User talk:Siebrand/Archive03

Banknotes

I've receive your notification requesting deletion of the banknotes i just uploaded. You say that maybe they are incorrect licensed. Well, i really don't know. Maybe i misundestanding the licenses but as far as i know that was a photo; i took the PHOTO and i am releasing the license of using THAT photo, so: ¿can you indicate me what is the correct license for that pictures instead of marking all of them for deletion????? thanks. --Jyon 16:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I just looking similar banknotes like this, that have GDFL license; that are wrong too??? it was posted two years ago and anybody says anything. Thanks. --Jyon 16:13, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Jyon, you cannot license something only because you are the author of a derivative work. There is also an original author or copyright owner (the bank that printed the bank note). You shold provide clarity on the copyright status for that copyright holder also. See Commons:Licensing for all the details. Siebrand 17:45, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Of course i know i can't own a copyrighted bill and then release the rights; i just only want to know why other banknotes images has GDFL license and what else i can choose. thanks. --Jyon 13:32, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

As far as I know, there is nothing you can choose that falls within our licensing policy. You could ask in Commons:Village Pump, because I know very little outside basic US and Dutch licenses. Siebrand 14:07, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely not a copyvio

Image:Norvegia 142.jpg was shot by me. Maybe it was the site which copied it. Bye and good work. --Attilios 22:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Attilios, see Commons:Derivative works. Mr. Vigeland's sculptures are protected by copyright until 2012, and Norway has only a noncommercial freedom of panorama. Your photo is therefore not a copyvio, but nevertheless against policy. I will delete it. Kjetil_r 23:04, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Delmerensmolen

Wat heb je in vredesnaam hier uitgespookt Image:Delmerensmolen.JPG ?? Misschien ligt het aan mij, maar daar zie ik alvast geen MOLEN in ? Dit daarentegen nl:Afbeelding:Delmerensmolen.jpg lijkt me WEL een molen? Wat is dat schoolgebouw dan ? --LimoWreck 18:36, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Ik heb de afbeelding verplaatst zoals die op nl.wp onder de naam nl:Afbeelding:P1010041.JPG (logboek) bekend was en met de bij de afbeelding aanwezige beschijving. Ik vermoed dat Delmerensmolen de naam van een wijk of iets dergelijks is... Je zou uitleg kunnen vragen aan de uploader. P.s. ligt het aan hoe ik je vraag lees of was het je intentie me agressief te benaderen? Siebrand 20:54, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/COP Banknote images (2007-03-02)

Hi, I merged your 18 deletion requests to one page. --Cat ^Chi? 22:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

• eek* That was a lot of work... Thanks. Siebrand 22:10, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Blokkendoos.jpg

Hey, I was wondering why that image shouldn't have been moved to commons. Also, would it be possible to make an adaptation of your bot for the Hebrew Wikipedia and how exactly does it check itself\choose which files to transfer, etc. Thanks, Yonatanh 14:18, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Yonatanh, the image should not have been moved because of insufficient source info. Because I'm uploading with the bot, I do miss some information now. Thus some of the uploaded images should be deleted again. As for the bot: it will probably be public. User:Orgullomoore and I are working on it. Have a little patience while we work out the quirks. I'll keep you posted. Siebrand 14:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Sure thing, thanks for the quick response. Yonatanh 14:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

CommonsHelper

Hello, what it is CommonsHelper? --Snek01 19:27, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

CommonsHelper is a tool that helps you retain all required information when transferring an image from another Wikimedia wiki to Wikimedia Commons. Siebrand 19:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Do you what is in number 3 at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Magnus_Manske/Commonshelper_interface/Help_en ? --Snek01 20:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

You mean the screenshot? It does not appear to work, but it's just a bunch of wiki text that'll be the image description on Commons... Or did you mean something else? Siebrand 21:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

blok

Sorry voor de omslachtige manier van communicatie, maar zou je mij (Phidias) even kunnen de-blokkeren op nl.wiki. Galwaygirl heeft per ongeluk een verkeerde blokkade gedaan op het ip-adres van 't unief. Ik heb ook een mail gestuurd naar de nl.wiki mailcentrale. Groet - PhidiasNL 22:59, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Ik heb niet zo vaak met dit soort dingen te maken. Volgens mij heb ik ook je IP-adres nodig. Kan je me dat geven (als de IP-blokkade niet al verlopen is)? Siebrand 06:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

welcome.py

Hi, i'm an italian user of Wikipedia and i've heard that you have written a script to welcome the new users. We also use another one script, now fixed and upgraded by me, and i would like to see your script to mix them togheter in a better and useful script :) You can find the italian version hear. Our script put another template if the nick has a badword that is in one of 3 list (elencoaf, elencogz and elencovarie). Now i have only an italian versione but if you are interested i could translate it also in english :) (but i would like to see your script before :D ) Bye, Filnik P.S. This version has only 2 bad words (because it only explains the code)

Hi, I did not write the script, User:Orgullomoore wrote it and I'm just running it unmodified. I run a slightly modified version on the Dutch Wikipedia. PLease drop me an e-mail and I'll include both versions of the script. Cheers! Siebrand 17:15, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

nowcommons

Afbeeldingen verplaatsen naar commons, allemaal goed en wel, maar dan wat zorgvuldiger zijn met de categorieën graag ? --LimoWreck 22:34, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Hoi Limo, op nl.wp hebben de afbeeldingen geen enkele cat. De cats worden met CommonsHelper automatisch toegewezen. Als er geen cats zijn, worden ze toegewezen aan Category:Files moved from nl.wikipedia to Commons requiring review. CommonsHelper gebruikt CommonSense voor de categorieselectie. Dat is niet altijd even goed (vaak grof), maar veel beter dan niets, het alternatief. Als je wilt kan je af en toe wat afbeeldingen sorteren als je ze tegenkomt en ze op de verkeerde of een te hoge plaats in de boomstructuur staan... Groet, Siebrand 22:41, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Soms heel grof, soms ontbrekend, soms zelfs dubbelop... Zo commonsense is het blijkbaar niet ;-) In elk geval, dat ze in een aparte categorie terechtkomen is alvast uitstekend, dat verhindert inderdaad dat ze verdwijnen in het niets op commons. --LimoWreck 23:34, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Afbeedlingsbeschrijveningen als template:afbeeldinginfo zijn niet meteen verhelderend: graag ook zo'n gevallen opvangen; ik weet niet of er bij veel afbeeldingen zo info is weggegooid; anders moet dat toch gewoon kunnen overgenomen wordne ? [1] (of kan de bot daar nog geen weg mee, en moet dat manueel gecorrigeerd worden?) --LimoWreck 21:40, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Alle info wordt overgenomen, maar mogelijk niet juist weergegeven. Ik zal kijken of ik dat sjabloon hier kan aanmaken en vermoed dat alles dan in orde is. Handmatig corrigeren kan altijd en heeft de voorkeur. Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Afbeeldinginfo geeft een lijst met media waar het sjabloon wordt gebruikt. Siebrand 22:50, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Ik heb het sjabloon aangemaakt zoals het op nl.wp bestaat. Information staat nu in Information. Niet helemaal ideaal, maar in ieder geval wordt alle inforatie weergegeven. Siebrand 22:54, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

't is inderdaad dubbelop, maar 't is alleszins netjes leesbaar nu wat de beschrijving is. Een toevallig voorbijganger kan het wel eens aanpassen dan; maar dat zijn slechts esthetische detailtjes nu ;-) --LimoWreck 22:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Yep. Had je die javascriptreut voor in je monobook.js nog bekeken? ERG handig, in het bijzonder voor {{Delete}}-nominaties: 4 edits met 1 klik en een zinnetje invullen. Siebrand 22:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Flag of the Byzantine Empire.svg

Hi, which aspect ratio is correct for this flag? --F l a n k e r 10:22, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I do not know :( I simply observed that they differed and thus the superseded that cannot be correct. I'm sorry I cannot help you further with this... Cheers! Siebrand 10:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the fix, Flanker! Siebrand 12:56, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Re:Image Tagging Image:Niuhuru_Empress_Xiao_Quan_Cheng.jpg

This image is from the english Wikipedia, show you the site[2]. I'm from China, and my english isn't very well.Can you speak Chinese?——蘇州宇文宙武 10:27, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I do not speak, read or write any Chinese language. Please look at Commons:許可協議 for an explanation of how to license. Thanks, Siebrand 10:29, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

see "The two-dimensional work of art depicted in this image is in the public domain in the United States and in those countries with a copyright term of life of the author plus 100 years. This photograph of the work is also in the public domain in the United States (see Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp.)." (from english Wikipedia) You can talk to me in User talk:蘇州宇文宙武——蘇州宇文宙武 10:33, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I see that. I however see nowhere when the work of art was created. Name a year, century, or whatever, and a source so this could be verified. Siebrand 10:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

You meant that this image in the english Wikipedia also has to be verified, but it hasn't. In your opinion it also has to be deleted, but why not yet? So, how will you deal with it? Delete it?——蘇州宇文宙武 11:04, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I am not familiar with the deletion procedures on en.wp. I only know that with the information provided, the image cannot be accepted here on Commons. Another wiki of Wikimedia cannot be named as valid source for other things than own work. Siebrand 11:05, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

If I can find out the author of this image(of course he died a long time ago), does it mean that this image won't need to be deleted?--蘇州宇文宙武 12:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

PS:I've found that this image Image:Tongzhi.jpg also has to be deleted because its author wasn't right. It says that its author is 敬庄, but this man didn't exist. So the person who upload it lies. If I lie like him/her, the image I upload doesn't need to be deleted, is this the rule in the Commons?--蘇州宇文宙武 12:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure you are not lying :-). You require dating and a proper source before you can tag something PD-old. As long as that information is missing, the image is not allowed here. I'm sorry, that's just how it is... Siebrand 12:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

So, Image:Tongzhi.jpg also has to be deleted.--蘇州宇文宙武 13:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

And I have to tell you that there're many Chinese artists that we can't find their names as the author of the image I uploaded, but they also died for more than 100y. Can we use their works in the Commons?--蘇州宇文宙武 13:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

You can also see Image:升仙太子碑拓片局部.jpg. That image is my work and someone copy it from the chinese Wikipedia, is this allowed?——蘇州宇文宙武 10:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

It depends. If the image has a free license and all source information was taken from the original location, it definately is. You can use CommonsHelper to transfer all relevant information. Siebrand 10:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Detail Guernica.jpg

Pay attention to copyright

Image:Detail Guernica.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation. The Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk. The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this image is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the image description page.

You might want to notify Wasily about this; unfortunately, I do not speak Dutch. grendel|khan 20:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Should have seen this before copying. Thanks for noticing. Siebrand 21:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

images deleted by ALE!

I am very sorry about that. I always replaced all usages before deletion. But is seems, that the check usage service now only displays usages in articles by default. I was not aware of that. Concerning the universal replace bot, I think that you refer to Orgullobot. That bot does not replace PNGs with SVGs for the moment. Unfortunately! Sorry for the hassle. I will try that this does not happen again! --ALE! ¿…? 09:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Siebrand 09:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Question

I'm curios to know why the bot included Image:Hadash.JPG in Category:Jerusalem - am I missing something here? Daniel Tzvi 12:01, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

It is using CommonsHelper to transfer information from the source wiki which is using CommonSense to suggest categories. Ik think this was written by User:Duesentrieb. I know it's not perfect, but at least the new images are noticed :-). If you see it, please fix it. I also know that it tends to categorise in categories close to the top, which is still better than no categorisation at all... I guess the image is somewhere related to Jerusalem on nl.wp, which is why that category was chosen (see nl:Image:Hadash.JPG) Cheers! Siebrand 14:22, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, in the meanwhile, somebody else already moved it to Category:Politics of Israel, so all's well. I can only assume that the bot put it the jerusalem category because the Knesset is situated in Jerusalem, but who knows what goes on the minds of bots? Daniel Tzvi 20:10, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, they tend to have a mind of their own :-) Siebrand 20:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I moved it after seeing the discussion here (I'm Yonatanh on the Hebrew Wikipedia). ;) Yonatan ^talk 21:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

image transfer from other Wikipedias

Hey Siebrand! Do you accept requests to transfer images (sets with some hundred pictures by one user) from other Wikipedias than nl.wp to Commons? Regards, --Polarlys 22:01, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Yep, if you place them in a category on that Wikipedia and are completely sure that the images have complete copyright info. I need to know what your "NowCommons" template looks like ({{NowCommons}} would be convenient). If I do not have to check for copyright and such, it can be done very quickly. Siebrand 22:05, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

P.s. if you know something about bots, I could also email you the bot. It's not really hard to adapt it to your specifications; I could guide you using IRC or Skype. Siebrand 22:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

You’ve got mail :-) --Polarlys 22:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

So do you. Please start slowly. Once you get how the bot works, keep on clicking :-) Siebrand 22:35, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Merano-Stemma.png

Hey, I was replacing this image with Image:Meran CoA.png using checkusage and saw it's used on nl. It's used in a template that uses File:Italian Municipality Name-Stemma.png so it's a bit of a problem for me to replace it there. I was wondering if you could do it for me. Thanks in advance, Yonatan ^talk 08:54, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, these images appear to be duplicates where the image you want to replace is older than the CoA image. Why do that? It appears to me that the new image can be speedy deleted using {{Badname}}. There are literally hundreds of images named Italian_Municipality_Name-Stemma.png. Siebrand 09:06, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I dunno, User:Gryffindor decided to rename it for some reason, I was just replacing all images in orgullobot's list. Yonatan ^talk 18:39, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, please look into it closer, because I suspect that he may be pushing something that is not needed. "CoA" is also not by the naming convention of Image:Coat of arms of ???.ext. Siebrand 20:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Foto's van fototwebwolf

Misschien kun jij even reageren op Commons:De_Kroeg#foto.27s_naar_publiek_domein? Jij bent hier iets beter bekend dan mij (foto's in de aanbieding). --Hardscarf 10:03, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:BSicon xSTBdr mod.svg

Je hebt Image:BSicon xSTBdr mod.svg naar commons: verplaatst, maar dat was niet de bedoeling (staat ook in de omschrijving), de naam is n.l. niet juist. En ik weet niet goed hoe ik 'm kan laten verwijderen... - Erik Baas 21:53, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Upload het bestand onder een andere naam en plak op het bovenstaande {{badname|NieuweNaam.ext}}. Siebrand 22:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, dank je, zal ik doen zodra duidelijk is wat de naam moet zijn. - Erik Baas 00:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Source information?

Since when do we require source information for pictures not copyrighted, or not copyrighted anymore?[3]--Rtc 12:48, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

We require source information for any image. Siebrand 12:49, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Nonsense. --Rtc 12:50, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

OMG! How so? Siebrand 12:55, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

source information has never been required for PD-old and PD-ineligible pictures, and it's irrelevant there. Don't be a dork. --Rtc 13:04, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

This is nonsense. And please take back your accusation that I would be trolling. Siebrand 13:05, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

that is not nonsense, and in any case it is no reason for deletion in this case. What you do is tolling. I don't know the soruce for these pictures and I there is really more important work to do than to research it, because it is simply completely irrelevant. --Rtc 13:08, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

a troll is someone who posts derogatory or otherwise inflammatory messages about sensitive topics in an established online community such as an online discussion forum to bait users into responding. If the source and author of an image is unknown, it should be deleted. I find your manner of discussing and adding accusations like trolling utterly uncivil. Siebrand 13:11, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

%$//(&/(§$§%%&(())) --Rtc 13:21, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Could you please elaborate? My %$ is quite sluggish :-). Siebrand 13:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

You have well understood what I was saying. --Rtc 13:25, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Please do not assume. I have no idea what you are are thinking, either. Kind regards, Siebrand 13:28, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

About TV_Chile.jpg

Hi: I'd saw your message about the TV_Chile.jpg image I'd uploaded this morning. According to the chilean law N° 17.336, article 88, we can use the TV Chile logo because it's the TV Logo from he government chilean channel. That's the reson why i'd changed the copyright to PD-Chile, adding tv-logo too.

Actually, we're using the TV Chile logo for the TV Chile Wikipedia page: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_Chile

Thanks a lot for reading this message,

Anselmo

Image:Creation of Light.png

Hallo Siebrand, das betreffende Bild ist von Gustave Doré, der 1883 gestorben ist. Es ist daher gemeinfrei. Woher der Scan des Bildes stammt, ist unwichtig, da es sich um ein zweidimensionales Objekt handelt, dessen Reproduktion (anders als bei dreidimensionalen) nicht urherrechtlich geschützt ist. Es besteht absolut kein Grund, dieses Bild zu löschen, es fehlen auch keine Informationen auf der Bildbeschreibungsseite. Gruß, Rainer ... 16:05, 26 March 2007 (UTC) (Hoffe, es ist ok, dass ich auf Deutsch schrieb.)

Writing in German is fine, just as long as I'm not required to answer in it, as my English is a lot better :-). In my opinion all images should be sourced, as they have an origin. Photographs of paintings to which copyrights no longer apply get credibility from the source. Not making an effort to name the proper source, especially in recent uploads, reduces the credibility of the image, the alledged facts that accompany it and will, if in high enough volume, eventually damage the credibility of the Commons as a whole. Thus we should not accept them. Siebrand 16:36, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, you are wrong. Da mein Englisch wiederum beim Antworten schlechter ist, bleibe ich beim Deutschen. Geht ja auch gemischt.

Die relevante Quelle für das Bild (und vergleichbare) ist Doré. Natürlich hat das jemand irgenwann abfotografiert oder eingescannt, das spielt aber rechtlich keine Rolle. Vermutlich wurde auch kein Original eingescannt, sondern eine Reproduktion aus einem Buch. Auch das ist unwichtig, außer in technischer Hinsicht. Bei Reproduktionen zweidimensionaler Werke, deren Urheber seit 70 Jahren tot sind, besteht definitiv keine Pflicht weitere Quellen zu nennen als den ursprünglichen Autor. Nicht in der Wikipedia bzw. in Commons und auch sonst nirgendwo. Deine Sorgen sind unbegründet. Gruß, Rainer ... 17:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I do worry, and time will tell. Thanks for your explanations. Siebrand 17:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, I'm sure. Rainer ... 17:52, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Cat rename request

Hoi Siebrand - ik maakte hier een categorie aan met de naam castles of Les Waleffes. Kan jij dat voor mij in het enkelvoud zetten? (castle dus). Groet Donderwolk 18:42, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Nope, hoeft niet. I.t.t. op nl.wp, hebben cats hier de meervoudsvorm. Helemaal goed, dus. Siebrand 18:43, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Albersminardi05.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Albersminardi05.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Morio 03:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

{{UWiscCIMSS}}

Hmm, why did you speedy tag everything using this template? If it is on COM:DEL, either close the debate speedily or keep the images until the regular closure. Either way is consistent, but to do both prejudices the debate and could lead to the loss of images (once in the speedy queue locating them will be a pain). I suggest you revert the noncommercial tagging and wait for the comdel to close on this..--Nilfanion 00:32, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Botcategorisatie (bis)

Sorry van mijn "genuanceerde" (ahum) bewerkingscommentaar [4], maar de bot (of hoe werkt het ook al weer?) maakt er écht wel vaak een soepje van (en niet enkel jouw bot trouwens, sommige waren een tijd terug blijkbaar al door anderen - maar al even onnauwkeurig helaas - gedaan). Een Belgische duin blijkt opeens in Nederland te liggen? Ik heb de voorbije dagen eens opkuis gehouden in de Belgische rivieren, en daar bleek het met overgezette foto's eveneens schering en inslag. Sommige foto's plots in een stad 30 km verderop te liggen - of in een ander land -. Kan dat echter niet beter afgestemd worden; of als het niet kan, gewoon veel trager overgezet naar commons. Nu gebeurt het domweg en komt allerhande info compleet verkeerd terecht (een anonieme vandaal zou het zelfs niet beter kunnen) - bij trager tempo kan eventueel meer handmatig gecheckt werden aleer verder te gaan. Ik denk dat de afbeeldingen die nu op NL staan er heus wel tegen kunnen om een weekje of twee langer ginder te staan, aleer ze hier ingevuld kunnen worden; en komen ze misschien meteen goed terecht. --LimoWreck 22:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

CommonsHelper categoriseert m.b.v. CommonSense. Sneller of trager maakt niet uit, het moet toch gebeuren. Sneller zou zelfs voordeliger kunnen zijn, omdat je de hoofdcategorieen dan niet meerdere keren door moet lopen. 't Gaat zoals het gaat... Er blijven ook een paar duizend afbeeldingen over die in het geheel niet gecategoriseerd zijn, ofwel omdat ze op nl.wp niet gebruikt worden, ofwel omdat CommonSense er niets voor heeft kunnen vinden. Nadat ik het eigen werk heb overgezet (iets over de helft nu, ~8000 gedaan, 8000 te gaan), wil ik me daarmee bezighouden. Groet, Siebrand 22:57, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

P.s. n.a.v. [5]: Image:Geul 2.JPG wordt gebruikt op nl:Geul (rivier) en die zit in cat nl:Categorie:Rivier in België. Dat is een manier waarop CommonSense werkt. Hoe meer cats een artikel waarin de afbeelding wordt gebruikt heeft en hoe vaker de afbeelding wordt gebruikt in verschillende artikelen, hoe groter de kans dat er wat rommelig gecategoriseerd wordt... Wat betreft de edit die jij hierboven aanhaalt: een artikel waarin de afbeelding wordt gebruikt is gecategoriseerd in nl:Natuurgebied in Nederland. De computer doet gewoon wat hij logisch kan afleiden... Siebrand 23:03, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Flamingwater.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Flamingwater.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 image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Tjipke de Vries 14:38, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Naamgeving afbeelding

Hoi Siebrand,

Jij weet meer van Commons dan ik, dus vandaar mijn vraag... Ik heb mijn Image:FMRI-scan sectie 85.JPG toegevoegd aan Category:Wikipedians from the Netherlands. Net als op "nl:" heb ik daarachter "|Erik1980" gezet om mezelf op de juiste plek te krijgen, maar op de één of andere manier kom ik zelfs nog voor de A in de gallery terecht.

Is hernoemen van een afbeelding hier wél mogelijk? Ik ben -volgens mij- het oiginele bronbestand kwijt dus her-uploaden is geen optie... Dank voor je advies alvast!

Groetjes, Erik1980 23:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Hoi Erik, hernoemen is helaas niet mogelijk tot de programmacode voor afbeeldingen volledig is herschreven. Tot die tijd: opnieuw uploaden en de oude afbeelding {{duplicate|Image:NieuweNaam.ext}} taggen. Siebrand 06:06, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Malonne Bier.jpg

Pay attention to copyright

Image:Malonne Bier.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation. The Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk. The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this image is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the image description page.

Lokal_Profil 21:07, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Yep. I agree. Siebrand 22:39, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bandschuurmachine.jpg

Beste Siebrand, kijk eens naar de rest van de Category:Sander. :-) Dryke 11:35, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Categorisatie is volledig automagisch gedaan door CommonSense. Die wist waarschijnlijk niet dat er ook visjes zijn die zo heten :-) Siebrand 13:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Trolling

I just repeat what I read on Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Apulien in Italien.png. It's look like trolling but I don't look in details. Sorry, I'll be more caraful next time. 14:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Miscats

Beste Siebrand, ik merk bij het onderbrengen van afbeeldingen in een diepere cat dat ik nogal wat fouten van SieBot tegenkom. Er staan bijvoorbeeld in de Category:Churches in Amsterdam afbeeldingen die daar niet thuishoren, namelijk van kerkgebouwen in Vianen en IJsselstein. Van de week kwam ik ook afbeeldingen van kastelen in een cat van gemeentewapens (of vlaggen, daar wil ik af zijn) tegen. Is daar wat aan te doen? Fransvannes 21:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

HOi Frans, niet echt, zie ook mijn antwoord in het onderwerp Botcategorisatie (bis) hierboven. E.e.a. gebeurt automatisch en is zo goed als artikelen waarin de afbeelding wordt gebruikt, de categorieen waarin dat artikel zit en de interwikilinks die het artikel heeft (tenminste, dat zijn de factoren die ik als bepalend heb geobserveerd). Slechte categorisatie is wel hoe dan ook beter dan geen categorisatie, omdat een afbeelding zonder cats en beschrijving op Commons vrijwel reddeloos verloren is. Siebrand 06:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Auschwitz - fence.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Auschwitz - fence.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 image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Chmee2 12:36, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Cartoon 7224.gif

Pay attention to copyright

Image:Cartoon 7224.gif has been marked as a copyright violation. The Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk. The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this image is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the image description page.

Jnn 14:04, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Yep, appears to be a copyvio. Thanks for noticing. Siebrand 14:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Caracalla bust2.jpg

Hello! I noticed that this image is tagged {{PD-art}}, but it appears to depict a three-dimensional work. Do you have any information on the photographer and what license he/she released the photograph under? If not, can you please contact Josh (the original uploader) to inquire? Thank you! —David Levy 06:32, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi David, the file was uploaded with PD-old and no additional information. I guess it's got to go. Siebrand 08:25, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

It appears so. I see that Josh has uploaded several images that have been deleted because of copyright violations (though I assume that these stemmed from honest misunderstandings). I've tagged the image and left a note on Josh's Wikipedia talk page (in case he can provide the correct source/licensing information). Thanks again! —David Levy 16:10, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Yep, he's had some notifications on nl.wp. The 'red uploads' are not a really good indicator, as about 50% of the 'own work' images have already been copied to Commons and deleted from nl.wp (~10.000 pcs)., so all users with a lot of own work uploads have 'red' upload logs. Siebrand 18:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Right, I was going by the warning tags on his talk page. —David Levy 20:46, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Caracalla_bust2.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Caracalla_bust2.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 image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Yonatan ^talk 19:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:2 resistors in parallel.png and Image:2 resistors in series.png

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:2 resistors in parallel.png and Image:2 resistors in series.png. I notice the image pages currently don't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created these media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Kareha 11:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Category:Maps of municipalities of Italy

Please do not upload all the locations maps of Italy in the category Category:Geography of Italy, which becames unusable with scores and scores of unsorted location maps.

Please use at least the appropriate category instead: Category:Maps of municipalities of Italy, or, even better, please upload the maps sorting them by provinces, to spare a duplicate work. Thank you in advance. --G.dallorto 12:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

The images are autocategorised using CommonSense. I cannot help the categorisation. Adding category links and creating categories for cities and villages instead of galleries only - as appears to be done for Italy related subjects - will most definately help... Siebrand 12:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Category redirects

I've run my bot through the category redirect and fixed them all today. // tsca [re] 17:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Hej. No, I don't use pywikipedia. In this particular case the "bot" was written mostly on the command line (check all the categories, if the category isn't empty then read the redirect template and recategorise the images) and ceased to exist once the task was accomplished. If I need to clean these categories again in the future, I'll have to do it all from scratch. :) // tsca [re] 18:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Derivative

Hi, your bot have uploaded a derivative of a copyrighted work image (Image:KuifjeStoel.jpg) Lugusto • ※ 05:04, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

RFA

I want to nominate you for adminship... ;) Yonatan ^talk 17:13, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Yonatanh. Thank you for considering this. If you would, I would gladly accept. Please take notice that I have nominated myself for adminship previously¹. If you do not see any negatives after reading it, please proceed. Cheers! Siebrand 18:37, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Weghalen categorieën

Hello, aangezien je op commons wel prima werk doet, en je hier nogal (heel erg goed) je weg kent ;-) Voor zover ik weet zijn categorieën redelijk essentieel op commons ? Deze gebruiker User:MPF haalt op grote schaal categorisatie weg. Hier is maanden terug er al op aangesproken User_talk:MPF#Categorisation, User_talk:MPF#STOP_altering_the_files_properties, ik heb hem op de richtlijnen in Commons:categorisation gewezen, maar hij gaat helaas maar door. Ik heb hier een melding gemaakt Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Vandalism, want dit moet m.i. stoppen, sommigen besteden uren zweet aan het categoriseren, maar ik weet niet of dit de goede plek is om "hulp" in te roepen? Enig idee? Groeten --LimoWreck 21:59, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Tricky subject. Zie bijvoorbeeld de overlegpagina van COM:TOL. Ik zit in het 'both systems should co-exist'-kamp, net als jij blijkbaar. Teun Spaans is een paar keer erg boos op me geworden omdat hij een andere mening heeft daar waar ik de mijne verkondigde. Er is geen beleid over en geen uitzicht op de korte termijn. Bewerkingsoorlogen en besprekingen in COM:VP zijn bijna aan de orde van de dag. Tenzij het mij direct aan het hart gaande afbeeldingen betreft, zie ik het, met lede ogen, als een fact of life en doe er niets aan... Het lukt gewoon niet. In plaats van het als vandalisme te bestempelen zou je nog kunnen proberen het op Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Attention aan de orde te stellen, beargumenteerd. Maar heb er niet te veel hoop op. Zie bv. ook de overlegpagina van User:Pudding4brains. Groet, Siebrand 22:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Wel ja, een gallerij kan voor mij zeker een meerwaarde hebben, maar dient m.i. niet ter vervanging van automatische categorisatie; maar kan eerder een extra vormen... Wat ik wel weet is dat sommige mensen veel tijd steken in het categoriseren en/of aanvullen van categorieën; en het is dan érg bot als men zomaar het uitgebouwde schema weghaalt, zeker bij categorieën, die niet zo makkelijk hersteld worden en het meer van het "automatische" moeten hebben ... --LimoWreck 22:47, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

imagecopy.py

Uh? What will do this script? ^^ Because, I'm working to a python version of OrphanBot and it's working quite good :) But it needs some fix and other stuff but if you have a similar script, it's not a bad idea if you send it me so i can mix together :) But, maybe they aren't the same script :) Bye, --Filnik 18:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC) P.S. Have you seen the latest bugfix? :) I think that now the script is good enough to work without problems :)

Check SieBot's uploads. That's what it does. More later, the screen of my notebook broke and now I'm typing on my LCD tv. Have to look sideways all the time and my wife is wachting :-). Won't be online interactively a lot in the coming 2-3 days I expect. Will be reading e-mail. Siebrand 18:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, understood :) --Filnik 12:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Some fixes here :-) Bye, --Filnik 12:06, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Orgullobot/commands

I've replied there.  V60 ^{干什么？ · VContribs} 00:40, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Gefeliciteerd, Beste Administrator!

Een cadeau voor onze nieuwe adminstrator van uw kameraden

Siebrand/Archive03, gefeliciteerd! U hebt nu administrator rechten op Commons. Neem een moment om Commons:Administrators te lezen en plaats gerelateerde pagina's op uw volglijst (speciaal Commons:Administrators' noticeboard en Commons:Deletion requests), voor in verwijderingen, pagina bescherming, gebruiksblokkades of wijzigingen in beveiligde pagina's te duiken. De meerderheid van de acties van administrators kunnen ongedaan worden gemaakt door andere administrators, behalve geschiedenis samenvoegingen, die dus met bijzondere zorg behandeld moeten worden.

Neemt u eens een kijkje op ons IRC kanaal: #wikimedia-commons @ irc.freenode.net.

Bastique 11:18, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Gefeliciteerd Sieb! ;-) Ciell 11:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Siebrand 12:47, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Gefeliciteerd. Nou je toch die knopjes hebt, loop even langs Commons:Upload/nl en de mediawikipagina's die daaronder hangen, er zijn vast nog wel wat typootjes achtergelaten door mij ;-). NielsF talk/overleg/discussion/discussione 12:51, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Löschantrag Image:Marieneiche bei Albertshausen, 1.JPG entfernt

Hallo Siebrand, du hast bei einem meiner Bilder den Löschantrag entfernt. [6] Ich möchte das Bild aber gerne löschen lassen. Gruß

Hi, you cannot revoke a free license. Could you provide more rationale behind this request? O, wait, I found out you uploader duplicates. In the future please use {{badname|ImageNameToKeep.ext}} so we do not need to have this talk... Cheers! Siebrand 05:09, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Mohali logo.png

could you just delete the older version of the image then? I can't because I'm not an admin. ThanksJaskaramdeep 01:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

 Done Siebrand 05:05, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

categorization of Image:Raamsdonkbavokerk.jpg

Hi Siebrand,
Siebot, your bot (?), added a lot of cats to Image:Raamsdonkbavokerk.jpg. I've removed those that IMHO made no sense (Category:Architects by nationality, Category:Architecture by country and Category:Germany) and added a description of the picture that was also missing. -- Túrelio 09:41, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The images are autocategorised using CommonSense through CommonsHelper. I cannot help the categorisation. Thank you for fixing it. Siebrand 10:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, but then why is that bot authorized to add wrong (or sort of random) categories that require manual work by other users, not to mention the addition of a meaningless description like "Eigen werk"[7] ? -- Túrelio 12:42, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Nothing is without error. The categories are close and are valid from a usage perspective: the image is used on pages on the source wiki that are in similar categories to the ones chosen for Commons. The alternatives would be to not put them in any categories at all and let them rot away, or to not ever move them to Commons. It's much more sane to accept the faulty categorisations so that users like you actually see them and are able to correct the categories then the misery and scattered result the other two options have. Demanding manual categorisation makes a job like moving 20.000 images from in this case nl.wp to Commons impossible, and I would not want to think of what this would mean for a possible 250.000 images that can be moved from en.wp. Please think with me on alternative ways to improve the process, but things have been quite well thought out and maximise effectiveness and a workable process. Cheers! Siebrand 13:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of used image

Hi, you deleted Image:DSCN5176 saddlerock e.jpg as duplicate despite it was used on de:Scotts Bluff National Monument. Please check every image before deletion, and in case of duplicates - exchange it. --h-stt !? 18:59, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, must have missed that. Thanks for the notice. Did you fix it? Siebrand 19:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Another contributor on de did, after Duesentriebs bot put a notice on the disk-site. --h-stt !? 19:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Panthera tigris1 sumatran subspecies.jpg

Hi!

I see you have deleted this image: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Panthera_tigris1_sumatran_subspecies.jpg

I found it by this page: (Shows as a blank image) http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Panthera_tigris_sumatrae

Why you deleted? Because there is another image that is exactly the same, only zoomed, that remains. (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Panthera_tigris1_sumatran_cropped.jpg)

In case of need, I have a copy of the original image you deleted, I downloaded before.

Hi. The image was unsourced. I have also nominatied the crop for deletion in 7 days, as that is obviously also unsourced. Siebrand 21:54, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Edit summaries

SieBot's edit summaries for category changes seem to be a bit off, it's like it uses the name of the next or previous categories as description of the edit. You might want to fix the code. --Para 11:07, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

I think it may have had to do with the enourmous backlog it had to process. Maybe threads got nixed up somehow. I'll keep an eye on future edit summaries. Thanks for noticing. Siebrand 11:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

I think I fixed it and made the edit summary even better than before :-) Siebrand 11:52, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Changes to ancient greece categories

Just wondering where the following changes were proposed:

# (diff) (hist) . . mb  Category:Ancient Greek temples by location‎; 10:12 . . (+7) . . SieBot (Talk | contribs | block) (Robot: Changing Category:Greek vases in the Museo archeologico regionale di Palermo)
# (diff) (hist) . . Nmb Category:Ancient Greek temples in Greece‎; 10:02 . . (+316) . . SieBot (Talk | contribs | block) (Robot: Moved from Category:Hellenic temples in Greece. Authors: SieBot, G.dallorto, Bibi Saint-Pol)
# (diff) (hist) . . Nmb Category:Ancient Greek temples in Italy‎; 10:02 . . (+170) . . SieBot (Talk | contribs | block) (Robot: Moved from Category:Hellenic temples in Italy. Authors: SieBot, G.dallorto)
# (diff) (hist) . . mb Category:Ancient Greek temples in Paestum‎; 10:01 . . (+7) . . SieBot (Talk | contribs | block) (Robot: Changing Category:Greek vases in the Museo archeologico regionale di Palermo)
# (diff) (hist) . . Nmb Category:Ancient Greek theatres in Sicily‎; 10:01 . . (+105) . . SieBot (Talk | contribs | block) (Robot: Moved from Category:Hellenic theatres in Sicily. Authors: SieBot, G.dallorto)
# (diff) (hist) . . Nmb Category:Ancient Greek temples by location‎; 10:01 . . (+29) . . SieBot (Talk | contribs | block) (Robot: Moved from Category:Hellenic temples by location. Authors: G.dallorto)

Thanks. Lcarsdata 20:55, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

I do not know. The cats were changed because another admin had placed them on User:Orgullobot/commands. A bot has automatically moved. Best look in the page history and ask the admin... Siebrand 22:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

??????????

zeg Siebrand, zal het wel wat gaan, ja? Ik neem speciaal foto's in een museum voor wikipedia, met toestemming voor commons, en je achterlijke robot gaat even betweter spelen. Nog een zo een opmerking van die vorte machine en je bent die afbeelding van de euromunten kwijt. Carolus 10:33, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Je wilde met me communiceren? Siebrand 10:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

doe niet zo uit de hoogte; als mod ben je hoogst onpersoonlijk! bovendien krijg ik een booschap in het engels. JIJ je zin. smijt ze maar in de prullenbak, de zoveelste waardevolle afbeelding verwijdert door Siebrand met behulp van zijn vorte rotrobot.Carolus 10:46, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Ik doe niet uit de hoogte. Ik ben alleen wat allergisch voor jouw onbeschoftheid. Siebrand 11:03, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

En ik ben, net als zo velen, hyperallegisch voor jouw praktijken aangaande afbeeldingen waar jij niets over te zeggen hebt. Carolus 12:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Ik heb een sysop gevraagd naar de bovenstaande opmerking te kijken. Die gaat wat mij betreft alle perken tebuiten. Siebrand 13:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Eastern_market.jpg

Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --Siebrand

Your bot really needs to give folks a minute to find the right copyright tag. The one I wanted was not in the drop-down menu. It took me not more than a minute to locate it. Or, can I opt out of your bot? -Aude (talk | contribs) 14:07, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

No opt-out as far as I know. You should give a copyright tag at upload time, preferably no later. Please ignore any warnings where they are not needed. Siebrand 14:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but the bot really needs to give users some time to locate copyright tags before leaving messages on user talk pages. I could have just picked a general {{PD-USgov}} tag, but that's really not good enough when we have numerous more specific tags available that indicated more directly what the source is. These are not available in the drop down menu, so I have to go find them. It takes some time. Surely you can program the bot to give folks a minute. Regards. -Aude (talk | contribs) 14:21, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

It's not my script and I'm not really good at programming. I'll look into putting in a delay in the near future. Siebrand 14:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I didn't realize it's not your script. If you can put in a delay, that would be excellent. As well, I'll see what we can do to improve the drop down menu. Thanks. -Aude (talk | contribs) 16:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

They are all Orgullomoore scripts we badly need for day to day Commons operation. I've been trying to take over in the past few days. It's good that all the quirks are reported so I can try and fix them. Siebrand 16:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

From now on images are checked and tagged with a 20 minute delay. Siebrand 19:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

CommonsDelinker Edit summary Translation

Hi! Please check your bot on Huwiki, as it seems to have fallen back to the default edit summary, even though previously it has used the translated one. Thanks, --Bdamokos 19:22, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

This is a known defect which was classified 'non critical'. Thank you for your report. Siebrand 19:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Siebrand 23:35, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Crystal_128_down.png

Hi Siebrand, you have deleted Image:Crystal_128_down.png today as duplicate but it was still used, at least at mediawiki.org. This gave a lot of trouble on the mailinglist: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2007-April/031087.html and following. Please be careful at deleting duplicates and use ChechUsage always. Thanks in advance. --Raymond ^Disc. 22:41, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm sorry that happended. It should have been replaced, but that does not work for www.mediawiki.org yet - I'll be working on that. It might have been fixed quicker if someone from MediaWiki.org had asked for the image to be undeleted. In the email the file name was not mentioned, unfortunately. Anyway, we're well aware of our responsibilities again. Cheers! Siebrand 23:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

P.s. Commons does not suck, it rules. We do however stay human and make errors we are prepared to learn from and correct. Siebrand 23:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Commons bot i ca:wiki

Please check ca:User:CommonsDelinker/summary-I18n. There is something wrong because your bot puts the summary in English. Thanks!--Iradigalesc (talk) 23:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

This is a known defect which was classified 'non critical'. Thank you for your report. Siebrand 23:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Siebrand 23:35, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

SieBot

Hi Siebrand, thanks for checking licensing tags with your Bot.

I think your Bot is too fast, however. I always edit the image pages right after I have uploaded the images to add description and license tag. I would be happy if you consider to stop putting "no license" tag on images in a second to let me add description and license tag without edit conflict. Thanks. Yassie 08:29, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I expect to have a new version of the bot that will have a 180 second (3 minute) delay. That's all I can do. Please consider adding the correct tag immediately on upload. Siebrand 08:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

From now on images are checked and tagged with a 20 minute delay. Siebrand 19:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I had the same problem as Yassie. I like to use the preview for the description which is not possible if it is entered on the file upload page. But 20 minutes is time enough to complete the description. However, I noticed a weak point of the bot: If the default description which appears on the upload page, i.e. the table with the fields, but without entered information, is left during upload, the bot does not mark the file. Greetings --Bjs 17:02, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed that unfortunate change in the upload process. I'm afraid I'll not be able to address that in the short term. I'll put it on a TODO list... Siebrand 19:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Sfnew.jpg

This image was created by me, it was deleted from the Sinn Féin article on WP and the reason given was because it had been deleted from wikicommons, I never loaded the file into wikicommons, not that I have any objection to anyone doing so, but because of that the image on wikipedia has now been tagged as for deletion. I have since tried to reload the image into WP but cannot as the filename exists here in commons, also the image on WP is no longer accredited to me but to the person that uploaded it from there to wikicommons, can a admin sort this out please.--Padraig3uk 09:36, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

As far as I can see you as the creator have licensed the image PD. If it would be PD, the is not need for attribution. I do wonder however if the image can be licensed PD, as it appears to be a derivative work. I have again nominated it for deletion. Siebrand 10:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Is see you have now nominated the image for deletion giving the reason as Derivative work, cannot be licesed PD without Sinn Féin's permission, maybe I should make things a little clearer the image that Sinn Féin uses today is based on a design I did for Dublin Sinn Féin around 1980/81 as a idea for a recruiting poster.--Padraig3uk 10:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

That would be most critical information. Please add it both to the image and to the deletion request. Siebrand 10:11, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:De Young_02.jpg

Beste Siebrand, behalve 1 tikfout (flick in plaats van flickr) geloof ik het complete verhaal van Flinfo te hebben overgenomen. De tikfout heb ik inmiddels hersteld. Source, licensing, author: alles staat volgens mij in de beschrijving. Ins het probleem hiermee opgelost? groetend,--Gerardus 12:14, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

De link de Young Sculpture Garden geeft voor mij geen pagina met de afbeelding/licentie. Kan je dat herstellen? Als dat werkt, kan je ook het no source-sjabloon verwijderen. Groet, Siebrand 12:16, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Coa focsani ro.gif

This image is from the english wikipedia. I hope that now it's correct. --Incola 12:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help

I will use {{Badname}} when I need for later.--Jasonzhuocn 12:45, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Principalities02.png

While I appreciate your efforts to maintain source information, I did nothing more than optimise the image in question, reducing its file size. Someone who may know something about the image is its original author, namely Edwtie. --Tene 13:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

You MUST name author, source and license. Since you did not add a source, the image was marked as no source. Please add it so it can be checked. Failure to comply will unfortunately lead to image deletion. Siebrand 13:10, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I've just said the author is not me! All I did was take the image that was ALREADY THERE and OPTIMISE IT please ASK AN UPLOADER, not me, who has absolutely NO IDEA as to what the source is. Thank you. --Tene 13:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see. There's no reason to shout. It's better for your blood pressure. Siebrand 13:17, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

So much work for nothing...

Images with {{PD-RO-Symbol}} tag are public domain by law, no matter who created them, thus no source/author tag is needed. Could you put your robot some filters? --Alex:D 13:14, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Without a source there is no way to verify they are actually public domain. Please add your sources. Siebrand 13:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

The source is the law itself. If you think that the tag is unapropriate, or has a lack of sources then let's discuss it there.

I am most definately not attacking the tag. I believe that is correct. However, now you upload a picture, claim it is a flag or coat of armour and how are we supposed to verify this is actually what is says it is? This is because one of our primary requirements for images, the source, is missing. It must be added. Siebrand 13:20, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

The authority that keeps them (State's Archives, Bucharest, The Heraldic Consultative Comission stock) is enough? Many of them don't name the author(s). --Alex:D 13:32, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, a web page that contains the image (in context) or a link to the source image itself (best would be both, but that is a lot of work). If the PD is correct, naming auhors is formally not required. Siebrand 13:34, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

No website available... Unfortunately. I had to scan lots of images from their files, especialy for the interbelic CoA. --Alex:D 13:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, then name the publication with whatever identifying properties you can produce and mention it was scanned by you (if we trust you, this also makes the info more valuable). Siebrand 13:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Missing source?

If this is the work of a bot you have to fix it. If you personally reviewed the upload, I don't get it: I clearly wrote that the source is the Greek Parliament. If you need a link, I disagree that is important for PD-70 works. The images may be distributed in hundrends of websites, or scanned from one or more publications. Geraki

It is not the work of a bot, I was checking uploads. All images need to be sourced. Please read the topic directly above this one. Having a source for all images is very important for the possibilities of verifying the authenticity of an image. Not mentioning a source gives no validity. I see you have already added the source to at least one image. Thanks! Siebrand 13:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Nasher_01.jpg

Beste Siebrand, T.a.v. de" license" tikte ik: GNU Free Doc. License. Ik heb dit nu veranderd in GFDL. Leek mij hetzelfde. Groetend--Gerardus 14:03, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Gebruik CommonsHelper als je afbeeldingen van een andere wiki overneemt. Er staat nu nog steeds onvoldoende informatie bij. Siebrand 15:35, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Met hulp van de CommonsHelper heb ik er nu een heleboel info bijgetikt, maar ik zie nu door de bomen het bos niet meer.

Is dit echt de bedoeling of (eerlijk gezegd) snap ik het niet meer. Moet dit zo omslachtig? Hoe vindt een leek als ik hier nog de weg. Kun je a.u.b. controleren of de info nu toereikend is. Als het echt de bedoeling is, dat afbeeldingen eerder geplaatst dienen te worden op Wikimedia i.p.v. op de lokale Wikipedia, kan er dan geen eenvoudige procedure worden bedacht. Graag reactie--Gerardus 16:51, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Je kunt gewoon de complete inhoud van CommonsHelper kopieren. Dit is de eenvoudige procedure... Als de afbeeldingen direct op Wikimedia Commons waren geplaatst, had dit niet gehoeven, maar niet iedereen ziet er helaas de voordelen van in. CommonsHelper zorgt ervoor dat er geen informatie verloren gaat... Siebrand 16:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Waarschuwingen per bot

Kan er geen timeout op de waarschuwingen die SieBot uitdeelt? Ik uploadde een bestand en verwijderde hem dezelfde minuut, maar kreeg toch al meteen een waarschuwing. [8] -- Bryan (talk to me) 14:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Zoals je hierboven in twee onderwerpen kunt lezen is dat op dit moment in behandeling. Groet, Siebrand 15:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Vanaf nu worden afbeeldingen gecontroleerd met een vertraging van 20 minuten (1200 seconden). Siebrand 19:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Commons delinker bot

Description: CommonsDelinker, written by Orgullomoore and maintained by Siebrand, is a service brought to local wikis by the administrators of Wikimedia Commons aimed at increasing trans-wiki cooperation and preventing red image links from appearing in local wikis after being deleted in Commons by delinking. An example of a red link appears at right.

CommonsDelinker is kin to and shares commons goals with, but is not a replacement of CommonsTicker. CommonsTicker and manual delinking by local communities is always the prefered method as it enables not only removal but handcrafted replacement of files by another equivalent free one in advance to a deletion (and of course there are situations the CommonsDelinker cannot solve). However Wikimedia Commons cannot wait longer than the usual Commons deletion timeframe for communities to act accordingly to the CommonsTicker messages - and local communites deserve something better than red links in that case. That's why CommonsDelinker comes into the process only after a deletion of a file in Commons.

Please show me what part of this description explains edits like the following diff. This is not a minor edit and deserves a proper explanation. I have left a message on the village pump asking what is going on with this particular image. However these sort of bot edits are not going to ever be acceptable on Wikisource. I expect you to prevent your bot from making future such edits or else remove it from operations on en.WS.--BirgitteSB 16:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

OK I do say where it describes such an edit reading this again. This is not going to be cool on en.WS and is problamatic for any wikisource. I will discuss this with the community but expect to be blocked unless we can get a red-link removal version only.--BirgitteSB 16:25, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Can you explain to me what exactly is the problem? These images were tagged duplicates and as such were migrated to one instance in use, after which the orphaned copy was deleted. Siebrand 16:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

The last time this happened 2004 CIA Factbook maps where replaced with 2006 CIA Factbook maps. Obviously there are some changes in city names and borders over two years. The general issue is that images in Wikisource are most often not simply an illustration, but part of a published text. What you might consider an "equivilent" illustration for a Wikipedia article can ruin the integrity of a Wikisource text.--BirgitteSB 17:00, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, I understand the possible problem. I think there are two possible options. Seeing the volume of CommonsDelinker actions (very low), a manual review of CommonsHelper edits is best. In case there is suspicion that something has gone wrong, you can either revert, remove the image of ask for a restore if the image had already been deleted. The page to do this on would be Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Attention. The other choice would be to configure CommonsDelinker to no longer be active on en.wikisource (and write some kind of an opt-out for the system). That's a bit harder, as I just took over the running of the system last weekend and an trying to figure out what is wrong with current functionality before writing requirements for a new version: this is a bit harder on the short term. Please be aware that the actions of this service are a Commons Admins responsibility and not my own. It is my responsibility to assure proper operation. I am however very willing to accept new requirements to the system, although I cannot promise these would be implemented really quick, as some (possibly most) of the code base is more than I can handle with my minor programming skills.

You always have the option of hitting the panic button, which would be blocking CommonsDelinker for a short amount of time (say one day), but please be aware this runs from the toolserver, so it is very important NOT to block the IP address it comes from. CommonsDelinker will never edit anonymously. Please let me know how you think we can best proceed. Siebrand 17:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I have brought the issue up locally, but I personally feel that we cannot rely on there always being such a low volume. I am copying your comments to s:Wikisource:Scriptorium#User:CommonsDelinker.--BirgitteSB 17:18, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Ancient Roman sculpture

Hi Siebrand. People working on Roman art have discussed this matter and come to the conclusion that this category should not be about sculptures, works of art, but about sculpture, the art of making sculptures, and thus include categories about sculptors as well. That was the motive for this cat move. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 16:03, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Right, that was a word missing from my vocabulary. I'll revert my revert... :| Siebrand 16:11, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

No worries :) Jastrow (Λέγετε) 16:22, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

¿Copyvios?

Hi. I'm afraid about contributions of Vasilis. He's uploading images of marsupials like this and this, marking them as "self-made", however, here and here, such images seems have another authors. Can you check it?. Thanks. --Lin linao ¿dime? 00:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, no time at this time. About to go to work. I've copied yor request to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. Siebrand 05:05, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

It's been taken care of. Many thanks for reporting this. Siebrand 06:26, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Kamienica_Piotrkowska_72_Lodz.jpg

Hi. I made mistake in name of this file. Please winding up this file. HuBar 01:06, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Please use {{Badname}} or {{Speedy}}. Thanks. Siebrand 05:03, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Order of the Aztec Eagle

Hi, this image is free and is used in the wikipedia in english with the same license, this image is on public domain http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Order_of_the_Aztec_Eagle.jpg

Sorry for my bad english, please remove that tag

--Ikonlabs 01:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

The image you reference is declared PD with a license tag that is up for deletion. Please ensure you have a valid source, author, permission and license for images that you upload that have not been created by you and/or are derivative works. I currently see no reason why Image:Order of the Aztec Eagle.jpg would be in the public domain. Siebrand 05:03, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Undeletion_requests#:Image:First_national_bank_US_with_HABS_border.jpg

Hi, just a heads up that I have restored this, the rationale for restoration made sense to me... the images are different in this context. You may wish to comment further. ++Lar: t/c 11:30, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Masaccio_Tribute_Money.jpg

Hi Siebrand!

• The source for the image is give as "wiki commons" that's wiki(media) commons, OK?

• The author is given as "Masaccio"

• The date is given as "142somethingorother"

• The license is given as a Painting that is nearly 600 years old.

Is there some other rule that I haven't understood?

Explanation

I downloaded a file for which the colours were much too intense. I suspected that the uploader may have used an "automatic enhance" on the pic. I reduce the intensity to a level that is consistent with a restored clean fresco and re-uploaded it in a somewhat smaller form.

--Mandy 13:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Mandy, please add a wikilink to the source image in the image description. That is now missing. Siebrand 14:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Images from jolle

You can delete all my images that you want. Is not easy to me to be considered a delinquent so frequently and in an unpolite manner as is the system of Commons, that each day seems more a band of frustate pride men, and I prefer ignore Commons in the future. I have more than 300.000 flags images, 25.000 digital photo from my last trips, and about 1000 high quality historical maps self made after reading a lot of books on te topic (because not all the world is only able to copy), this is my own work, if anyone discuss it I will demostre it with presentation of original vector images (flags and maps) and original fotos and I can't justifiying this to all the world all the time (Who are the editors for to doubt of me?, important people? International figues?). Why who wrote in Wikipedia is not considerat thats his writing are untrue facts before comprobation?. Why in Commons all people is guilty ans must demostrate his honestity?. I published last year a book with about 6000 flags and 4000 emblems of current political parties, and I wanted to give the rights of the images (vectorial exportable to PNG) to Wikipedia, and the continuated Commons ofenses frustated this. I was even bloked. Then I cancelled my participation on Commons. No answer please, I will sign in never again.--jolle 17:13, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea what it is you are trying to accomplish. I, personally, have always valued your contributions. I'm certain we will not delete validly licensed images. If I can be of any help in any specific case, please let me know. Siebrand 17:18, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:IC 1992.gif

Hi, why did you delete that picture?? It's a picture of the german IC-Network and used on the german site de:InterCity!! And it has been there for quite a long time!! 194.95.58.114 11:05, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

The image did not have a license and was tagged on 26 April. Below you can find the description. Siebrand 11:06, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Lines of the German Intercity Train Network as of 1985. Reconstructed using information from http://home.arcor.de/bahnarchivar/reisezeit/index.htm .

* Each coloured line on the map corresponds to one train per hour on that line. Dashed lines represent one train each two hours.
* Bold lines represent InterCityExpress high-speed trains.
* Not all systematic stops of the network are shown. (Especially in the Rhur area: Duisburg, Bochum, Essen, Solingen, Hagen.)
* Some trains also take other routes or stop at additional stations.

Drawing in Vector-Format (OpenDocument Draw): http://freenet-homepage.de/rwp/historische_IC-Netze.zip
[[Category:Maps of Germany]]

Image:Uncle bush.jpg

Hello!

User Bryan] order me appeal at Commons:Undeletion requests. I ask ten Wikipedians who uploaded this image in own user sites help me save this image. --Starscream 00:13, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia projects are no place for your personal (political) agenda. The Wikimedia projects do not benifit from this image in any way, so I have deleted it a third time. Uploading this file again will be seen as vandalism and action will be taken in that case. Siebrand 00:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Uncle bush.jpg

ten Wikipedians for anywhere countries uploaded this image in own user sites!!! TEN!

I ask ten Wikipedians help me save this image. More images in commons is samilar. --Starscream 01:14, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Why you not permit to debate ten Wikipedians? --Starscream 01:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

User sites in Polish Wikipedia are very autonomy. --Starscream 01:21, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you should check the goals of the project you are contributing. You might possibly come to the conclusion that ventilating your personal favours and disgusts (especially the latter one) are very much not the goal. It is building an encyclopedia. Siebrand 01:25, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

User sites in Polish Wikipedia are very autonomy. There are more images are similar. You must permit to debate. You aren't officer. --Starscream 01:33, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

If you feel this image deserves undeletion, goto Commons:Undeletion requests. Don't spam the talk pages of admins who are just enforcing community decisions. -- Bryan (talk to me) 09:25, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

OTRS confirmation?

Perhaps you can help with the OTRS confirmation of these images: [9], [10] ?? The individual that holds the ownership of the images/documents emailed the OTRS permission with the correct format on March 18, 2007... Smee 09:32, 4 May 2007 (UTC).

Smee, this is on my list. If possible, please have a little more patience. Siebrand 09:10, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

To my knowledge, this is the first time I had posted to your talk page. Please advise me as to how I did not have patience in this matter??? I am confused. For the record, I do not mind if it takes a while to confirm, just wanted to make sure someone was aware of this. Smee 01:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC).

Problem

CAN BE KNOWN AS IT IS THE PROBLEM WITH YOU! Perhaps you think that you can be changing the pages that your you want,then no,I was informed into which you did by email: 'Wikimedia Commons page User talk:Dace96 has been changed by Siebrand it was I title of the message that was sent with information of which you did,you never return to change my User talk or already sides the one that hopes to you.

Sign --Dace96 02:24, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

PD:In addition not nothing on that such OTRS and as to put those small things without sense of the labels, so it lets bother

Hi Dace96, please gorgive me, but are you asking me to not again edit your talk page to inform you of image deletion nominations? If you are asking something else, please clarify. Siebrand 09:09, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

regen

het regent hier (non-stop) klachten en problemen. Heel goed bezig, siebrand! Blijkbaar ligt het dus toch aan u, en ben ik niet de kwal.Carolus 08:55, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Klachten in de trend van "OMFG... YOU DELETED TEH IMAGE I FOUND ON GOOGLE!!! U FASCIST ADMINS ARE DESTROYING WIKIPEDIA, OMG, OMG." Sure... -- Bryan (talk to me) 08:58, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Brasao_sfs.jpg

Você não tem o que fazer mané? Não sabe ler? Se o brasão é da Prefeitura Municipal de São Francisco do Sul, se o brasão é feito pela Prefeitura Municipal de São Francisco do Sul, se o brasão é da Prefeitura Municipal de São Francisco do Sul é uma imagem de governo, e pela lei brasileira é de dominio público, qual você acha que é a origem???? Vocês tem que ajudar mais e ficar enchendo a paciência menos... Vocês tão ficando mais chatos a cada dia... E não me incomode mais... não quero ver nenhuma mensagem sua em qualquer arquivo meu. Se estiver faltando alguma coisa, apague! É uma ordem. Não quero seu nome ou de qualquer outro dizendo que falta alguma coisa, entendeu??

Sorry, this is not a language I can read. Siebrand 16:47, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

It's Portuguese. Roughly:

You do not know how to [not sure of fazer mané; fazer is "make" or "do", I think it's a colloquialism]? You don't know how to know to read? If the blazon/seal is on the Municipal Prefecture of São Francisco do Sul, if the blazon/seal is made by the Municipal Prefecture of São Francisco do Sul, if the blazon/seal is of the Municipal Prefecture of São Francisco do Sul it is a government image, and by Brazilian law it is in the public domain, what do you find that it is the origin? You have to help more and to be try people's patience less… You are becoming more [not sure of chato, can mean flat, maybe "shallow"?] every day… Do not bother me any more… I do not want to see any message of yours in my archive . If it is lacking something, erase it! That's an order. I do not want your name or any other saying that it lacks some thing, understood?

(I just translated it. I don't share the sentiment at all. And I think it is rather rudely put.) If you have an issue with my images, please inform me. On the other hand, I don't use my watchlist here at all, so a message on my user talk page is really helpful. - en:Jmabel | talk 04:30, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Jmabel, thanks for translating the message. It is unfortunately a known type of message. :( As for the messaging on home wikis: please make sure you put some kind of clear request at the top of your talk page. We often visit a user talk page for a very short while. Thanks again. Siebrand 08:15, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I look regularly at my Commons user talk page, but I don't watch the thousands of images I've uploaded. I'm presuming (below) that you put a note on the image itself at some point before deleting it (again, I have no way to check), but I would really appreciate one on my user talk page if this comes up again. And, of course, it would be ridiculous for me to post a notice on every image I upload telling people to communicate on my user talk page. From what I've seen, that is usually standard practice before deletions, no? - en:Jmabel | talk 20:22, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

We signal uploaders on their talk pages here on Commons, we do not usually go and look for them outside of this wiki, unless the uploader is able to attract enough attention. We have had discussion on if we should start chasing users all around the world, but that would be too hard. You could add email alerts to page changes on your watchlist. Siebrand 20:25, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Leschi_marina_02.jpg

Unless I am mistaken, you deleted Image:Leschi_marina_02.jpg. I uploaded this message. I don't remember requesting that it be removed, but since I have no way to look at deleted pages, I have no way to verify this. You said it was identical to a picture that I believe (though, again, I could be mistaken) is a similar image with different exposure.

If I did request this deletion, then my apologies. However, if I did not, then as a person who has uploaded a couple of thousand images to the Commons I would hope that in the future before deleting an image of mine (other than in response to a request for deletion), you would leave a note on my user talk page. - en:Jmabel | talk 04:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Flag of Antarctica (Smith).svg

I am going to ask Dr. Smith when I get home on Monday. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:44, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Carl Gustav Carus.jpg

Thanks for the warning. As I took it from the german wikipedia I thought it was not neccessary to say anything. I've just licensed it. Thanks again, --Lauranrg 17:49, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Please also add some information about the image: Who is depicted, around which period was the picture taken, who was the author of the picture, if known, and what is the source. -- Bryan (talk to me) 17:55, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

P.s. Bryan is my bot and he's doing a fine job :-) Thanks Bryan! Siebrand 18:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of images

I'm sorry, when I raised those images considered that the requirements are correct, if no longer thus I am in agreement with its erasure. Battroid 07:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

OK. Thanks for the message. I'm sad they have to go, but that's the price of the freedom we envision... Siebrand 07:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Dupe of Image:Upper Silesia coat of arms.jpg

Hi. I've reverted in which direction the dupe tag points since the png version contains random red pixles (most easily seen in the botom left corner). /Lokal_Profil 10:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I must have missed that. I think that the PNG should be fixed, as JPG is quite a shitty format for this type of images. Can you fix it? Until then, should be maybe tag them as alternate versions? Siebrand 10:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

True, I'll tag them as alternate and add a cleanup tag to the png, will clean it up myself if I get the time. /Lokal_Profil 10:35, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Someone has now cleaned up the png so I remarked the jpg as a dupe. /Lokal_Profil 22:28, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:1972.JPG

Image deletion warning

Image:1972.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 image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

--Ashfire908 14:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:وهدَفي_حسابْ.gif

Thank you for the warning, I added the source:

http://www.alargam.com/numbers/sir/1.htm

--Aissa 17:12, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

CS and history

Could you please repair your bot (CommonsDelinker)? Every time it comes on cs.wikipedia it change or delete every image link in a separate edit and it makes the history tome. Thanks. - UP3 22:05, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean. Could you please show me an example of the incorrect behaviour? Siebrand 22:07, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

For example this page: [11] — could you repair your bot to do all these edits in one edit? - UP3 12:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see. No, the bot will not be changed to make these changes in one edit. Reason for this is that universal replacement takes one file replacement as one job, for which it does a CheckUsage. It then crawls though all the pages the image is used on to replace it in any of the ~700 wikis of the Wikimedia Foundation. The feature you are requesting would mean implementing advanced queueing and such. Aside from this being way to hard (i.e. impossible) for me to program, it would make the changes made by CommonsDelinker for the local communities very hard to track and trace. If you think CommonsDelinker is polluting your Recent Changes, feel free to request that a bot bit is set on your local wiki for User:CommonsDelinker and add a task for CommonsDelinker edits to be checked regularly. I'm sorry I cannot help you any further. Siebrand 12:21, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

OK. I take it. - UP3 12:34, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Hasty removal

There is a different image named ShetlandPony.jpg on Wikipedia, renaming this one is screwing up an article (and in a critical way: Image:Shetland Pony-1-.jpeg is a nice, slim show pony, the other image is a fat fuzzy pet pony. About like comparing a mazda miata to a volkswagen!0 Please restore the name, if you could, please. 161.7.2.160 23:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Can you please let me know which of the 250 Wikipedias you are talking about, or even better, which of the articles within that particular Wikipedia? I'll try and correct it asap. Siebrand 06:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Dupp of File:Crystal kcmmemory.png

Please be careful when deleting images when if it is a duplicate. It is probably better if you use or run CommonsDelinker to replace the image you are going to delete with another one. Because other wikis that use the image could be affected. Since there are tools available, it should be used. --Jutiphan 07:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Dude, you're preaching to the choir. I run CommonsDelinker. :-) Are you placing this comment here because something went wrong? If so, please be more precise so that you give me a chance to make due. Siebrand 07:59, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Malfunction on :en

Hey -- your bot, en:User:Commons Delinker, made a mistake in en:Cryptography. There was an image there, en:Image:Nsa-enigma.jpg, that exists on commons at Image:Enigma.jpg. Unfortunately, there is already an image en:Image:Engima.jpg, so that ended up showing up in the article instead. The bot should probably check for that kind of thing. Thanks, Mangojuice 13:59, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Mangojuice, it does check for that and I have no idea why it made this mistake. An admin blocked CommonsDelinker indefinately for it. I have asked him to remove the block. Siebrand 14:01, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Help required for and

Hello! I have some difficulties with correctly handle the copyright problem I was noticed about concerning the two images shown here above. The purpose was to create a copy of the original image just with another name in order to be able to handle it with conditional templates by conforming it to the "Flag_of_<country>.svg" and "Coats_of_arms_of_<country>.svg" naming standard.

I tried to use the CommonsHelper tool, but I don't know if the result is OK (i.e. I don't think so!), especially for the "License information" section. Please, could you help me? I would appreciated this a lot!

Regards, --Hedorfer 16:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not really for creating duplicates for those images. I think you'd best create your template code in such a way that they use existing images. As for the information: source, author and a valid free license are required. Just ensure those 3 are present with the image description. Cheers! Siebrand 19:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I hope they are OK now. I tried to find out other ways to use them by leaving their current names as they are, but it's quite difficult (I mean for me). #REDIRECT instructions do not work for images, neither do {{#ifexist:...|...|...}} structures. So how can you deal with these situations? The template where I need this is it:Template:Bandierina. The best solution, I think, is to have a missing flag whose file name conforms to those of all other flags, doesn't it? Cheers! --Hedorfer 21:00, 8 May 2007 (UTC)