User talk:Daniel Mietchen

Return to "Daniel Mietchen" page.
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Daniel Mietchen!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | Estremeñu | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Frysk | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Latina | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Scots | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−

-- 21:18, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Open Access resources as an ongoing donation to CommonsEdit

Sorry, I did not get much time to look at your upload needs. I have rather little time lattely and there is still a lot I was planning to do on the Walters upload. However at this point that can wait, so if you still need help, I will look into it. I looked at March_2012_trial_for_batch_upload_to_Wikimedia_Commons.csv file and have some comments:

  • file location - fine
  • author - fine, but a version with a link to somewhere would be better if it is easier split into author_url and author_txt columns
  • description - fine
  • date - A date in YYYY-MM-DD format is what is needed, but it is an easy conversion
  • link to source page - I do not understand it. I was expecting an url to some page with the picture.
  • commons categories - fine, although I do not think we need "Media from ZooKeys" - if all files have it we can hardwire it
  • Licensing - fine

I guess we would still need a column with filenames to be used on Commons. We could use names like "ZooKeys-171-001-g001.jpg" but most commons users like descriptive names. We could use names like Acroceridae wings - ZooKeys-171-001-g001.jpg. --Jarekt (talk) 02:42, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jarek,
thanks for the comments, and yes, your help with getting this workflow set up would still be appreciated. My comments on your comments:
author: the link is provided by way of the DOI (e.g. doi:10.3897/zookeys.171.2137). Most authors won't have a Wikipedia entry.
date: OK, will fix that.
link to source: again, the link is provided through the DOI.
commons categories: Yes, Media from ZooKeys can now be dropped, as this is done by {{ZooKeys-License}}
file names: OK, will try to implement the Acroceridae wings - ZooKeys-171-001-g001.jpg variety.
Will get back to you when done. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 03:02, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
I was wondering if it's possible to have a script that looks at whether a species page on Wikispecies does not have an image and an image is available Commons (especially if the image comes from ZooKeys journal). I do recall the back in 2007, a similar script [1] identifies images on Commons which the corresponding biography's page does not have an image. Do you know who could write a similar script? OhanaUnitedTalk page 05:52, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Nice idea. Have you asked User:emijrp whether he could provide and possibly even modify that code? -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 05:02, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Access 2 research video by SPARC.ogvEdit

Please can you indicate where you found the license for the above file. I followed all the links in the description, and none gave a clear license that I could see. --99of9 (talk) 12:55, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

The final frame in the video states CC BY, as does the YouTube page (if you hit "more"). -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 13:08, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Great, thanks. --99of9 (talk) 13:49, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Data ingestion layout templatesEdit

Category:Data ingestion layout templates. Multichill (talk) 08:57, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Import bot requestEdit

Melde Dich wenn der request existiert. Gruss --Dschwen (talk) 17:40, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

User:JarektUploadBot/Upload_Open_Access_Images.pyEdit

Daniel, Above is the code I was thinking about to use for the upload. Would you be able to run it? --Jarekt (talk) 02:27, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jarek, thanks! However, I'm not sure how I am supposed to run that code - I would know how to use it as part of a PyWikipediaBot installation, but I don't have one for Commons, and this would still require bot permission for me. Or is there a way to get JarektUploadBot to do it for me? -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 01:30, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Ok, Do you have a version of the csv file with filenames, like "Acroceridae wings - ZooKeys-171-001-g001.jpg", see here --Jarekt (talk) 02:40, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Nope, but see email. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 02:58, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
I uploaded a few images, see Category:File with non-existing species category. See User:JarektUploadBot/Upload_Open_Access_Images.py. If they are OK I will add the rest. --Jarekt (talk) 11:04, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I checked them all. Looks good, and that additional category was helpful. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 14:39, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
All uploaded now. Let me know if you have more. --Jarekt (talk) 16:59, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! I've done them all. Will get back to you when more is available. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 21:42, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
Any progress with those? --Jarekt (talk) 15:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Nothing concrete, apart from some long-term strategic thoughts. I am currently concentrating on User:Open Access Media Importer Bot. Once this bot works fine (we're not there yet - see here for latest details, and I still have no idea how to operate the thing via the toolserver or Labs eventually), it would transfer suitable files from PubMed Central onto Commons. In quite a few cases, this may not be enough, since (a) the full record at PMC is often not available before some weeks after original publication and (b) not all journals are indexed in PMC. For these cases a and b, I am thinking of ways to use your upload scheme (or something very similar) as an alternative, but I haven't yet thought this through, nor asked publishers for further sample files. Would welcome your views on that. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 15:35, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
A bot continuously running on a toolserver would be ideal. I also have no idea how to operate a bot via toolserver. Is there a way to create csv files automatically, based on the available data, for the cases when csv-bases upload scheme is used? --Jarekt (talk) 18:44, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
I don't know of a way to generate a generic automated upload workflow other than via PubMed Central, which the OAMI uses. For our purposes, it will have to be specific to the publisher (or perhaps even journal). I'll see what the possibilities are. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 23:01, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

talk backEdit

Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Daniel Mietchen. You have new messages at HstryQT's talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Asturianu | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | हिन्दी | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | +/−


Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Daniel Mietchen. You have new messages at Sv1xv's talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Asturianu | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | हिन्दी | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | +/−

Location?Edit

Hi Daniel - do you have a location for File:Rain drops on needles.jpg, please? Thanks! - MPF (talk) 10:48, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Done. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 11:48, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! - MPF (talk) 23:11, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Just noticed the date and fixed the location accordingly. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 23:47, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Filemover!Edit

Commons File mover.svg

Hi Daniel Mietchen, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

  • Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
  • Please do not tag redirects as {{speedy}}. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references.
  • Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

Deutsch | English | 한국어 | മലയാളം | Русский | +/−

Trijnsteltalk 21:28, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 21:32, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Media of the dayEdit

Hello,

When you add a new media of the day, please copy the English description, and add descriptions in other languages as possible. Also it is best not to add the same kind of media on consecutive days. Thanks, Yann (talk) 18:51, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I am traveling these days and thus offline, but plan to do the descriptions tonight. I agree about the consecutive days in principle, but that week is Open Access Week, so I thought featuring some Open Access materials would be OK. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 19:53, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Just saw that you already started putting in the descriptions - thanks a lot! -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 19:55, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

re Thanks for your help with categorizing media filesEdit

Hi Cirt, thanks for improving the categorization of some of the files in Category:Uploaded with Open Access Media Importer and needing category review. With a smile, -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 22:18, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

You're most welcome, -- Cirt (talk) 22:59, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Category misspellingEdit

Category:Biophysic al simulations (for example on this file) should be Category:Biophysical simulations. --99of9 (talk) 04:04, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. This typo affects over 500 PLOS papers and will have to be corrected manually for the time being (just did it once for everything already imported), unless we allow a redirect. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 07:41, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
Don't do it manually. If you can't code it easily pre-upload, then we can just temporarily create the bad category and hotcat or category move to the good one. --99of9 (talk) 09:11, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
OK. I have notified PLOS. By "manually", I meant HotCat, but I'd personally prefer a redirect. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 09:30, 16 November 2012 (UTC)


Category:Viral diseasesEdit

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Viral diseases has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


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

--WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:28, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for checking those categories and notifying me. I replied there. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 22:26, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Matrix-assisted_laser_desorption-ionization_mass_spectrometryEdit

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Matrix-assisted_laser_desorption-ionization_mass_spectrometry has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


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

Badseed talk 01:31, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I replied there. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 02:41, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the quick response and action - Badseed talk 16:24, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Picture of the Year voting round 1 openEdit

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

  1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
  2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
  3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee


Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 09:03, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

Re:Categorizing multimedia filesEdit

Hi Daniel

you are quite right. I got the topic and name of a journal mixed up. I'm really sorry for that so now, as you rightly advised me, I take a break and I'll try to fix the categorization by source.

Thank you so much, Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 21:57, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Daniel MietchenEdit

FYI: Category:Daniel Mietchen. Andy Mabbett (talk) 13:11, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Ha - love that latest category that you added! -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 21:21, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

TUSC token: 22656c789875e425543d3d8bec2e2b93Edit

I am now proud owner of a WMFLabs TUSC account! -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 08:12, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Uploading from Plos OneEdit

I haven't delved into the source, but how thorough is the spider of pubmed central? Figures from Plos One don't all seem to be uploading. Could you scrape Plos One directly? Also, you should add a {{User bot master}} to your userpage.Smallman12q (talk) 19:54, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

The bot is not meant to upload images - it only does audio and video at the moment. Did you have some specific PLOS images in mind? I can help with getting these up here. I have added the bot master template to my user page - thanks for the hint. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 20:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Is there a reason only audio/video is uploaded? Images would be more likely to be used and are more abundant.Smallman12q (talk) 22:09, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
The main reason is that most figures in journal articles are charts and plots of kinds that are very rarely used in Wikimedia projects even if available from Commons. I am envisioning here a functionality similar to Flickr2Commons, where the transfer of specific files can be triggered manually and performed by a bot, but this has not been coded yet. Would you be interested in giving it a shot? -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 10:49, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
I could write something like that for individual PLOS articles (I wrote a NCBI bookshelf scraper for Stembook). However, before I do that, perhaps there's a more automated way? If you want to upload only pictures/photographs, you could check the number of colors used in the image. We could create a set with only the color images and upload that automatically. Additionally, most of the tables are labeled as "Table x". One of the problems is that a number of the images are A/B/C/D in one image, so to be properly used, they'd need to be split into 4 different photographs. Doing it by article will be very slow.Smallman12q (talk) 13:27, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Some good illustrations are black and white, so counting colours won't work. Tables are doable, but also not generally useful, so better imported on demand. Composite figures are really annoying indeed, and why I wrote "main reason" above: they are completely unnecessary in electronic publications, and they make it difficult (sometimes impossible) to extract something useful from them. I'm adding a quick selection here:
How would you tackle these algorithmically? -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 19:14, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
  • I'd also like to see the images done. I think high quality charts are still worth it even if they're not used often, because when you do want to use them, they're often very time-consuming to prepare from scratch. The composite images can be split at a later date, but it would be worth tagging them as such. --99of9 (talk) 00:24, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
    I don't see an easy way to tag files as composite figures but I agree that putting up composite figures can be useful sometimes, in that they act as pointers to the individual subfigures which may be used in more specific contexts. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 01:03, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

You've illustrated your point well=P. Composites separated by definitive white/black lines could be semi-automatically cropped (auto-display guidelines where to crop). Unfortunately, the description would not be so easy to parse...if it could be separated at all. Is it worthwhile to upload composite images? Some figures cannot be separated without losing meaning (such as when showing zoomed in portions). Should tables/charts not be uploaded...how would their mass deletion be handled? We could do a stream of thumbnails of what to upload/not upload/what's a composite with some centralized db serving out fresh batches and keeping track of already processed images. Ideally, there'll also be a browser based cropper (javascript w/html5 or flash). What are your thoughts on this?Smallman12q (talk) 00:34, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, splitting the images in a useful manner is challenging in and of itself, but coordinating this with a suitable arrangement of the captions (simple splitting will often not do) is a common deal breaker here. For tables and charts, I do not have a strong opinion, just the observation that they would rarely fit in as they are. Options for mass deletion can probably be handled by way of categories. The "centralized db serving out fresh batches and keeping track of already processed images" sounds interesting, and while we have implemented a version of that for the multimedia files, I see quite some room for improvement, which would all transfer to images. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 01:03, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
So there are one of two ways to do this:
  1. Upload everything to commons, and sort it out/delete from here.
  2. Create a separate stream/db to serve new images and have folks determine what stays/goes from there and upload to commons. Keep log what stays/goes/new/old/etc.
Which way should we do it (and then we can go from there)? Maybe file an RFC? Smallman12q (talk) 01:43, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
I think there is a third way: Have people decide on a case by case basis which files to import, and then do the import automatically, just like Flickr2Commons does (if the toolserver is working). The weakness of this approach is that it does not allow for easy browsing of the candidate material (though the BioText search engine comes close). -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 07:52, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
That's pretty much option 2. I'll try and write something up this week.Smallman12q (talk) 15:06, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Sounds cool - looking forward to it! I assume you are basing your code on that of the OAMI, which has been designed in a modular fashion, so as to allow for extensions like this. If not, please explain why. Thanks! -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 23:58, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
I looked at it OAMI, but I'm not entirely sure I need that much code for this. I intend to scrape OA Web Service for web records that were updated that day, and then look for image figures in the .nxml file of the .tar.gz link. I transform the figure description to wikicode, and extract the graphic out of the zip file. Is there something wrong with this method? Also, is there a reason you chose to use urllib directly instead of a wrapper such as requests?Smallman12q (talk) 12:13, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
If you would build it as an OAMI plugin, you would only have to write a function that downloads the given data and a function that looks for image figures, OAMI does the rest. You may not be aware of the fact that other metadata in the .nxml files requires various workarounds: For example, figure caption, title and summary are often not consistent and licensing data may be in plain text, inconsistent or even wrong. I know requests, but do not see which problem it could solve here – simple indirection is not abstraction. Nils Dagsson Moskopp 89.204.130.118 20:08, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Well, in that case it'd be better to use OAMI. The documentation seems a bit lacking (maybe it's me) and it seems I'd need to call a specific script and redirect/parse its output (it's not very OOP friendly)? This is the skeleton of what I need to do:

articles = list of articles from a date
for article in articles
    articletitle = article.title
    articlejournal = article.journal
    .
    .
    .
    licensecheck()
    for figure in article.figures
        if figure.format in [list of image formats]
            AddFigureToDB()

If OAMI can get me there faster, great.Smallman12q (talk) 23:54, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

The documentation is, in fact, lacking. OAMI has different „sources“ that all implement two functions, download_metadata() and list_materials(). On a more in-depth look it seems we already do iterate over the <fig> elements <https://github.com/erlehmann/open-access-media-importer/blob/master/sources/pmc.py#L555> – if that was done correctly (I have to test it), we probably just discard the results for now.
Checked it, <fig> results get discarded when OAMI cannot find a <media> element in it, but a <graphic> element. Stand by.
I got promising results under the somewhat questionable assumption that figures always contain JPEG images. Please look at this patch <https://github.com/erlehmann/open-access-media-importer/commit/03eda6fba6b52665bfc8fd241fe40b4c64ae83d9> and suggest improvements. I also suggest you download the figure branch and do the following:
./oa-cache clear-database pmc_doi
./oami_pmc_doi_import_test
./oa-cache browse-database pmc_doi

I am pretty sure that media conversion and uploading filter out everything that is not audio/video, but that could be overcome easily.

You should add to install the dependencies, you need:

sudo apt-get install python-gobject python-dateutil python-elixir python-gst0.10 python-magic python-magic python-mutagen python-progressbar python-xdg When I tried, './oa-cache clear-database pmc_doi', it requested the userconfig file. So I put in the example one. It then states that the userconfig is missing the 'whitelist' section. Is the whitelist section and associated options documented? What should the userconfig be? I could dig into the source, but you should document your code.Smallman12q (talk) 02:39, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

I'll start doing that now.

Importer file thumbnailing bugEdit

Some of the files uploaded by the bot aren't thumbnailing properly. Have you filed a bug report?Smallman12q (talk) 00:34, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I didn't file anything on the matter so far, as I haven't yet found the time to look at it in detail. Help with that would be appreciated. It seems to be a rather recent phenomenon, though - jumping to my attention just about two weeks ago. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 00:48, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
I've filed it at Bugzilla47465.Smallman12q (talk) 01:38, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 07:46, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

CommandeEdit

Bonjour Daniel Mietchen

j'ai une commande d'images : ce [www.plosone.org/article/fetchObjectAttachment.action?uri=info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0057756&representation=PDF pdf de plos one]... ++ Poleta33 (talk) 09:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Il est plus facile d'utiliser les images de la version HTML - voilà. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 19:06, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
merci c'est parfait comme d'hab ! Smile ++ Poleta33 (talk) 12:49, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

File tagging File:Podarcis sicula klemmeri from Licosa - 1471-2148-10-289-1d-left.pngEdit

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Podarcis sicula klemmeri from Licosa - 1471-2148-10-289-1d-left.png. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

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

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

Stefan4 (talk) 13:25, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for checking, but the file is taken from the indicated article, which is clearly labeled as CC BY 2.0 (just click on the doi link to confirm). Since that license is not available through the upload wizard without the flickrreview template, I chose that, and then forgot to remove it. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 14:09, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Reply from Dcrjsr at WikiProject BiophysicsEdit

Thanks for the ideas on open source projects & collaborations. I like the circular permutation article very much! I'll see if I can come up with some feasible lines of attack - but for now, the project and the contest are probably all I should try to manage.

Another question: I have indeed heard that PLoS figures have open licenses compatible with Commons, and your role there certainly confirms that. However, I'd combed their web site and could not find a statement anywhere of what their license actually is. Can you tell me that, and perhaps also point me to where the documentation for it is? I'd like to set our BPS folks to using those. Thanks! Dcrjsr (talk) 03:25, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks very much! Clearly my mistake was looking on the journal website rather than on the journal pages themselves. 152.16.15.76 23:22, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Lithoscaptus helleri from Indonesia with unidentified bopyrid in left branchial chamber - journal.pone.0035350.g001-G.pngEdit

Pay attention to copyright
File:Lithoscaptus helleri from Indonesia with unidentified bopyrid in left branchial chamber - journal.pone.0035350.g001-G.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may find Commons:Copyright rules useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.


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

Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:00, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Daniel. In explanation of the form template above, I wanted to say that, unfortunately, we have received an official complaint about this image from Sancia van der Meij (Ticket:2013050910007498) who denies the license or having granted permission to upload this material here. I see that you asserted permission but you do not seem to have forwarded that permission to the Wikimedia Foundation. Please be sure if you have uploaded other images under assertion of permission that you forward a copy of each to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and place the following on the images: {{otrs pending}}. Commons:Declaration of consent for all enquiries is a good template to use. It is essential that we retain these for our records to avoid misunderstandings. Sancia van der Meij has requested the deletion of this image as soon as possible, and it has been accordingly flagged for removal. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at my talk page. Thanks. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:00, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the notification and the explanation, but I am not sure where exactly the problem is. If you check the source that I had indicated, you will see that this is an article in an Open access journal, clearly labeled as being licensed CC BY 2.5. If you then go to Figure 1, you will see that it states "Photographs used by permission of ... Sancia van der Meij (G)" - that is the permission I referred to. Unfortunately, I have no way of knowing the terms of the permission that Sancia van der Meij gave to the authors of the paper, but since no different licensing is indicated, I think it is fair to assume (see also the footer of the page) that the CC BY 2.5 license also applies to her photo. My suspicion is that the authors have asked her for permission to use the photograph in their upcoming "Parasitic Isopods Associated with Crustacean Hosts" paper, which she gave, not being aware of the licensing and/ or the implications thereof, possibly not even knowing that the article would go to PLOS ONE (possibly after a rejection elsewhere). Please forward her email to me, so I can follow up. Thanks! -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 02:16, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi. As I mention in response to your email, I'm afraid I can't forward her email to you due to the rules of OTRS, but I'll happy if you like to pass your email address to her. Meanwhile, she indicates she is corresponding with PLOS and I believe she understands that her issue is with them. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 10:22, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Special GLAM award? for DanielEdit

QRpedia code for Eremit (Käfer) at Phyletisches Museum - IMAG5488.jpg Cool looking labelling
Hi Daniel, congratulations - not sure how long its been there but that QRpedia code looks very good Victuallers (talk) 19:06, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! It's been there for about a year as a proof of concept, but has not been used much. Still, the two existing codes may eventually pave the way for more of their kind. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 19:53, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Net fishing on Aitutaki Island, Cook Islands - journal.pbio.1001387.g002.pngEdit

català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | 日本語 | norsk bokmål | polski | português | română | русский | suomi | svenska | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Net fishing on Aitutaki Island, Cook Islands - journal.pbio.1001387.g002.png. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the OTRS system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. (You can get a list of all your uploaded files using the Gallery tool.) Thank you.

JuTa 21:50, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Fixed - thanks. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 21:52, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Wikimania 2014Edit

Hallo Daniel, gerade hat das brain storming fuer Commons auf der naechsten Wikimania angefangen. Wir wollen unser Projekt etwas staerker vertreten haben. Ich bin mir sicher, dass Du einiges an Input zu geben hast, auch mit Blick auf Multimedia :-). --Dschwen (talk) 20:00, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Hab mich eingetragen. Danke! -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 22:17, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

PLoS Bilder - UmbennennungEdit

Electron microscopic image of a mimivirus - journal.ppat.1000087.g007 crop.png

Hallo Daniel,
ich hab gesehen, dass Du die meisten Bilder der Serie Mimivirus umbenannt hast, finde ich eine gute Idee!
Hat es einen Grund, dass das Image

noch seinen alten Namen hat?

Und wäre es nützlich, auch die Abkürzung mit in den Namen aufzunehmen?
(googlen nach "Mimivirus APMV" liefert immerhin 19.500 Treffer)

  • Acanthamoeba Polyphaga Mimivirus APMV - detail - journal.ppat.1000087.g007.png

PS:
Ich hab die ergänzten Abbildungs-Texte aus den PLoS-Original-Artikeln deutlich gekürzt. Darf man die in der WM eigentlich 1:1 übernehmen?
Jaybear...disc. • 20:32, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Ich hatte File:Journal.ppat.1000087.g007 crop.png einfach noch nicht gesehen, nun aber ebenfalls umbenannt. Abkuerzungen zusaetzlich zu ausgeschriebener Version find ich in Dateinamen nicht sinnvoll - das reicht in den Beschreibungen. Bildbeschreibungen aus PLOS-Artikeln und anderen CC BY-Quellen duerfen ganz oder teilweise uebernommen werden, solange Quelle und Lizenz angegeben sind, was hier ja Standard ist. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 20:50, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Danke und Ok • Jaybear...disc. • 21:00, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

PLoS-Image File:Crustacean hosts parasitized by epicaridean isopods - journal.pone.0035350.g001.pngEdit

Natürlich mit entsprechender Attribution bei jeden Bild!
Jaybear...disc. • 20:58, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Die sind schon extrahiert, auch wenn G wieder geloscht wurde, da sich die Autorin beschwert hatte (zu Unrecht, denke ich; siehe oben). -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 21:04, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Oops! Habe ich die wohl übersehen ...
(da fehlte aber auch ein Hinweis beim Quellbild ;-)
Jaybear...disc. • 22:04, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Ich extrahier die Einzelbilder meist, bevor ich sie und das Quellbild gemeinsam hochlade. Da passt dann {{Image extracted}} nicht unbedingt. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 12:41, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Bulbophyllum bicoloratumEdit

Hallo Daniel Mietchen,
Dank für die neuen Orchideendateien. Meine Frage: Auf der Homepage, von der Du die Dateien geholt hast, sind auch Bilder von Bulbophyllum bicoloratum. Stehen die ebenfalls zur freien Verfügung?
Grüße. Orchi (talk) 11:38, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Hochgeladen hat die mein Bot. Aber ja, der ganze Artikel steht unter CC BY 2.5, also koennen die Bilder auch verwendet werden (gern auch gecropped usw.). Sag Bescheid, wenn Du dabei Hilfe brauchst. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 12:37, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
....vielen Dank für Deine Info und Hilfe. Ich habe zwei Bilder hochgeladen und Deine Beschreibung im wesentlichen übernommen. Könntest Du bitte kurz nachschauen, ob alles seine Richtigkeit hat?:
hier: [2] und [3].
Grüße. Orchi (talk) 16:51, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
P.S. Könnte man mit Deinem Bot auch nach freien Orchideenbildern suchen???
Deine Uploads sehen gut aus soweit. Mein Bot durchsucht erstmal nur PubMed Central (worin Orchideen selten thematisiert werden) und vorerst nur nach Audio und Video (beides haben Orchideen-Artikel selten - eine Ausnahme gibt's hier). Aber wenn Du Tips hast, wo passend lizensierte Bilder in grossen Mengen vorhanden sind, guck ich mir das gern mal an. In der Zwischenzeit gibt's hier ne kleine Ueberraschung. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 22:05, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
....Du hast die schönen Bilder von Bulbophyllum bicoloratum sehr gut in Scene gesetzt. Auf der mir bislang unbekannten POLS ONE - Seite bin ich mit einigen weiteren Bildern seltener Orchideen fündig geworden. Wenn Du bitte nochmals eine kurzen Blick auf den richtigen Disclaimer werfen könntest. Auf Dein Angebot, eventuell beim Suchen zu helfen, komme ich gern einmal zurück. Hier die neuen Bilder:

Dank und Grüße. Orchi (talk) 23:28, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

...hab ich bei Rudolfiella picta wohl nicht aufgepasst. Danke. Orchi (talk) 00:12, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
(EC) sieht so aus, ja. Tut mir leid, aber die Rudolfiella picta-Serie musste ich soeben zur Loeschung nominieren, da das Copyright leider einer Nachnutzung hier im Wege steht. PLOS ONE (derzeit die groesste wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift nach Anzahl der jaehrlich publizierten Artikel - 2013 bisher knapp 22000) ist geeignet lizensiert, Annals of Botany nicht. Beide sind in PubMed Central mit Volltext indiziert, aber man muss trotzdem immer noch genau auf die Lizenzen achten. Hier mal noch eine Suche nach Orchideen in PLOS journals (neben PLOS ONE gibt es noch andere, und sie sind alle unter CC BY 2.5). -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 00:15, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Merging Category:Antiviral agents into Category:AntiviralsEdit

Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Daniel Mietchen. You have new messages at Category talk:Antiviral agents#Merge request.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Asturianu | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | हिन्दी | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | +/−

Wiki session at Biophysical SocietyEdit

I've gotten the meeting organizers to schedule the wiki session for Sunday afternoon Feb 16, 2:15-3:30. Can I tell them you'll be there as a local expert on open media & wiki editing? They'll provide you with a free one-day registration. The session will soon be advertised in the Biophysical Society newsletter. You'd also be very welcome & appreciated at the dinner we'll have for the 4 of our 6 contest winners who'll be at the meeting, along with wiki folks from the society (probably Sun evening, perhaps Sat). I can also now send out a sensible message to the SF group to see if anyone else is interested in coming - perhaps some of the local SF grad students & postdocs might end up joining the group. At the society's Council meeting last Sat they agreed unanimously to make meeting photographs taken by the society's photographers open license, as feasible, and will try to persuade entrants in their yearly image contest to do likewise. If you're willing to share your email, that would make talking much easier. Mine is jane.richardson@duke.edu. Dcrjsr (talk) 05:04, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks - I replied via email. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 03:30, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

commande (un peu speciale)Edit

Tcho

est ce que tu arrives a ramener les images de grenouilles de cette source ? il y en a deja une qui est arrivee.. ++ Poleta33 (talk) 09:29, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Je ne peux pas promettre, puisqu'ils se cachent dans un PDF - pas de version HTML/XML. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 10:11, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Editor @ ar.wikiEdit

Hello. I would like to inform you that I have granted you editor flag at the Arabic Wikipedia, all your edits there will be automatically marked as patrolled. Best regards.--Avocato (talk) 07:02, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

!شكرا
-- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 08:42, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

commandeEdit

coucou

tu peux nous ramener les images de celle la ? ++ Poleta33 (talk) 11:17, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Plica rayi male in breeding coloration
j'en ai remene une pour le moment - les autres sont composees. Tu as besoin de quelles images d'entre eux? -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 11:43, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
ramenes tout va, je trierais lundi... merci ! Poleta33 (talk) 14:09, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
avec un peu de retard, mais voila. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 01:01, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 R1 AnnouncementEdit

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!Edit

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on . Click here to learn more and vote »

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2012 Picture of the Year contest.

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 AnnouncementEdit

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!Edit

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on . Click here to learn more and vote »

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:21, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Schleiden-Denkmal Botanischer Garten JenaEdit

Hey Daniel, hast du rein zufällig noch ein Foto des Schleiden-Denkmals im Botanischen Garten in Jena ohne Osterei auf der Schulter? Das wäre dann, nun ja, enzyklopädisch brauchbarer :D (Abgesehen davon, dass das pinke Osterei schon ziemlich fetzt... :D ) Danke! --Indeedous (talk) 10:42, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Bestimmt, muss ich aber suchen, oder einfach ein neues aufnehmen. Bis wann brauchst du's? -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 11:32, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Cool! Immer mit der Ruhe, kannst ja bei Gelegenheit vielleicht mal auf der Festplatte nachschauen. Ich sitz seit Wochen an der w:de:Liste der Kulturdenkmale in Jena und versuche da ein paar mehr Bilder rein zu bekommen. Der Vorteil an diesem Thema ist allerdings, dass da so schnell nichts wegläuft. --Indeedous (talk) 11:55, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Gucksu hier. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 13:18, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Ssänk ju! --Indeedous (talk) 14:20, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 Results AnnouncementEdit

Picture of the Year 2013 ResultsEdit

The 2013 Picture of the Year. View all results »

Dear Daniel Mietchen,

The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).

  • In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
  • In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:

  1. 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
  2. In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
  3. In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.

Click here to view the top images »

We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:59, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Help on issue with Molecule-of-the-Month imagesEdit

After uploading & using a few of them myself, last week I used that as the opening exercise for a class that will be doing uploads & editing as part of their class projects. It mostly went very well, but a couple of us had an interesting hangup I don't know how to get around, including for my choice of a class-demo image, the 4-part SODs from the Superoxide dismutase MotM. Upload failed at the end with a message saying this couldn't be done because there was already an image with the same content which had been deleted (presumably earlier, before the licensing was changed). It gave no option for appealing the block. Can you advise me how this can be corrected, preferably in general for the MotM images, or at least one at a time when the problem recurs? I, and the class, would be very appreciative of your help, especially since it seems a good percentage of these images were desired and frustrated already. 50.105.30.86 14:40, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm hopping on a long-haul flight in minutes, so can't dig deeper atm. Suggest to copy your message to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard or Commons:Village pump, referencing the new license as stated at Category:Molecule of the Month. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 14:51, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
Last modified on 29 March 2014, at 14:51