Commons:Village pump

(Redirected from Commons:Village Pump)

Shortcut: COM:VP

Community portal
Help deskVillage pump
Administrators' noticeboard
vandalismuser problemsblocks and protections
↓ Skip to table of contents ↓       ↓ Skip to discussions ↓       ↓ Skip to the last discussion ↓
Welcome to the Village pump

This page is used for discussions of the operations, technical issues, and policies of Wikimedia Commons. Recent sections with no replies for 7 days and sections tagged with {{section resolved|1=--~~~~}} may be archived; for old discussions, see the archives.

Please note:

  1. If you want to ask why unfree/non-commercial material is not allowed at Wikimedia Commons or if you want to suggest that allowing it would be a good thing, please do not comment here. It is probably pointless. One of Wikimedia Commons’ core principles is: "Only free content is allowed." This is a basic rule of the place, as inherent as the NPOV requirement on all Wikipedias.
  2. Have you read our FAQ?
  3. For changing the name of a file, see Commons:File renaming.
  4. Any answers you receive here are not legal advice and the responder cannot be held liable for them. If you have legal questions, we can try to help but our answers cannot replace those of a qualified professional (i.e. a lawyer).
  5. Your question will be answered here; please check back regularly. Please do not leave your email address or other contact information, as this page is widely visible across the internet and you are liable to receive spam.

Purposes which do not meet the scope of this page:

Search archives:

A village pump in Burkina Faso [add]
Centralized discussion
See also: Village pump/Proposals • Archive

Template: View • Discuss  • Edit • Watch
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 7 days.

August 24Edit

Please move File:Peraturan_Presiden_Nomor_52_Tahun_2010.pdf into File:Peraturan_Presiden_Republik_Indonesia_Nomor_52_Tahun_2010.pdf. It's just a little bit mistake. Mnafisalmukhdi1 (talk) 06:12, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Done. --ghouston (talk) 07:17, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

September 09Edit

Is Template:Nofacebook valid?Edit

Template:Nofacebook showing

No Facebook.svg This file has been released under a license which is incompatible with Facebook's licensing terms. It is not permitted to upload this file to Facebook.
seems to be at odds with the document it uses as reference: meta:Legal/CC BY-SA licenses and social media, which is a legal opinion about how to comply with CC BY-SA while posting on social media. Our statement in that template seem to be false. --Jarekt (talk) 17:00, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
The MetaWiki page was heavily revised in August. Previously, the advice was that you could not share CC BY-SA licensed material from a third-party on Facebook without violating the terms of the license [1]. clpo13(talk) 17:41, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
So what to do with this template? Deprecate it entirely (i.e. removing usages of it from file descriptions), or replace it with a statement that the uploader prefers that reusers don't upload it to Facebook but can't legally stop them from doing so? -- King of ♥ 17:55, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
The text says: "where the user provides attribution for a work and complies with the other terms". It is near impossible to do that on social media. Most people do not even try. And even if they try, they mostly get something wrong. The situation (in EU) will probably change significantly with the digital copyright directive coming into effect soon. --C.Suthorn (talk) 18:52, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
@C.Suthorn: “It is near impossible to do that on social media.” How so? Why would it be so? meta:Legal/CC BY-SA licenses and social media gives several “good examples” − would you disagree? For example, I find that the Instagram or Twitter feeds of Wiki Loves Monuments do a good job. I myself maintained CommonsCat Tumblr for years, and I like to think I did a decent job at it.
(“Most people do not even try” − that is probably true, does not make it impossible :-))
Jean-Fred (talk) 09:47, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
There are also some recommendations by Creative Commons here. Users may have personal reasons to not want their work on sites like Facebook (such as not trusting them to actually abide by the terms of a license), but if both Creative Commons and the Wikimedia Foundation believe there is no conflict between CC licenses and social media terms of service, then this template has no weight behind it. Non-compliance with the terms of a license, such as missing attribution, can be handled like any other copyright infringement, and social media sites usually have an easy form for reporting it (e.g. Twitter, Facebook, Instagram). clpo13(talk) 18:30, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
On april 13th Julia Reda (@senficon) made a tweet on Twitter. Reda was a member of EU parliament and worked 4 years on digital copyright. Today she leads the project #ControlC that is all about copyright and using free content on social media. In the april tweet she presents this very project with a video. The end title of the video has this attribution: "(cc) by 3.0 Music: BigAlBeatz Translation: Videezy". No links to the license text, the used works or their authors. The main author - Reda herself - is not even mentioned, neither are other people who may have contributed to the video. If one of the most skilled experts on digital copyright in a tweet about copyright, promoting legal use of free media still doesn't get it fully right, then how could a random user of social media get it right? --C.Suthorn (talk) 21:36, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Sorry for writing german. Siehe Wiki Love Monuments Deutschland, klickt man auf das Foto, erscheint [2], dort sind die Wikipedia:Fototips verlinkt, da erscheint das Bild aber nicht. Erst wenn man das Foto direkt in die Google-Suche eingibt [3], erfährt man, daß das File:Wikimania 2014 by Dschwen 3293.jpg von @Dschwen: ist. Kein Wort zur Lizenz, kein Wort zum Urheber. Der dargestellte Fotograf verwendet das Bild vorbildlich: Es kann ja theoretisch sein, daß man beim Fratzenbuch & Co. Bilder lizenzkonform verwenden kann, in der Praxis geschieht das jedoch nicht. Der Warnbaustein sollte unter jedem Bild auf Commons stehen. --Ralf Roletschek 23:45, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
@Ralf Roletschek: Ich bin nicht sicher was du meinst. Am dieser Facebook post, ich lese Foto: Daniel Schwen (, „Wikimania 2014 by Dschwen 3293“,” − der Titel, das Autor, Hyperlink zu Lizenz, und Hyperlink zu den Commons Datei Seite. Ich verstehe nicht, was das Problem hier ist? Jean-Fred (talk) 10:47, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
@C.Suthorn: I don’t know which tweet or which video you are referring to (nor am I going to scroll back months of Julia Reda’s timeline to find it), so it’s a bit hard to judge that particular case. I’ll take your word for it that the attribution in that video was lacking.
One thing to keep in mind: authors can always waive any license requirement for a particular usage − so Reda certainly does not need to attribute herself for her own work if she wishes so.
In the case of pictures used by the Wiki Loves Monuments international team (for use on the Twitter and Instagram I linked above), the consent of the authors is explicitly sought and obtained − see Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments/Photo Sharing Permission & phab:L36).
So I’ll stand by my point that it’s not impossible to abide by free license terms on social media. Sure, it’s not easy − neither is it easy to do it in print or in audio, or anywhere really. Do we need a banner disclaimer for print reusers as well?
(That it’s so hard to comply with license terms perhaps says less about reusers and more about licenses. For example, while I agree it’s not perfect because it’s not hyperlinked, I personally think a plain “CC-BY-SA 4.0” without hyperlink is “good enough” [Creative Commons seem to think so] − and I’ll never understand the whole debate on linking to license deed vs. legal text − I mean, I’m sure the lawyers are right or whatever ; but what actual difference does it make? But then again, I CC-Zero my own work so I’m probably not the right audience :-) )
Jean-Fred (talk) 10:47, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Instead of consulting twitter, you could read wikipedias article about Reda (available in 24 languages): "In November 2014, Reda was named rapporteur of the Parliament's review of 2001's Copyright Directive.". And yes, it is possible to comply with copyright on social media, it is also possible to fly to the moon, but only 12 men (and no woman) have ever done that. You think we could waive the need to hyperlink to the license text in a very specific and limited way? Reda has done so, not with her own part in the video, but with respect to the soundtrack. --C.Suthorn (talk) 14:33, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
The same probably applies to {{NO Facebook Youtube license}}. Jean-Fred (talk) 11:02, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Also {{Yesfacebook}}. clpo13(talk) 16:13, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

I generally like uniform treatment of all the content without great many personal templates and instructions. {{Nofacebook}} should be either added to all files for which it applies or to none. However I understand that a lot of photographers do like to control reuse of their contributions and are frustrated with people using their files without proper attribution (I share this frustration). To me adding templates like {{Nofacebook}} is not going to resolve the issue, but I am OK with modifying templates like {{Nofacebook}} to convey that the photographer's preference is that the file is not being used on facebook, as it is hard to fulfill the attribution requirements of the license. However that preference is not binding. --Jarekt (talk) 15:42, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

A template like no facebook is basically a service to people. 99% of world population do post media files on social platforms or not at all. And this social platforms are facebook, facebook, facebook, facebook and twitter (instagram, tiktok, snapchat do exist, but are for original content). Poeple do not understand licenses and they do not understand that a generic "not public domain" does apply to them: They are not Warner, Bertelsmann, Sony. They do not post media for money. They only share something they themselves found on the internet with their less than 10000 friends. Copyright does not apply to this sharing. And wikipedia is for free. you can copy anything from wikipedia and it is not piracy... An image like the "no facebook" with a red cross over it, may actually be something that people will notice and maybe understand: Oh, that is me. I have to obey copyright. --C.Suthorn (talk) 21:19, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
IMO, {{Not public domain}} is a better option to emphasize the need for attribution. People reusing CC licensed material without even the barest attempt at attribution is not a problem unique to social media, so a template specific to social media (or indeed a single site) seems unnecessary. clpo13(talk) 16:13, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment IMO, as the statement on the template is false, the text should be either modified or the template deleted. Also agreed with Jarekt about the need of uniform treatment, so if an additional statement is really needed then maybe it is better to target the wanted license templates and to add there the statement needed. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:22, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Aside from attribution, another possible issue that comes to mind with social media and Creative Commons licenses is that of additional restrictions. From what I understand, CC licenses do not allow reusers to apply additional legal restrictions and/or technological measures (i.e., DRM) that restrict or prevent recipients of the licensed work from exercising the rights granted under the CC license. If a social media site has a terms of use provision along the lines of "You may not download or save any content that you did not create, except for personal usage" and a CC-licensed work is uploaded to the site by someone who is not the work's copyright holder, the question comes up as to whether the site's terms of use provision would be an additional restriction on the reuse of the CC-licensed work and whether the uploader has violated the terms of the CC license. This CC FAQ entry is relevant but it may not fully cover the issue. (To be sure, there is the question as to how many users actually read through the terms of use for each and every Web site...) --Gazebo (talk) 05:39, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

I nominated it for deletion. See Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Nofacebook. --Jarekt (talk) 13:15, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

September 14Edit

I found one of my restorations on AlamyEdit

[4] which is File:Ivan Logginovitch Goremykin, c. 1906 (cropped).jpg. Although I think they upscaled it, because the dimensions given aren't the original ones, which is kinda bad too.

They also have [5] which I think they meant to steal from my work, but got the wrong file. It's from File:Levi_Morton_-_Brady-Handy_portrait_-_Original_LoC_scan.tif which is just the unedited TIFF, unless I'm horribly mistaken.

Of course, these are just the ones they say they stole. There may be others. Now, I don't mind people using my work. But this feels... scummy. Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:35, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

I recently heard that this file that I uploaded had been copied to Alamy and was being offered for sale. It certainly felt pretty scummy, but in that case, it wasn't illegal (it's a PD file). Nevertheless, my friend contacted them and they took it down. The user who uploaded it there was Matteo Omied (I'm only saying that in case they're running a bot or something here; it looked like they had tens of thousands of images for sale on Alamy, I don't know how many come from Commons). — Sam Wilson ( TalkContribs ) … 09:15, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
It is encouraging to hear the case from Sam, so it actually may be worth emailing Alamy and politely ask for it to be removed; presuming a black mark of some sort on the uploader. Unfortunately these type of companies that rely on profiting from copyfraud, are likely to be comfortable with scummy behaviour, and mostly require a take-down notice before doing anything. If this does not go anywhere, have the satisfaction that we agree with you that only unethical arseholes knowingly profit from copyfraud. Were there a CC-BY-SA license here, a take-down would have legal weight, and meaningful consequences if ignored. -- (talk) 09:21, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Few more I found:

Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:30, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

This all brings to mind the former glory of COM:ALAMY.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 03:51, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

September 15Edit

Redundancies at Category:Banate, IloiloEdit

Hello. Can anyone check the categorization of files and images at Category:Banate, Iloilo? There are too many redundancies in categorizations. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:41, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

  • @JWilz12345: Can you be more specific with an example or two of what has you concerned? - Jmabel ! talk 23:11, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

September 16Edit

Italics on PD-US tagsEdit

Why are these tags using italic text? I don't see other PD tags doing that ({{PD-old-70}}, {{PD-anon-70-EU}}, {{PD-US-expired}}, {{PD-1996}})...

-BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 00:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

  • Probably for no reason in particular. Most likely scenario: Somebody made a template way back in the 2000's and just thought it looked good. People copied the code when they made new templates and just kept the italics. Nobody noticed that most other templates don't use italics (or nobody cared enough) so nobody unified the design. --El Grafo (talk) 09:57, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
    • Would it make more sense to undo the italics for consistency? For me, it just looks... off, probably because I see long strings of italics and think that something is being quoted. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 01:13, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Search functionEdit

We do have a file

However, when I directly enter the file name "ScottishCeltic.ogg" into the searchbox wikimedia answers we do not have that.

  1. Is there a way to work around this?
  2. shouldn't the software be altered so that filenames are found?

Teun Spaans 04:48, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

It's the first result for me. You can control search preferences here, including which namespaces are chosen. The default search options will find this file. —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:42, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Pre-fill Special:MovePage/File:Kangxi_Style_Kangxi_Radical_001.svg with right values for 200+ renamesEdit

I have 200+ renaming following a known patern. Following mw:API:Move I try to build convenient "Rename" url with prefilled parameters from, to, reason. I get an error message :

    "error": {
        "code": "mustpostparams",
        "info": "The following parameter was found in the query string, but must be in the POST body: token.",
        "*": "See for API usage. Subscribe to the mediawiki-api-announce mailing list at <> for notice of API deprecations and breaking changes."
    "servedby": "mw2362"

So I digged on, added &token=123456ABCDEF&type=csrf from mw:API:Move's to get a better url:, I still fail. Where may I get help for this ? Yug (talk) 11:45, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't understand the "POST body" part. Yug (talk) 11:49, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Oh.... I can't make it works because entering it in my browser's url send a GET query... ? Yug (talk) 11:56, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
OK, got it. The URL is to be used by serverside POST requests, not via clientside url bar. It also requires to first login, via a similar approach (see mw:API:Login#Example). I store this and will handle it later on. Yug (talk) 12:05, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Unsourced medical statements in imagesEdit

Is there any Commons policy that objects to a file like File:Signs of PPD 1.png, where an editor has made an infographic of "Signs of paranoid personality disorder" with no cited source, and which may be their own original research? There are several such graphics from the same uploader. --Lord Belbury (talk) 15:00, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

  • @Lord Belbury: Commons does not have a policy against original research (after all, almost every original photograph is original research!) but if you think the information is inaccurate, you can use {{Fact}} and cite your source that contradicts it. - Jmabel ! talk 15:33, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
    • If Commons is fine with original research and not particularly alarmed at original research offering medical tips, fair enough. I'm not going to check 13 different fields of mental health research to decide whether these are all reasonable summaries of each condition, I'll just go with {{References missing}} and check the images aren't being used on Wikipedia. Thanks for the clarification. --Lord Belbury (talk) 15:55, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
      • Thanks Lord Belbury, seems good. These images should then be sourced themselves on in articles. Up to the wikipedias to monitor those. Yug (talk) 19:29, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

User:name/common.js : limit for renaming files ?Edit

I will use my common.js to rename 200 files from a project I'am working on. The renaming have been calmly discussed by the project's contributors for 3 years. The lights are green. Should I declare my "mass"-rename action somewhere ? slow down my script ? There should be some best practices but I saw nothing on mw:API:Move. Yug (talk) 16:06, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

It may conflict with COM:BOTS. Ruslik0 (talk) 19:50, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
This is a small rename task. To worry about a more formal consensus or even requesting bot permission, this would mean something like a regular housekeeping task, or one that might mean something like 100x the changes you are planning.
Suggest that you throttle the changes to 4/min or fewer, just so that nobody worries about recent changes being overwhelmed. -- (talk) 12:06, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
@: thanks, this is the wiki spirit I came for. Yug (talk) 19:36, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

September 17Edit

Rectifying my mistakes and instead report here phil bldg and sculpture photosEdit

Hello everyone. Its my biggest mistake to have made mass deletions. I sincerely appologise most esp to the moderator @Mutichill:. I will not do those deletions by myself again. Instaed i will forward here some violations on phil photos of bldgs and sculotures. AND,_Bayambang_2020 - AND ("JQS Builders, ARCHITECT Jerry Suratos, Engr. Aaron Villafuerte and Jericho Roble DATE OF COMPLETION 2019) AND,_Bayambang_2020 - AND ("JQS Builders, ARCHITECT Jerry Suratos, Engr. Aaron Villafuerte and Jericho Roble DATE OF COMPLETION 2019) - (The same image and narrative are also committed to sculpture. The likeness of Gregorio Del Pilar was executed in 2000 into an equestrian statue by history sculptor Apolinario Paraiso Bulaong. ........ Aside from this equestrian statue and numerous bust portraits of Del Pilar, Bulaong also executed in 2001 a relief sculpture depicting the battle at Tirad Pass. The sculptural mural is installed at the plaza of Bulacan, Bulacan, where Del Pilar came from.)

• pls also look at photos under the groups at and most esp,_Bulacan,_Orion,_Bataan - (The statue made by world-renowned sculptor Julie Lluch was installed in Wawa in 2014.)

• Also pls look at some photos at plus some groups at that category.

• Statues and or sculptures listed at

(Meaning: Structure Provenance Site Location Artist)

  1. Gat Francisco Balagtas Marble Bust 1950 Malolos Plaza and Rotounda Guillermo Tolentino,National Artist
  2. Bronze Statue of Emilio Aguinaldo 1950 Barasoain Church Plaza, Malolos City Antonio Caedo,pre-National Artist
  3. Gen.Isidoro Torres Monument 1950 Plaza Torres, Malolos Market n/a
  4. President Ramon Magsaysay 1960 Bulacan Capitol Compound, Malolos
  5. General Gregorio del Pilar 1950 Bulacan Capitol Plaza, Malolos n/a

• Capitol bldg photos at,_Sultan_Kudarat - (completed 2006),_Nueva_Ecija_Map_and_Landmark (although owned by the government, the LGU is not obliged to force the creators to withdraw their moral rights to them whether architecture or sculptures, and this is reinforced in the new copyright rules for government works),_Aklan - monument to the late Cardinal Sin -

• Photos of the sculpture of Rizal at reason: (The sculpture was conceptualized by Antonio Tuviera and was executed by Manuel Tolentino. The monument consists of five figures, including the three artillery escorts seemingly loading off from a small boat and the Spanish Captain on Rizal’s right side. It was opened to the public, 117 years after the actual event.)

Another one is unfortunately

Even in your wiki entry it says it underwent extensive renovations, and under the Marcos admin "The old Palace was gutted almost entirely, not only to meet the needs of the Presidential Family, but also because the buildings had been weakened by patch up renovations over a century that had resulted in unstable floors and leaking roofs. The building is now made of poured concrete, concrete slabs, steel girders and trusses, all concealed under elegant hardwood floors, panels and ceilings. It is fully bullet-proofed, cooled by central air-conditioning with filters, and has an independent power supply. Architect Jorge Ramos oversaw the reconstruction, which was closely supervised by Mrs. Marcos. The refurbished Palace was inaugurated on May 1, 1979–the Marcos' silver wedding anniversary." It indicates it is not the same bldg as the spanish or american era which was mainly made of wood. I couldnt found a source for the death date of Jorge Ramos. - Mrcel Lxmna

Next:,_Pangasinan - - 2007 unveiled and unknown creator - - (This statue, sponsored by the Anvil Business Club of Manila, specifically honors Confucius in his role as a teacher, and thereby is erected in honor of all teachers. It was placed in 2009 in the Chinese Garden section of the large Rizal Park in downtown Manila.)

• the category pls check. The statue is designed by napoleon abueva -

• photos grouped at each of categories

Mrcel lcmna - - 2007 by Jun Vicaldo

• contents under — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrcl lxmna (talk • contribs) 12:19, 17 September 2020‎ (UTC)

  • Am I missing something about why this is a VP topic? Why isn't this going through more usual channels for requested deletions? - Jmabel ! talk 23:41, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
    @Jmabel: I think it is because Mrcl lxmna is here to Right a Great Wrong, please make it stop.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 00:14, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Commons overriding internal wiki's filesEdit

It doesn't makes sense to allow such an override. Perhaps it should be replaced with a namespace for Commons' files. Anyways, it just blocks the access to the local wiki's file. There should be a solution when moving a file from a local wiki to Commons. Galzigler (talk) 12:24, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@Galzigler: Can you give an example of this happening? My understanding is that where a wiki has a local file, the Commons file with the same name is unusable on that wiki. For instance, en:File:Example.jpg is different from File:Example.jpg, so where en:Help:Edit toolbar uses [[File:Example.jpg|thumbnail]] it gets the Wikipedia version and not the Commons version. I suspect there's something more subtle that you're talking about though. --bjh21 (talk) 12:53, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

September 18Edit

Notification of global ban proposal who were active on this wiki (このウィキでアクティブだったグローバル禁止提案の通知)Edit

This is a notification of global ban discussion per the global ban policy.


My regards, SMB99thx uh~~kay!! 📸 06:22, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

ODbL template needs updateEdit

I.e. {{ODbL OpenStreetMap}}. The issue is OSM changed the licensing of its tiles. --Palosirkka (talk) 10:34, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Photographic effectsEdit

Splitsing metro M3 en M4.jpg

How can we classify this photographic effect? We have a categories for 'Contre-jour photography', but movement effects. I searched the metacategories: 'Photographic techniques', 'Photography by style' and 'Photographic effects', but could not find anything.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:14, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

May be Category:Blurred images. Wouter (talk) 15:14, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Tunnel vision? ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 17:37, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Category:Motion blur, Category:Blur from camera motion MKFI (talk) 07:27, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
I have added Category:Underground structures but its a bit lonely there. It is not an underground railway station.Smiley.toerist (talk) 09:08, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

This should be in Category:Zoom burst, see Zoom burst. Also known as 'zoom blur'. Verbcatcher (talk) 14:06, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Edit requestEdit

Can someone autopatrolled user create page Template:Potd/2020-09-27 (fi) with content: "Alaskantuulenkala (Ammodytes hexapterus) kaivautuneena hiekkaan." Thanks in advance Jnovikov (talk) 16:33, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

✓ Done Ruslik0 (talk) 11:08, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Oh, thanks but actually I mean this: {{Potd description|1=Alaskantuulenkala (''Ammodytes hexapterus'') kaivautuneena hiekkaan.|2=fi|3=2020|4=09|5=27}} Jnovikov (talk) 11:30, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
✓ DoneBMacZero (🗩) 16:49, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Who Is Really In This Painting?Edit

The artist with Nicholas Lanier (left) and Sir Charles Cottrell (right), circa 1645.

According to the Wikimedia Commons title of the painting at right, "William_Dobson_-_The_Painter_with_Sir_Charles_Cottrell_and_Sir_Balthasar_Gerbier_-_WGA06361.jpg", in addtion to William Dobson the other two are Sir Charles Cottrell and Sir Balthasar Gerbier. However, copied from the William Dobson Wikipedia article, the descriptions states that it is "The artist with Nicholas Lanier (left) and Sir Charles Cottrell (right), circa 1645."

In addition to that image description, Waldemar Janusczak also claims the figure at left is Nicholas Lanier, starting from 39 minutes onward in his BBC4 documentary, "The Lost Genius Of Baroque: William Dobson (Art History Documentary) | Perspective" Perspective, Jul 25, 2020 Waldemar also verifies that the figure at right is Sir Charles Cottrell.

Again Waldemar Janusczak claims that the figure at left is Nicholas Lanier, starting from 25:15 onward in his documentary, "Designing St Paul's Cathedral (Art History Documentary) | Perspective" Perspective, Apr 30, 2020

This confusion should be resolved.

See also this mirrored comment in this Wikipedia discussion: ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 17:27, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

@JasonCarswell: Following the discussion at en:wp and the sourced given at the new Category:William Dobson - Portrait of the artist with Nicholas Lanier and Sir Charles Cotterell, that looks like a pretty clear case now. The file should probably be re-named. --El Grafo (talk) 14:33, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

September 19Edit

How to remove "er daddy (given name)" red link categoryEdit

See Category Daddy Yankee which has a red link with "er daddy given name" and I don't know how to remove this. Please advice or do. Thanks and regards. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 11:16, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

@The Eloquent Peasant: That error was introduced in this edit. I reverted and replaced it, warned the person who made it, and made sure it was effective here.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 12:16, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you so much - gentlemen! --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 12:18, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: The edit you reverted was actually correct, the problem was that the label for the item was changed. Anyhow, all sorted now. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 12:30, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
@Mike Peel: You're welcome. My respect for Wikidata has diminished with the introduction of Flow there.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 12:39, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

September 20Edit

Adding the same tag to many filesEdit

Is there a way to add the same tag to several images at the same time within a category? For example, if "Churches in Austin, Texas" is a category (I'm just making that up, but maybe it is), could someone go though and easily select 50 of the images and add "Methodist churches in Texas" or something to all of them at the same time? Or do you have to actually go through the process of individually opening each one, typing the new category, adding it, and the backing up to the category before repeating that fifty times?--ProfReader (talk) 00:45, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Instead of "typing" you could try copy-pasting. --E4024 (talk) 00:50, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
There is a tool called Visual File Change, which allows for batch tasks on categories. Unfortunately it is quite counter-intuitive and it takes a long time to actually click on all files in the category and the potential to mess something up is quite high, thus I did not give it a try to the fullest extent. ℺ Gone Postal ( ) 01:20, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
I use Visual File Change constantly, and find it useful but, yes, there is a bit of a learning curve. Making a change to all of the files in a category is actually pretty simple, and the select mechanism isn't too bad (you can use CTRL-shift to select a range, and you can select multiple ranges for the same operation). Basically, it works by text substitution; it's most powerful if you understand regexes, but it is pretty powerful even without that. So, for the example given, you could replace [[Category:Churches in Austin, Texas]] with [[Category:Churches in Austin, Texas]]\n[[Category:Methodist churches in Texas]] for the selected files, effectively adding the category. (That "\n" is a newline). - Jmabel ! talk 01:35, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
to select all files you do not need Ctrl-whatever. There is a checkbox at the top "(un)select all files". However all is only all files already loaded to the vfc page. Therefore first scroll down and possibly also click the load more button for a number of times. Then: is this about categories or tags ("a way to add the same tag"). Then it would be QuickStatements, not vfc? --C.Suthorn (talk) 07:30, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
@ProfReader: for categorization only, you can also use Cat-a-lot.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 02:30, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Extracting old image from a websiteEdit

Can anyone work out how to download this image (at the foot of the page; also others from the same book) to add to Commons, please? It is from 1876, so safely out of copyright. Right-click to save is disabled. Thanks! - MPF (talk) 16:13, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

  • It looks like they use composite images created on the fly from tiles, so unless you can somehow get access to the tiles I think the only hope is a screen grab using PrtSc, or some programmed equivalent of that in a screenscraper. - Jmabel ! talk 16:32, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Pinging @ as an expert in such matters.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 16:36, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
This will work using standard tools if you follow User:Fæ/dezoomify. The tile links you need to find look like,7&CVT=JPEG in the inspector. Each page can be separately dezoomed using these links fed into the ophir dezoom page, which will stitch a single page PNG file in your browser, which you can then save. -- (talk) 18:22, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
@: - many thanks! I tried it, but it didn't work for me; it's too complex for me to understand the workings to get round the problems. Would you be willing to give it a try, please? It is plates 15 (the one linked above), 16 and 17 that are of the most interest. Thanks! - MPF (talk) 20:02, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
This is what I do. Go to the view page in Chrome, toggle on the inspector option, go to the Network tab in the inspector, tap on the "+" on the image view to zoom in, instantly the URLs for tiles appear in the Network tab (starting "iipsrv.fcgi?"), right click on one to see the menu option to copy the URL, open another browser tab and go to the Dezoomify page, paste in the tile URL, click the button.
The image dezooms like magic, and I can "save image as..." locally and upload to Commons as normal.
File:Mongolia, the Tangut Country, and the Solitudes of Northern Tibet; Being a Narrative of Three Years' Travel in Eastern High Asia (plate XV).png
But as these take about 5 mins or longer each time depending on my connection, and there are valuable large content projects in my backlog, no, I'm not going to do these. Please follow the instructions and keep trying, it will work. -- (talk) 10:46, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
@: do we have strategies like that documented somewhere they could sanely be looked up, rather than people having to find them in archives of general discussion pages? - Jmabel ! talk 14:36, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Commons:Dezoomify, if you want to write a bit of an introduction on that page because my text is a bit technical, please do. -- (talk) 16:47, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Export of files from sq.wikipediaEdit

I want to export this and that file to Commons. I get the message ".. importing files from the source wiki ( is not yet possible because there is no configuration for the wiki in the configuration file list ..". I looked at the documentation page, but for me it is not clear what I should do to make this possible. What to do? Wouter (talk) 18:26, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

  • @Wouterhagens: Since they are public domain images with no metadata anyway (except for one Armenian-language description that is easily copied), I'd suggest just downloading to your computer and uploading fresh on Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 23:28, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, that was an easy solution. The images are now also available for the other Wikipedias via a Commons category. Wouter (talk) 10:36, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
These files doesn't contain even approximate date of creation. Proper source information and license tags must be used. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:26, 21 September 2020 (UTC)


Hello, Can someone help me to delete all pictures from Simone´s article? Those pics are not allowed. Thanks

@Fcsnaveia: ✓ Done A DR was created by Raphael Figueira. Commons:Deletion requests/File:Simone 1973 simone (712017813).jpg. – BMacZero (🗩) 19:14, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

September 21Edit

IIIF developments -- office hours *today* (21st) and tomorrow (22nd)Edit

International Image Interoperability Framework logo.png

A few weeks ago, ticket phab:T261621 quietly got opened on Phabricator, "Support the addition of the IIIF API for Wikimedia projects regarding content partnerships"

"The WMF platform team is working on implementation of a IIIF API (International Image Interoperability Framework) for the Wikimedia projects and WMSE will provide support around the needs from our content partners."

As a first step towards this, WMSE has announced two GLAM & Culture team Office hours, on the subject of "IIIF on Wikimedia Commons"

The first office hour is *today* (Monday 21st Sept) at 3.30-4.30 pm UTC (4.30 pm UK time).

"We will be joined by staff and members of the IIIF consortium and Evan Prodromou, Product Manager in the Foundation's Platform team. Evan is scoping a potential implementation of International Image Interoperability Framework (IIIF) on Wikimedia Commons and he is very interested in potential GLAM use cases."

The meeting will then be run again tomorrow (Tuesday 22nd Sept) at 11.30am-12.30pm UTC (12.30 pm UK time):

"We will be joined by staff and members of the IIIF consortium and Jason Evans will share his experience with IIIF at The National Library of Wales."

The WMSE team are particularly interested to hear about GLAMs' experiences with IIIF; what IIIF capabilities on Commons could be most useful to them; and, therefore, what capabilities and use-cases it would be most useful to prioritise development around.

More about IIIF in a moment, below, but I just wanted to get this up a.s.a.p. in case anyone who is interested managed to see it in time. Zoom links via the announcement on meta. Jheald (talk) 14:38, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Do you remember that the COM:VP/T was hotly debated, but in the end the 'technology' village pump was created? This looks like a topic that would be of interest there, but of not much wide interest here. -- (talk) 10:11, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks User:Fæ. Some introductory background about IIIF, and notes from yesterday's zoom call, now moved to COM:VP/T (thread). Jheald (talk) 10:23, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
"Hotly debated"?! It was nearly universally supported! In fact I've seen a small number of WMF engineers exclusively post technical notifications there. Apparently the above post has more engagement there, should this thread then be marked as "Solved" or better leave it here to have more eyeballs on the discussions? --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 21:47, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

September 22Edit

Cat names: "playing" or "playing the"?Edit

We have these two:

These should be merged, but into which one? And what about other analogous cats with and without "the"? -- Tuválkin 01:57, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Tuvalkin: How about Category:Banjos being played?   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 07:02, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: I don't think switching to passive voice would be an improvement.
@Tuvalkin:I'd say either is correct, but I'd probably go with Category:People playing the banjo as more colloquial. - Jmabel ! talk 14:39, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
@Tuvalkin, Jmabel: How about Category:Banjo performances?   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 14:57, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
We should aim for consistency in the subcats of Category:People playing musical instruments. There's a mixture, but I think there are more without 'the', so I'd go for Category:People playing banjo. Verbcatcher (talk) 21:28, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Pixabay images before 2019 still okay?Edit

Template:Pixabay isn't clear on this, though some past VP discussions appear to suggest that Pixabay images with upload dates prior to their licence change on 9 January 2019 can be considered to have been licensed under CC-0 and are okay. Is this correct? How should one list the original upload date? --Paul_012 (talk) 13:36, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Paul 012: Yes, Pixabay images uploaded before 9 January 2019 are ok. "Uploaded to Pixabay 8 January 2019." in the description field should be sufficient.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 15:02, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. ✓ Done. --Paul_012 (talk) 00:12, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

September 23Edit