as it was a while ago. I vaguely remember it being among a batch of renames of a similar nature.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:00, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

It has been fixed, thanks :) --Sargoth (talk) 07:21, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Reply to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dr. C. W. Saleeby, obituary, 1940.png?

Hi. Do you have a reply to the latest comment on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dr. C. W. Saleeby, obituary, 1940.png? I do not know the answer. I just noticed that you never replied and thought perhaps you missed the comment? --MGA73 (talk) 20:02, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I have no authoritative opinion, and articles around are not clear. Not one for which I am going to go to the wall, though I have added one fo the links that I found at the time that I read.  — billinghurst sDrewth 17:28, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia-like edit

Hey, Billinghurst

I am looking at this strange edit of yours which looks more like a Wikipedia edit than a Commons edit.

First, you inserted the other version into |otherfields parameter; the result of which is messy. Please preview your edits and take note that there is an |other_versions field there.

Second, you have rejected the deletion with a "file-mismatch" reason which is valid in Wikipedia but not here. (See Commons:Deletion policy § Duplicates) The only requirement here is the nominated image must be an exact or a scaled down version, in terms of size, quality, color depth, etc. The only excepts is the reproduction of better quality files which need attribution, such as SVG versions of a raster image or PNG versions of JPEG diagrams, charts, maps, etc. which are all reproduced. An Adobe icon however, is originally PNG. Any JPEG version of it is a result of format conversion which scales down quality.

Fleet Command (talk) 06:43, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for picking up the slip on the paste; fixed. Re your commentary about the duplicates, I believe that you are not correct. It clearly says If the file is the same file type … the remainder require a request.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:55, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Same type refers to raster vs. vector. (You are looking for "format" not "type"; Wikipedia again.) Just let another admin handle this. A third opinion is always helpful. (Although, you the first to reject. Others always deleted.) Fleet Command (talk) 06:58, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

The bot for the replacement itself does not even handle these, and it specifically states such. Otherwise, don't push your luck. If you wish to ask for a second opinion, then go and ask someone, not revert.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:04, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

I never said a bot. But I get it: "Don't push your luck" means you're an admin, you can break every last bit of law and bully me and I can do nothing. Alright, I get. We're cool -- "Wikipedia-wise". Fleet Command (talk) 07:20, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Sure right. Excuse me. I don't know about anything to which I refer. I provide examples, and that is wrong too. I have no knowledge. I have no skills. I bow to your greater intellect. I gave you laternate to the speedy, and suggest again that is the route to progress it.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:25, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

You don't have to "bow" or resort to such extreme measures. We can simply agree to disagree.

I am a filemover myself and I have run into a lot of cases in which someone requests a completely implausible rename; I decline, he reverts and insults me. Only I don't have the luxury of threatening him or her with "don't push your luck". So, I always say "sorry, with all due respect, I disagree". Most of the times, that's the end of the discussion. For the rest, another filemover usually declines and he gets the message.

Always remember: If you don't think something is an edit dispute, that does not mean that the other side thinks the same. Fleet Command (talk) 07:53, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Oops

You're right, it's a careless mistake on my part. I usually refuse such requests for the reasons you explained. I have undeleted the file. Sorry ! --M0tty (talk) 08:58, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

File:Coat of Arms of South Africa (1932-2000).svg

Relax and have a cup of tea please. I've always known you to be a reasonable, patient editor so I'm really not sure what the big deal is with the inherent assumption of bad faith. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:55, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Eh, why did you undelete that file? It was not use, as all WPs use the original GIF image.--Antemister (talk) 15:14, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

It was in use at English Wikisource, and it was just deleted. There was no replacement file supplied, neither in the reasoning for the deletion, nor in the command for removal. If you can provide a link to the image, I will have a look to see what we can do to replace the existing image from its usage to your proposed file.  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:28, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

The SVG autotraced from File:Coat of Arms of South Africa (1932-2000).gif. Autotraced SVG file are practically useless, so they are ususally deleted.--Antemister (talk) 15:36, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Your comment on my talk page

Hi Billinghurst!

I am puzzled by your notice on my talk page and on the pdf file's info-page: "This file is missing evidence of permission. It has an author and source, but there is no proof that the author of the file agreed to license the file under the given license"

I wrote the LaTeX code & Pdf file, in which I identify myself as the author. I state I uploaded it under CC 3.0 BY SA in the document, at the end ("Coda: Copyright"), from which I quote:

"5.2. Copyright. This discussion is copyrighted by its author Kiefer.Wolfowitz and by the real-world author using the Kiefer.Wolfowitz account on Wikipedia. It is uploaded to the Wikimedia Foundation under the terms of the Creative Commons 3.0 Share-Alike and Attribution license."

This seems like proof of licensing to me!

Best regards,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz  (Discussion) 20:22, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Did you think that someone would know to read through the work looking for a copyright and a permission statement? Anybody can claim that they are the author, anyone can pretend to be the author. All of which is why the default position is to ask for OTRS on modern works. As you have pointed me to that statement, I have linked to it, and as you suggest it should be sufficient.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:23, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

In the next version, I can put a SA BY CC 3.0 statement on page one. Thanks for your help! I understand that ensuring copyright-compliance is important. Cheers,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz  (Discussion) 14:31, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

That would be excellent.  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:45, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Done.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz  (Discussion) 11:28, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

CC and Commercial

Hi Billinghurst!

[[File:Free_Guitar_Chords.pdf|right|thumb|This document has a prohibition against reproduction, which seems to violate CC and Commons policies.]]This media's cover warning doesn't seem compatible with Commons or CC licensing.

It also has a commercial solicitation every other page.

Cheers,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz  (Discussion) 11:27, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Added the permissions prompt template.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:30, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

It was deleted. Thanks for your help. But let's hope that the donator recreates the pdf file with appropriate licensing and without the adds, because it did look useful.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz  (Discussion) 10:07, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Periodic Table Armtuk.svg

On "File:Periodic Table Armtuk.svg", you removed my request for deletion with the comment "not duplicate; colouration different; cannot speedy".

While I agree that the colours are different now, the original files were the same save for font effects. The only reason that "File:Periodic Table Armtuk3.svg" is different is because I updated it (meaning I updated it to correct it). Should it still not be deleted? I'd also like to point out that "Periodic Table Armtuk.svg" is not used anywhere, so can it be deleted by a different method? Can we say that "Periodic Table Armtuk3.svg" is a updated version?

Travürsa (talk) 17:17, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I will have another look. To note that the {{Duplicate}} is a speedy process, so is only having the review of one person, which is why it is a more stringent criteria; it is not a complete rejection. There is a list of the criteria that allows for speedy deletions at Commons:Deletion policy and some of the other criteria seem to apply here, then within that there is also the regular process for nominating works for deletion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:18, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I have nominated it for deletion, and do not feel comfortable to speedy the work. To note that as the periodic table id s living document, so not only is it only ever accurate at a point in time, accordingly we need document its file history well, or even to consider whether a separate file should exist for each change, rather than update the original. Then we may wish to consider that Commons should have a history of each rendition of the periodic table, rather than delete a version just as it was out-of-date, not in error.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:32, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Bon festival

When you moved Category:Bon to Category:Bon Festival, you were likely unaware that some of the items in the category were actually related to Category:Bon religion, which, while buddhist influenced, has nothing to do with the japanese festival. i have recategorized the items. your move was correct, but the category was initially filled with the two subjects.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 08:48, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Great, glad that someone gave it a bit of love.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:38, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Block of Akcfif

Hi. You blocked user Akcfif (talk · contribs) as a crosswiki spamer - it is a mistake. Can you help him? His IP now is 46.118.116.129 (maybe it is important). Thanks.--Сергій (обг.) 18:55, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

They are not blocked, they are in a blocked IP range which has been heavily spamming the wikimedia wikis. I have made some modifications to the block that should allow registered users to login, and now just block anonymous users. If that doesn't work, they can apply for an IP block exemption at m:SRGP#Requests for global IP block exemption.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:05, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Undelete to Wikisource

Can you undelete...

• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Alice_in_Wonderland_(1903).ogv

... and move the .ogv and 3 .jpgs to .enWS for reasons outlined in the discussion? All the Pages: and Index: are currently broken back home and somehow went un-noticed for over a year now. TIA. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:40, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Undeleted and marked with {{fair use delete}} and we will see if the bot is fixed and will do as is advertised. We will need to keep an eye on it, as they may just delete it after the bot things that it has done its job.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:44, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Which three files? They aren't located in a category to make it easy to find them, nor linked to the ogv file.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:47, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

There are 3 jpgs listed further down in the delete discussion linked above. I assume they are stand-alone (derivative?) images used in the transcription of the work. The source being an .ogv file here, I can't say for sure until the Index: is restored and the transclusion is further inspected. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:03, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

That is all back. D'oh about the three files. I will look to do those manually, and this file manually as the fair delete tool is not working, and the hacker seems to have other priorities.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:56, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Kosovo Ombudsperson of Kosovo Sixth Annual report 2005–2006.pdf

 

Pay attention to licensing

Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content: images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. File:Kosovo Ombudsperson of Kosovo Sixth Annual report 2005–2006.pdf seems to be free (or it would be proposed for deletion), but it was identified as having a wrong license. Usually, it is because a public domain image is tagged with a free license, or because the stated source or other information is not sufficient to prove the selected tag is correct. Please verify that you applied the correct license tag for this file. If you believe this file has the correct license, please explain why on the file discussion page.

The reason given by the user who added this tag is: The Ombudsperson of Kosovo claims copyright over all material on their homepage. The Ombudsperson of Kosovo is not affiliated with the United Nations and hasn't been since 2006/2007 (it was progressively transferred from the UNMIK to Kosovo domestic control, thus PD-UN is not appropriate unless it can be shown that one of the three PD-UN categories applied at the time of publication

I didn't nominate for deletion because the copyright for a document from this body in 2007 is kind of grey. Sorry for templating you, it's just easier.User:Doug^{(talk • contribs)} 22:36, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Whatever Doug, I just transferred the beast from enWS from where it was labelled, nowt much else. #160;— billinghurst sDrewth 10:04, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Help: no-FoP Italy

Hi. When you have a moment, could you do me a favor. I decided to occupy my time to list the no-FoP files in Italy. It has been a long and difficult work that needs to be reviewed by administrators. Please, could you check if everything is correct on User:Raoli/Deletion requests/FoP Italy? Thanks! Raoli ✉ (talk) 23:19, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately I am time poor in that regard. I would suggest that if you have not found someone to review, that you then ask at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard. Apologies.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:57, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Ok :) --Raoli ✉ (talk) 00:35, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

I've added the whole discussion in the Administrators' noticeboard. Raoli ✉ (talk) 00:52, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Note to self - temporary restoration

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hurricane frances.png due to n:Talk:NOAA predicts increased hurricane activity in U.S.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:30, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

 Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:13, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

file rename

Hi there, I saw you're listed as an administrator that can rename files and I was wondering if you could help me rename one. --Turn685 (talk) 23:43, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Hopefully we have the process simplified. Use {{rename}} while picking the appropriate reason and the new filename. This will identify the file to administrators to be moved, and whomever is available will do it.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:44, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Opinion?

With your more global hat on do you have any opinion on this? Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:28, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes. Stalker! :-P  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:42, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Moving category "Unidentified plants from Gardenology.org"

Hi Billinghurst! Today I came across a problem caused by moving Category:Unidentified plants from Gardenology.org to Category:Unidentified plants at Huntington Gardens. Now many photos like File:Gardenology.org-IMG 0697 bbg09.jpg and File:Gardenology.org-IMG 2369 ucla09.jpg are categorized in that category and in Category:Plants at Huntington Gardens, which actually were taken in other gardens and which should be found in Category:Brooklyn Botanic Garden or Category:Mildred E. Mathias Botanical Garden. As far as I can see here, it was you, who ordered this move. Possibly not only photos from these both gardens are concerned, but Category:Plants at Huntington Gardens is extremely big and it is not easy get oriented. Maybe there is a possibility to move the concerned photos with a bot, as the file names contain combinations of letters referring to the garden: hunt = Huntington Gardens, bbg= Brooklyn Botanic Garden, ucla = Mildred E. Mathias Botanical Garden. Do you have an idea how to proceed? I suppose, several hundreds of photos will be necessary to move. Regards --Franz Xaver (talk) 14:17, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Yep, I ordered the bot to do it, from someone else's request. If they are wrongly categorised, just fix them, it is a wiki and categorisation is dynamic, so you can just remove that category. It was a while ago now, many other requests have been undertaken since, so my memory of the details is vague. If you can see a pattern, and need to split, then the place for a request is Commons:Bot requests and give them the category to manipulate and what you see as a solution.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:56, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I never have used a bot and I am not sure what they can do and what they can not. Is it possible to move all files from Category:Plants at Huntington Gardens that contain the letters "ucla" in the file name to Category:Mildred E. Mathias Botanical Garden? And in the same procedure, if applicable, change Category:Unidentified plants at Huntington Gardens to Category:Unidentified plants? (In a similar manner also files with "bbg".) I am not sure if this would work. Anyway, I would not change several hundreds of files by hand and browse through a category of more than 7000 photos in order to find them. --Franz Xaver (talk) 23:13, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I am not exactly time-rich, but on this occasion I will get it done. Splitting out

• ...bbg... to Category:Unidentified plants at Brooklyn Botanic Garden
• ...ucla... to Category:Unidentified plants at Mildred E. Mathias Botanical Garden
• ...rbgc... to Category:Unidentified plants at Royal Botanic Gardens, Cranbourne

Presumably there will be others, but will work with that initially. Happy for you to make other suggestions based on your investigation.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:12, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

 Done, remainder seem to be now correct.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:30, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks for the immense work you did. It was more than I had expected. As far as I can see, the bot (and you) worked for serveral hours on this stuff. Especially creating these three new categories instead of filling the files into Category:Unidentified plants is very welcome. However, I am sorry to say, that only half of the work has happened now. (I can understand, if you tell me now, that I should try to find someone else at Commons:Bots/Work requests.) As far as I see, you started from Category:Unidentified plants at Huntington Gardens, not from Category:Plants at Huntington Gardens. All the files were categorized in both categories. In the files at the first period of your work you changed only the first category to a new one, e.g. to Category:Unidentified plants at Mildred E. Mathias Botanical Garden, and left the latter category untouched, e.g. [2]. Of course this is incorrect, and also the Huntington category should be changed to the category of the respective garden, e.g. Category:Mildred E. Mathias Botanical Garden. The unidentified photos are placed in both categories, because they should remain categorized with the garden, when they get identified to species. In this case the "unidentified" category would be replaced by the species category - see [3]. Later you have changed both categories to a new one, e.g. [4]. This is correct for now, but also these photos additionally should have the category of the respective garden, as the category "Unidentified ..." is only temporary and will be changed when the plants on the photos are identified. (This latter task of adding a gardens category is not very urgent.) Moreover, there are some photos in Category:Plants at Huntington Gardens that are not in Category:Unidentified plants at Huntington Gardens, because they already are identified. Among them are some that came from gardens other than Huntington Gardens, e.g. the example I gave before: File:Gardenology.org-IMG 0697 bbg09.jpg. These probably are not too many and I will try to recategorize them by hand. Regards --Franz Xaver (talk) 13:16, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Damn, I had realised that when into the later batches, and I had meant to get back to them when they were finished. Running through the recategorised files now to remove the incorrect. To whether they should be in duplicate categories, well, I tend not to duplicate them.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:39, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

It's OK if you do not want to add a "duplicate" categories. Usually I myself also am not in favour of such. As long as everyone who identifies the plant on the photo adds a species category and changes the "Unidentified .." cat o the garden cat, this will work. However, I suppose that some visitors will only change the "Unidentified" cat to a species/genus cat and the garden gets lost. Anyway, at the moment there are not so many persons who try to identify plant photos. By the way, I already did the identified RBG Cranbourne photos from Category:Plants at Huntington Gardens. These were only few. --Franz Xaver (talk) 14:09, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for removing the rest of the wrong categorizations. Meanwhile I have done by hand the files from Category:Plants at Huntington Gardens that were not included in Category:Unidentified plants at Huntington Gardens because they already had been identified. Regards --Franz Xaver (talk) 22:04, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Kewl. Do note "catscan" tool via https://toolserver.org/~magnus/index.html which can identify category intersections like you did manually, oh and look at en:Wikipedia:Category_intersection  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:43, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

A little bit late but yet in time

Cheers. Almost 2 years ago you asked me to review the name of Sarchochilus fitzgeraldii. Sorry just saw your message now for I have been out of WP for a while. Indeed it should be Sarcochilus hartmannii, do you mind of renaming it for me? Thanks a lot for checking it. Dalton (talk) 20:44, 18 December 2012 (UTC)