Last modified on 16 January 2010, at 19:26

User talk:Multichill/Archives/2009/December

Return to "Multichill/Archives/2009/December" page.
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Thinking about category

As I said in my talk page, mixing those old pictures in the main category (for example: Bogor) can lead to a potentially confusing result. When people looking for images best representing Bogor, they have to sort through the masses of old stuff that they don't really care. Therefore I propose the old pics to be categorized to a subcategory, whatever it may be (Old pictures of Bogor, Black and white pictures of Bogor, etc). Really, I dont' want to see 2.287 pictures (as you suggested [1]) of b&w Indonesia in Category:Indonesia. Please think of this for a while before your bot & Siebrand's make any further edits. Let's invite other Indonesian Wikipedian first. What do you think? And since more and more volunteers are coming in, I dare to say that this is urgent. Bennylin (talk) 08:41, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

You're exactly describing categorization. Move some image to a general category and then sort out these category into different subcategory to keep it workable.
As for Category:Indonesia, I don't think these images will be in there for long because most images will end up in one or more subcategories and my bots will filter of the Over-categorization. Multichill (talk) 11:17, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Okay, that's for Category:Indonesia. How about Category:Bali that now has 1.718 pics, how did you plan to filter them if it doesn't have any temp category that's more specific? Could you combine category (Culture of Indonesia + Bali automatically Culture of Bali) with pybot? Thanks. Bennylin (talk) 15:54, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Maybe some automatic work, but I guess a lot has to be done by hand. Lot's of categories still need to be created. I just went over Category:Provinces of Indonesia. Maybe you could have a look at the lower level categories like cities/towns/villages? Multichill (talk) 20:44, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Is the Black & White category I mentioned above out of the question? My fear is that once they're moved to the main category, there won't be any method for bot to recategorize them. Bennylin (yes?) 14:24, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
It's not out of the question, but I just think we can find way better categories than that. Categories describing what you see in the image. This categorization process will require a couple of iterations. Multichill (talk) 18:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Excuse me

Excuse me for breathing! I was doing "something nice", some (as I thought) useful work, identifying Category:Unidentified Asteraceae, when I discovered five virtually identical images by this user, and several more sets of near duplicates, which it seemed pointless to go to the trouble of identifying and moving to another category. It also seemed pointless to leave them there cluttering up that page, wasting other people's time. I could have simply removed the category, but it seemed more valuable to bring it to someone's attention. I agree that Fale has uploaded lots of great images, and I've told him so, but I think that you are both missing the point. Have you looked at, for instance, the third 200 of his Category:Files by Fale, where there are 17 almost identical images. He's normally a reasonably good photographer, but these are all out of focus. He's uploaded 2,985 images (with lots of duplicates)! I'm just suggesting that he should be more selective, and choose only his best images to upload. Can you suggest a good use for 17 virtually identical blurry images within Wikipedia? "Move along" yourself. (I like the "Please be polite" guideline at the top of your page – doesn't it apply to you?) SiGarb (talk) 20:14, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what's up, but your comments to other users haven't been helping discussions. It's been degrading them, and not very mellow. Look, you're an extremely bright person who has helped this project extensively, but that doesn't give you a reason to be rude to people who may not know as much about Commons. Killiondude (talk) 21:29, 1 December 2009 (UTC) To be clear, that comment was directed towards Multichill. Threads on Wikimedia sites can be confusing sometimes as to where comments are directed, so I just wanted to clarify. Killiondude (talk) 21:32, 1 December 2009 (UTC)


Bot created categories

Hi, I just spotted, not been a regular on commons, that the BotMultichill has created lots of categories in Category:Towns and villages in the East Riding of Yorkshire. There is already a sub-category of this Category:Villages in the East Riding of Yorkshire which contains the rest of the categories, some are duplicated and some are under dabed name in one and undabed in the other. For example Category:Langtoft in Category:Villages in the East Riding of Yorkshire and Category:Langtoft, East Riding of Yorkshire in Category:Towns and villages in the East Riding of Yorkshire are for the same place. We really need to combine these somehow, retaining the bot added descriptions. Any thought on the best way to proceed? Keith D (talk) 00:19, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Keith D, thanks for your note. I thought I cleaned up all counties, but apparently not. I now put all the categories in Category:Towns and villages in the East Riding of Yorkshire. The dupes should be easy to spot. We prefer to disambiguate at Commons so the category with the longest name should be kept. The other category can be tagged with {{Move|<longer category>|Disambiguation/merge}}. Multichill (talk) 20:51, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Some of categories "by alphabet"

Category discussion notification Some of categories "by alphabet" has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

--ŠJů (talk) 08:17, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Left a comment over there. Multichill (talk) 20:41, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Internationalization

Hi Multichill, just wondering, what was the result on October 23 (see Template_talk:Information#Internationalization). -- User:Docu at 17:36, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Left a comment over there. Multichill (talk) 20:40, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

An observation...

...you've done a huge category move here and you haven't even bothered to consult someone that actually comes from England. We would never call it "Norfolk County". It's just "Norfolk". Fix this, please. :) Lewis Collard! (lol, internet) 23:03, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:Norfolk was tagged for more than two weeks and nobody bothered to comment. If you think the category should be renamed, tag it with {{Move}} please.
Oh, btw, some possible names:
What would be the best name in your opinion? Multichill (talk) 23:14, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
I think one of the latter two. Category:Norfolk, England might be better, since it's more specific. By the way, the Wikipedia article is simply Norfolk. Hugs, Lewis Collard! (lol, internet) 14:39, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
✓ Done. Multichill (talk) 15:08, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Username change

I would like to change my Username from B Pohlmann to Pohl 1 as I am being associated with the pictures I have uploaded for public use. Please advise.

See Commons:Changing username. --Leyo 07:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

File tagging File:Drukfout-voorbeeld-rd.jpg

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Drukfout-voorbeeld-rd.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

OSX (talkcontributions) 01:48, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

9point-barnstar.png The Everything Barnstar
For all the awesome bot, bot-like, and simply human activity at Commons! --AVRS (talk) 14:06, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Thank you very much AVRS! Multichill (talk) 15:33, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Merge?

Maybe all the deletion requests about Category:Palace of the Parliament should be merged.... Multichill (talk) 14:57, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Feel free, although I think a couple raise different issues from the others, so be careful. - Jmabel ! talk 18:22, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Swedish maps uploads

I asked around at #wikimedia-commmons for help with mass uploads and someone suggested your name. Just today I was made aware that the Stockholm University Library has made very high quality scans of hundreds of maps of Sweden from their archives and made them available for downloading at the following site:

http://kartavdelningen.sub.su.se/kartrummet/kartskapet.htm

I have personally talked to one of those behind the project, Stefan Ene, who was very positive to the idea of getting these maps uploaded to Commons. Since I don't feel computer-savvy enough to handle the mass-uploading, do you think you could be of assistance in this matter?

sincerely,
Peter Isotalo 17:10, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Looks very good Peter! Of course I can be of assistance. Maybe you could drop by in #wikimedia-commmons again so we can discus it? Multichill (talk) 17:19, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
I started a thread to verify the copyright status of the maps here. I'll dorp by IRC later when I get home.
Peter Isotalo 10:42, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Molotov, Stalin and Voroshilov, 1937.jpg

Bot is adding date to {{Delete}} for 3rd time. Please take a look. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:45, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Embarrassing

While a little engaged in looking for obscure categories- I detected a error message that was following me round- so I spoke to Lupo: who suggested that I should contact yourself. I do hope I am not entering a turf war! Here is the posting and reply. But the geograph issue is far more urgent.

A trail of Errors/searchable features

Several thousand edits down the road, I have noticed this error message on pages I have hotcatted on Commons. (Firefox 3.5.5/Ubuntu 9.10)

ReferenceError: addLink is not defined
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Populate-category.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&dontcountme=s (33)

say Category:Kinder Scout Several questions.

  • Causal link?
  • Why?
  • A fix?
  • A bot to fix the damaged pages which appear to work well?

--ClemRutter (talk) 11:37, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

This has got nothing whatsoever to do with HotCat. Ask the author of MediaWiki:Populate-category.js, User:Multichill, about it. I suspect the call to addLink should actually be a call to addPortletLink. Lupo 12:34, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

User-specific cats

Hey. Is there a bot or something that can automatically add user-specific categories to somebody's uploads? Or does it have to be done manually? Thanks, –Juliancolton | Talk 01:40, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

No bot that I'm aware of. Shouldn't too hard though. Just make a list of someones uploads (toolserver query) and have a bot add a user category. Multichill (talk) 13:17, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

BotMultichill is malfunctioning

Hi Multichill, please take a look at this history, showing how your bot continually adds new dates to a {{delete}} template -- now for the ninth time. Cheers, AFBorchert (talk) 22:39, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

I've just blocked your bot as this is not a singular case. Cheers, AFBorchert (talk) 22:43, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Damn, don't be so isn't someone trigger happy. I was working on fixing it, but screw this, let someone else clean up this mess. Multichill (talk) 23:06, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi Multichill, please feel free to unblock your bot as soon as this issue has been fixed. As this was already going on for days (see notice above by EugeneZelenko) and I didn't knew when you will have time to fix it, it seemed best to me to suspend the bot's activity. Cheers, AFBorchert (talk) 23:15, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
The mess was caused by the transclusion of the DR of {{PLoS}}. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 23:51, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
And by some other transcluded DR's in templates. Also the redirect of {{ffd}} is causing a problem. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 11:50, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:Architectural details

I am also confused by your deletion of Category:Architectural details. Your bot moved one of my images taken in Massachusetts, USA to Category:Architectural elements of the Zwinger, Dresden (diff). Checking that category, there now appear to be others images, such as File:Griffins Bas Relief at the London Guarantee Building (Chicago, IL).jpg which are also not taken in Germany. Is there now any alternative general category for architectural elements? Update: Ok I have found Category:Architectural elements, but images should still not have been moved from a general category to a specific category relating to one building in Dresden. Fletcher6 (talk) 17:53, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

This category was a mess. In dutch we would call it a "vergaarbak" (look that up in Google Translate ;-) ). Anyway, still need to sort it out. Care to help? Multichill (talk) 21:35, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I removed everything out of place from the Zwinger Dresden category and tried to add at least somewhat better categories for them. Fletcher6 (talk) 23:59, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Thank you! Multichill (talk) 13:16, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Unnecessary complaint about lack of categories

Your bot complained in September 2008 that this picture needs a category. But it already has a category, always had, so could you please fix your bot and remove the complaint from pictures in that category? --LA2 (talk) 10:47, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

You shouldn't use license templates to add topic categories. Multichill (talk) 13:18, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Disruption

See my comment here. Frankly, I find such behaviour not acceptable. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 12:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Pieter van der Heyden 004.jpg

Hallo Multichill, ik richt me even aan jou als beheerder. Ik probeer een transcriptie toe te voegen van de tekst in deze prent. Maar dit wordt me onmogelijk gemaakt omdat deze het woord "cock" bevat. Hoe kan ik dit probleem omzeilen? Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 16:27, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Resolved
iemand heeft het probleem inmiddels opgelost. Mvg, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 12:24, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


File:Icoonklaarland.jpg

http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bestand:Icoonklaarland.jpg

Beschrijving Icoonklaarland.jpg Nederlands: De icoon van Onze-Lieve-Vrouw van Klaarland Italiano: Icona di Nostra Signora di Klaarland English: The icon of Our Lady of Klaarland

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.20.28.32 (talk • contribs) 12:51, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Ja, probeer maar eens hier. Multichill (talk) 12:02, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Geograph

Only bunnies are allowed to hop here

Hi Multichill. Thanks for your message. I have tried to use http://toolserver.org/~magnus/geograph_org2commons.php on several occasions, but have not been able to get it to recognise my TUSC account. However, have tried again and, this time, it's worked! Don't know why, cause I've not done anything different from the other umpteen tries I've had. Now that it's finally working, will certainly make things a hell of a lot easier! Skinsmoke (talk) 15:50, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

See User talk:Skinsmoke#Geograph images. Please don't hop talk pages. Multichill (talk) 15:57, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

File:TruchetVlakvullingbol.jpg

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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Kenmayer (talk) 17:50, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry about nominating this file for deletion.

I'm afraid I didn't understand your comment here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:TruchetVlakvullingbol.jpg

Keep In use, in scope, please check this before you nominate anything for deletion. Multichill (talk) 18:11, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

What does this mean here? I'm not being sarcastic. I just want to follow your advice. --Kenmayer (talk) 17:18, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

You nominated the picture as being outside of the project scope. This policy is described at Commons:Project scope. The fact that the image is in use makes it in scope, see here. You can check usage with this tool. Multichill (talk) 17:22, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!--Kenmayer (talk) 14:36, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Bot created categories reloaded

See Commons:Village pump #Indonesian disaster. -- Greetings Hämbörger (talk) 09:32, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Replied there. Multichill (talk) 21:23, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

uploads from geograph

Please see User_talk:MGA73#Bot2 - the question for you is - will the upload be able to categorise down to County level? This would be extrememly helpful it it did.Shortfatlad (talk) 21:18, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Replied there. Multichill (talk) 21:23, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Files still awaiting OTRS confirmation

My bot left this on you AWB account's talk page by mistake, so you'll probably need to log into it manually before your AWB will work again. Sorry about that, it seems the bot doesn't recognize redirects. Hersfold (talk/work) 09:50, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello, MultichillAWB. The file(s) listed below have been marked with {{OTRS received}}, but there has been no complete confirmation of its permission status in the last 30 days. From what I'm able to tell, you were the person who added this template. Would you mind taking a look at this again? If confirmation cannot be found, this file should probably be marked for deletion. This should be the only notification you will receive regarding this image, so long as the comment I added to the image description page is not altered. Thanks! HersfoldOTRSBot(talk/opt out) 09:16, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

If you are not an OTRS volunteer or did not add the "received" template to this file, it's possible I made a mistake identifying the correct user. I look for the most recent diff where the template was added, so if you reverted an edit where this template was removed, I can't tell the difference. If this is the case, please let my operator know at w:en:User talk:Hersfold. Sorry for the inconvenience!

The file(s) in question are:

I uploaded all these files. The problem I currently have with getting an permission is this: KRG.org uses a lot of images from Reuters,AFP and other news agency's. These are copyrighted and can't be used. However KRG.org also has a lot of pictures that is theirs. We are allowed to use these. The site-owner says that if I send him an email asking for permission he will send me one back granting me permission. But the email has to be set up in such a way that it excludes copyrighted images. Can someone give me an example? WP:BRP doesn't have any. ~ Zirguezi 23:35, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Wel heel veel tekst bij category

Multichill, ik zag bij Category:Cork (city) die je hebt gemaakt wel een heel erg lange lijst van tekst in alle talen. Naar mijn mening zou de bot alleen de Engelse tekst moeten gebruiken en - als de bot dat kan onderscheiden - ook de taal van het land waar het onderwerp op van toepassing is (voor zover dat relevant is). De functie van de tekst bij de categorie zie ik in eerste instantie als hulp voor de gebruiker zodat die weet waar de categorie over gaat. Bijvoorbeeld zoals bij Category:Cork dat men weet dat die niet voor kurk bedoeld is. Alle interwikilinks vind ik prima. Wouter (talk) 10:08, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Nee, ik vind dat de beschrijving er in zoveel mogelijk talen op moet zitten. Om te voorkomen dat het zo'n lap tekst wordt gebruik ik vaak {{Multilingual description}}. Goed dat je het zegt, ik zal Magnus meteen even vragen of hij dat sjabloon kan gaan gebruiken in sumitup. Multichill (talk) 11:10, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Dat is een goed idee! Wanneer het werkt hoor ik het graag. Wouter (talk) 15:09, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Goed initiatief. Bij voorkeur zou de tekst enkel in het Engels, in de gebruikerstaal en in de landstaal van de item moeten getoond worden. Een beetje veel gevraagd misschien, vooral het laatste (tenzij dat het systematisch als eerste op de lijst gezet zou kunnen worden). --Foroa (talk) 15:17, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Zie User:Multichill/monobook.css hoe ik een beetje met de instellingen aan het spelen ben. Multichill (talk) 16:05, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Ter informatie. Ik heb het eens geprobeerd bij Category:Bezirk Deutschlandsberg met {{Multilingual description}} en sumitup en een "platte" tekst verwerker. Copy/paste werkt niet - zoals ik al eerder bij andere Commons aangelegenheden heb gemerkt - omdat kennelijk bepaalde (onzichtbare) karakters via de platte tekst niet goed worden meegenomen. Zelfs wanneer ik alle japanse, russische, etc teksten heb weggelaten. Het resultaat is dat totaal niets van het gekopieerde via de preview te zien is. Wouter (talk) 19:27, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Ik had nergens last van. Inhoud van sum-it-up erin. Wat haakjes anders gezet en het werkt meteen. Multichill (talk) 19:34, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Heb je daarbij uitsluitend gebruik gemaakt van browersvelden bij de copy/paste en edits of heb je gebruik gemaakt van een aparte editor waarin je de sum-it-up gegevens hebt gekopieerd en daar find/replace. Dat laatste werkte bij mij dus niet. Ik ga het in ieder geval proberen door binnen de browser velden te blijven. Het is een elegante manier om compact informatie voor de gebruiker te presenteren.Wouter (talk) 21:00, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Gewoon in de browser search and replace. Ik vermoed dat je editor niet overweg kan met UTF-8/unicode. Multichill (talk) 21:02, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Via de brower gaat het goed. Handmatig controleren is wel nodig want wanneer er voor de eerste regel een plaatje is gegeven wordt daarvan een stuk van de tekst gebruikt. Bijvoorbeeld van [[Datoteka:Deutschlandsberg im Bezirk DL.png|Položaj grada Deutschlandsberg u okrugu Deutschlandsberg|300px|thumb]] het gedeelte Položaj grada Deutschlandsberg u okrugu Deutschlandsberg|300px|thumb]]. Wouter (talk) 21:50, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Bug bij {{Multilingual description}}

Ik heb gebruik gemaakt van "sum-it-up" bij Category:Gevelsberg. Het blijkt dat daar ook de taal Nedersaksisch wordt vermeld zonder omschrijving. In de links is er geen naar Nedersaksisch (nds-nl). Een directe kopie van sum-it-up geeft een juiste weergave van al de talen. Het is bij gebruik making van {{Multilingual description}} dat het probleem optreedt. Enkel wanneer ik Plattdüütsch (nds) geheel weglaat, komt de vermelding Nedersaksisch niet meer voor. Weet jij een oplossing? Wouter (talk) 13:28, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Ja, zou nu moeten werken. Multichill (talk) 13:31, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Bedankt, dat was snel! Wouter (talk) 13:50, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Template:ID-USMil

Hi Multichill. I finally had enough time to care about the language subpages for Template:ID-USMil. The problem is that I don't have an idea so far how an issue could be fixed. I created Template:ID-USMil/layout so that you don't have to write the same code (colours etc.) over and over again. {{{fail-text}}} is section where the 'You have forgotten to include an ID'-message should be included and which should be displayed if you haven't entered an ID. That message would also get included on the main page if you use {{Autotranslate}}. Any ideas how to change that?
I don't created a */doc subpage, because I think */doc is not flexible enough. I created Template:ID-USMil/info/lang instead which shows all the information you need or might be interested in. I just didn't found the right place for Template:ID-USMil/info/lang. Right now I placed it at the bottom of the page but that doesn't look really good. I thought about a small box (on the right side) below the "Usage" headline just like en:Template:Commons where the languages could be selected from the box. I also thought about a small box which says "Display this page in: Deutsch, English, italiano, {{#language:whatever}}". I would use a link to Template:ID-USMil?uselang=lang for that purpose.
Off the topic: How did you include User talk:Multichill/Editnotice on your userpage when you edit it?
regards --D-Kuru (talk) 05:54, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Just for the orange box --D-Kuru (talk) 10:38, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, converting templates is always difficult and I haven't come around to doing this. Multichill (talk) 11:25, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

Best wishes for the holiday season and the upcoming new year! –Juliancolton | Talk 01:12, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Breaking l10n'ed descriptions on Geograph images

This (a Geograph image) is curious:

{{cy|Injan Stêm Glynllifon}} {{en|Glynllifon Steam Engine}} became: {{en|1=Injan Stêm Glynllifon Steam Engine In the extensive estate workshops the steam engine has been restored and regularly operates.}}

The extra description text presumably came from Geograph.

Does this mean that already-localized descriptions in multiple languages are all overwritten when a fuller description is loaded from Geograph, then stored as one of those languages? Andy Dingley (talk) 09:27, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes. A lot of images weren't properly transfered from geograph (wrong license, wrong attribution, no location etc etc). I restored these descriptions based on the geograph database. That might cause a couple of translated descriptions to be overwritten. Multichill (talk) 09:32, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
If the bot does any more over-writing of well formed image descriptions, I would report it as with any other user problem for discussion. Snowmanradio (talk) 20:33, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
I pretty much cleaned up all crap. I am going to add location templates because some people don't seem to understand how to add these at upload right away. I don't understand why people don't just use the tool. Multichill (talk) 22:04, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
...Why does the bot not put the full stops between sentences. Snowmanradio (talk) 23:40, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
The bot? Which one? Multichill (talk) 23:43, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
The one named "BotMultichillT". Is it a bot? Snowmanradio (talk) 00:58, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Nog een bug bij {{Multilingual description}} ?

Multichill, ik krijg bij Category:Glove puppetry het gedeelte voor

Bân-lâm-gú: Pò·-tē-hì (布袋戲) ......

niet goed. Wordt het gedeelte |zh-min-nan=Pò·-tē-hì (布袋戲) door het template niet goed behandeld of heb ik ergens een typfout gemaakt? Wouter (talk) 12:34, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

New category for photographs from the G.R. Lambert & Co. photography studio

I see that your helpful bot is categorizing photographs from the KIT. Just wanted to let you know that I've created a new category called "Category:Photographs by the studio of G.R. Lambert & Co." that you might want to help populate. — Cheers, JackLee talk 15:17, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

geograph

I think that replacement of the existing image description should be more cautious than replacing every one with the geograph version. The bot copies points of view, external links, unreferenced material, and copies the whole lot even if it is not suitable for an encyclopaedia. The bot overwrites the image description that was specially manually written for the wiki at the time of the original transfer to the wiki. Please rethink this total overwrite of the previous image description. If the licences need checking, then why not do that and correct the licence. I welcome checking and correcting the image location template, but there is no need to change scores and scores of image descriptions. I think that a lot of repair work is needed in the wake of this bot. Snowmanradio (talk) 19:02, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately wrong license was not the only problem. Besides that: Missing and incorrect description, author, source, date or location. Multichill (talk) 22:09, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
  • All of the below have the correct details and a well written image description except the geo-location coordinates were absent. Snowmanradio (talk) 23:37, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

I would ask that all the original image descriptions of all the hundreds of image descriptions overwritten are checked and revered if necessary. Snowmanradio (talk) 20:27, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to do so, this is a wiki. If you think the original of a certain image is better, feel free to change it. Multichill (talk) 22:09, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
I have found lots of errors in the new image descriptions and I think that it would be better if these errors were not copied from geograph in the first place. Snowmanradio (talk) 23:26, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
That's a shame. I scanned the list and it was full of mangled up pages like this one or this one. This is part of a cleaning effort to prepare everything for Commons:Batch uploading/Geograph. Multichill (talk) 23:42, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

The Bot is doing a great job- and getting the geograph database is an enormous prize, and edits can be remade. I only mention this concern so I can possibly prevent an embarrassing error. I have examples of poorly documented images with inaccurate Grid References on Geograph. For example File:Falcon Mill, Victoria Street, Chadderton - geograph.org.uk - 696671.jpg given as SD 910 055 when it is SD 911 057, which makes it impossible to expect an accurate georef- giving 53.54605870;-2.13729419 rather than 53.54785809;-2.13579081 but during the cleaning process I am concerned that some of the alterations to visually correct positions give a result suggesting that the Helmert transformation between OSGB and WSG84 has not taken place. If this is true, every geograph file uploaded will have a coordinate error, but as we have discovered it now it should be easy to program the bot to overwrite a correction as it is a mechanical process and the maths is known.

Using a sample of one file File:Osborne Mills, Chadderton 695142-by-Chris-Allen.jpg it looks as if the algorithm used to convert the OS reference is wrong- no Helmert conversion has been done. The latitude and longitude given wrongly uses OSGB36 as R Haworth used to do in his template {{Oscoor}} and not WSG84 which commons, wikipedia and GPS uses.

The clue is that the camera location SD913056 appears to be 112m out. On this image, the camera is clearly in field with a prominent path. This is a spot close to {-{Location dec|53.547503|-2.132168|heading:67}}(original). In cleaning this has been changed to {-{Location dec|53.547864|-2.130659|heading:67}} which is a point in the middle of a car park pointing away from the target. I wrote [OSTOWIKI] as a tool for geotagging. This was written to apply the Helmert conversion accurately- and using this with the grid reference SD913056 gives 53.54696265;-2.13276957. A rule of thumb- 4 decimal places gives an accuracy of -+ 7m. If we look at the -2.13276957 (mine) and -2.130659 (cleaned) this predicts a shift of 0.0021 1057 or approxiamately 147m very close to the 112m that a Helmert error would generate, and certainly over the 100m limit of accuracy claimed on Geograph.

If however the error was random, and the uploader had done a manual correction then information has been lost in the cleaning and a list of each file that had its coord changed would be helpful to manually correct back the changes. If the file has been wrongly referenced then we are shafted and can do nothing about it- but I cannot see a mechanical way to correct carelessness or stupidity.--ClemRutter (talk) 23:35, 25 December 2009 (UTC)b

I'm using two fields in the databaes, wgs84_lat and wgs84_long:
  • For 696671, wgs84_lat=53.547767 and wgs84_long=-2.137149
  • For 695142, wgs84_lat=53.547864 and wgs84_long=-2.130659
So I would expect these fields to be in the WSG84 format. Multichill (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
I think that I need to find a very dark corner, close my eyes and hope it all goes away! wgs84_lat=53.547864 and wgs84_long=-2.130659 does sound like a reliable indicator that they are using the WGS84 datum- it is annoying that it has got it wrong.
  • For 695142, wgs84_lat=53.547864 and wgs84_long=-2.130659- back converts to SD 91440 05700
  • The geograph description---with my conversions appended
Subject Location
OSGB36: geotagged! SD 914 057 [100m precision]---->WGS 53.54786315;-2.13126318
WGS84: 53:32.8718N 2:7.8396W ---->53.54786333334;-2.13066
Photographer Location
OSGB36: geotagged! SD 913 056---->WGS 53.54696265;-2.13276957 (Using google map and bookmarklet it is {-{location dec|53.5473|-2.1335}-}
View Direction
East-northeast (about 67 degrees)
The horrid truth seems to be that:
  • this coord relates to the subject location not the camera coord required on commons
  • Geograph software only works to 5 decimal places so introduces a cummulative transformation error (possibly of excess of 7m each conversion)
  • Some geograph contributors lack precision when filling in the upload form.
Thats my best shot using the data from one image I know. The correct 'photographer_wgs84_lat' and 'photographer_wgs84_long' could be generated from 'photographer_osgb36_gridref' if that is known. But there is no potential to do a less accurate linear correction as we are talking about different points. So I am looking for that darkened room! --ClemRutter (talk) 16:41, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Season's greetings

[w.] 23:28, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Your comment on the administrators' noticeboard

You are absolutely right with your comment here. But as long there are Users that take a shine to act like this, it will never end. Greets, High Contrast (talk) 15:10, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

File:WLANL_-_mchangsp_-_090626-110151_1482_50D.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:WLANL_-_mchangsp_-_090626-110151_1482_50D.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Avron (talk) 14:13, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


File:WLANL_-_mchangsp_-_090626-105929_1472_50D.jpg

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:WLANL_-_mchangsp_-_090626-105929_1472_50D.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Avron (talk) 14:18, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Timeline energy companies NL.png
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Timeline energy companies NL.png, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.