Busy desk.svg This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

العربية | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | magyar | հայերեն | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | Simple English | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

TUSC token 211033b1711e51385fa1da3b5f03b199Edit

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Deletion of file brügelmannEdit

This is an official gift intended for advertisement - see the articel in the germany wiki — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hardwareonkel (talk • contribs) 18:45, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Pholidota (Orchidaceae)Edit

Hallo De72863, .....mea culpa !! bei den Synonymen. Dank und beste Grüße. Orchi (talk) 17:15, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Kein Problem, sowas kann passieren.   De728631 (talk) 20:07, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

South Sudan border and UK in current EU mapsEdit


Can you add the border of South Sudan in the world map section in the upper right corner in:

Maps in the same format like File:European Union (blue).svg and File:EU-Luxembourg.svg respectively already include the border of South Sudan in their world map corners.

In some current maps in Category:SVG locator maps of countries in European Union (green and grey scheme) and Category:SVG locator maps of the European Union the UK has not been removed and/or the border of South Sudan has not been included in the world map corner.

I cannot edit SVG files (I am "SVG illiterate"). That is why I asked you. I can only edit PNG and GIF files, where I added the border of South Sudan in hundreds of maps, as long as they are not sophisticated topographical and orthographical maps.

However, if you make the edits in the SVG maps, I can copy and paste them in the PNG duplicates in case they exist.

If you stumble upon current maps where South Sudan is missing and/or where the UK and Gibraltar need to be removed, can you update them?

See also Category:Maps needing South Sudan political boundaries, in case you are interested in adding missing South Sudan borders and labels.

Yours sincerely, Maphobbyist (talk) 18:08, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello Maphobbyist. I think this can be done step by step. I've got a lot of things to do off-wiki but I'd like to help with these updates. Recolouring the UK is the easiest task, so I'll start with this. De728631 (talk) 20:12, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Well, this went even better than I expected. Once I had a template for the PNG maps, I could insert the South Sudan border, and the SVGs were quite easy, too. So I think I've updated all the maps in your list. De728631 (talk) 00:01, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the updates! I have one last request. I have overlooked these maps, and they are strategic and either are or can be used across Wikipedia. Can you remove the UK (and/or add the border of South Sudan in these maps below:
That is it - and I won't bother you with a large request like this. Thank you again for all your work. Maphobbyist (talk) 08:12, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
@Maphobbyist: I have updated all but File:Europe location EU.svg. This SVG has an invalid internal code and even if could update the colours and borders, I wouldn't be able to upload the new version because of its bad formatting. Unfortunately I don't know how to fix this without redrawing that map from scratch. De728631 (talk) 17:48, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you very much for all your work! Maphobbyist (talk) 20:36, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
@Maphobbyist: FYI, I have restored the previous version of File:EU28 on a globe.svg because the current EU-27 are already shown in File:EU on a globe.svg, and the former map should be kept for historical reasons (mind also the file name). De728631 (talk) 06:05, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you again! Only a small request: Can you also add the border of South Sudan:
And remove the UK and add the border of South Sudan:
It may sound trivial and a fuss, however these maps can certainly be copied and uploaded with these obsolete borders and colorings. South Sudan is present in the upper left corner in File:EU–Georgia.svg which can be used as a source. Thank you again. Maphobbyist (talk) 10:45, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

As I explained above, I cannot edit File:Europe location EU.svg, but I have now updated these other maps. De728631 (talk) 21:35, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much! And sorry for overlooking the file, which you explained above. Maphobbyist (talk) 07:11, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

NPS documents... STOP..Edit

Thanks for the effort, but you also seem to be mistagging a number of works that have no connection with the category concerned. Please review ALL your categorisation efforts before continuing more carefully.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:21, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi there. I find it way easier to categorise large quantities of files in bulk and then sort out those that are not NPS-related. Otherwise it will take ages to sort these new bot uploads. I am currently cleaning up Category:Academic theses and dissertations of the Naval Postgraduate School after populating it with new files that have already gone through various search filters. De728631 (talk) 20:25, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
It would be nice if you'd left a comment on the relevant project page beforehand though. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:26, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Also , I cannot see how this https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Acts_of_the_Parliament_of_India_1966.pdf&oldid=433294743 was even remotely related to your bulk effort, as it's not even in a related category. Please do NOT do ANY more mass categorizations without discussing them first please. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:33, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Well, imho it would've been nice if any such relevant project had tagged that category as being of interest. I can't see anything on Category talk:Academic theses and dissertations of the Naval Postgraduate School or Category talk:Naval Postgraduate School that says "Don't add files here through cat-a-lot without asking for permission." As to that file you linked to, the PDF contains the words "naval" and "school" which is why it showed up in a search for naval postgraduate school -news -update pdf During a quick check I ignored files that obviously did not match the thesis pattern but some others may have gotten into that category that are reports or otherwise unrelated. Stuff like this tends to happen and would have been sorted out by me. But now I am sorely tempted to remove all the single files again from the theses category and let others categorise them if my actions were so overly disruptive. De728631 (talk) 20:41, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Your actions in categorising is most appreciated, and isn't disruptive at all, now that you've provided the expal

What the (Semi) automated tools should be looking for is the string navalpostgraduateschoollibrary in the page text, there are NO spaces. ( I'd been using that to move material into Category:Documents from the US Naval Postgraduate School Library.) If that isn't present then the file is unlikely to be NPS related. With that information the situation should be recoverable. You just need to remove you categorisation from files that don't have the relevant string.

If it at the same time you are able to move files between Category:FEDLINK - United States Federal Collection and the more specific category mentioned above it would be much appreciated, so that effort can be concentrated on manual license review and categorization for other files in the category. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:20, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. I was in fact trying to copy the files directly from FEDLINK to the "Academic theses and dissertations ..." category without taking a stop at "Documents from the Naval Postgraduate Academy". As it turned out, all the yellow booklets are actually reports of some sort from the NPS though (I'm going to make a dedicated subcategory for them) while the greenish/blue ones with the seal on top are actual theses and dissertations. All the "Calhoun" files appear to be from a Theses and Dissertations collections as well. Add to that some stray PDFs that have nothing to do with NPS at all. De728631 (talk) 21:28, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
@ShakespeareFan00: I think most files in Category:Documents from the US Naval Postgraduate School Library are now overcategorised because they also appear in either of the subcategories. De728631 (talk) 17:52, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
Right , I'm pausing so you can decide on one scheme based on my recent removals of Category:Documents from the US Naval Postgraduate School Library, perhaps YOU can come up with a reliable way of making the categorisation for over 6000 files consistent. It's too hard to do it even with manual tools. Let me know when you've made eveyrthing consistent again. Thanks. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:05, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
I have now turned Category:Documents from the US Naval Postgraduate School Library into a hidden category. Since it is a "by source" category and a maintenance category rather than a topic category, I think we can ignore the overcategorisation – at least until a method for reviewing the licenses has agreed upon. Also, I have made it a subcategory of Category:Documents from the Naval Postgraduate School which seemed logical to me instead of having it the other way around. De728631 (talk) 20:32, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

NPS works to be placed in a specfic 'type' category...Edit

https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=16795470 ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:50, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. 1504 is a workable size but since I'm working with cat-a-lot only I'm wondering how to use this list effectively. De728631 (talk) 18:24, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=16838336 is an udpated query which is smaller in size. I'm working through it as well..ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:06, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
That's it, we're down to zero! https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=16838655 Now for the license reviews... De728631 (talk) 17:20, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

The next big list is https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=16849318 , as all the Items that are in an NPS "type" cateogry, should also typically be in a "Source" category. (Being Category:Documents_from_the_US_Naval_Postgraduate_School_Library or Category:Documents_from_the_US_Naval_Postgraduate_School_Library_for_license_review respectively.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:32, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the efforts, Are you reviewing the pages in the Theses/reports as well? Was finding a number of 'license review' situations by doing so. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:33, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
@ShakespeareFan00: So far I have been sorting the categories only, but I noticed that you put some of the theses into the review category. It would be helpful if you left an edit summary as to why you think that a document's licence needs to be reviewed. E.g. I can see how theses by foreign nationals that were not members of the US Navy are problematic, but there are also files up for review that I would not have considered. De728631 (talk) 18:00, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Duly noted - My main criteria for moving to review are :
  • Foreign Nationals
  • "State" vs Federal Employees.
  • Submissions to institutions other than NPS. (which need review to determine if the student had Federal research funding).

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:16, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. This is also how I would proceed. I'm currently working on a batch deletion request for the former two points (foreigners, non-Feds). De728631 (talk) 18:18, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
By the way, imho submissions to other institutions than NPS are nothing to worry about if the author is clearly credited as a member of the US armed forces. Assignments to external academic institutions are not unusual, so these publications may still be treated as PD-USGov. If there is no military rank though, more scrutiny is required. De728631 (talk) 19:26, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Check the inputs before doing a massive recat?Edit

I've just "cleaned" Category:Coasts of California. If you were trying to categorize 'Specifc' files there linked, apologies, but there were many that had no obvious link to the category topic, and it was easy to just to remove all of the recent additions, so you could re-aplly the category concerned ONLY for the files you intended. Don't worry, we all make mistakes ... ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:27, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Umm, this must have been a click on the wrong link. I don't recall actively selecting this category for any action. De728631 (talk) 17:54, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Yes, when you open Cat-a-lot in Category:A bottom gravity survey of the continental shelf between Point Lobos and Point Sur, California (1973), "Coasts of California" is just above "Documents from the US Naval Postgraduate School Library". So while trying to add the source category to some 200 files, I must've gotten the wrong line. Anyhow, thank you for fixing it. De728631 (talk) 18:03, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Items in FEDLINk review category and subcats.Edit


By carefully reading more than just the IA data (such as authorship and title pages in the works concerned), this category has grown to 500 items plus sub-categories. Some additional assistance in removing items that are not of "clear" US Federal origin, would be appreciated.

In many instances the issue is one of 'joint' authorship between a 'Federal' agency and a non federal entity (working in a professional capacity) in Industry or academic research. In others it's to do with the copyright status of work 'funded' by an agency, but not undertaken by them directly.

Pre 1978 works without copyright notices, can probably be retained (with a detailed explanation.). It's unlikely anything post 1988 can be retained if it has Non Federal contributions. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Photographs of Elsa DorfmanEdit

Hallo, De… ich schreib dich mal hier an. Das Thema betrifft aber zunächst das enwiki, aber auch Commons und potentiell bildernutzende Wikimedia-Projekte. Auf der Dewiki-Startseite wird seit gestern und heute noch (nach MESZ) auf den Artikel de:Elsa Dorfman hingewiesen – so wurde ich darauf aufmerksam (übrigens Pinging @Seewolf, den das womöglich auch interessiert): Man liest, sie sei (erst) kürzlich verstorben (30.Mai 2020), und kann ein „Selfportrait" von ihr sehen: File:Elsa Dorfman (2005).jpg (wovon es noch abgeleitete Bildversionen gibt, siehe Kat. Elsa Dorfman). Nun findet man für dieses Bild wie auch für einige der Bilder in Kat. Photographs by Elsa Dorfman, dass sie ursprünglich ins enwiki hochgeladen wurden von einem Nutzer/einer Nutzerin en:User:Elsad. Soll man gutgläubig sein und auf diese Nutzerseite die Vorlage en:Template:Deceased Wikipedian setzen – samt bisher fehlendem Hinweis, dass es sich um Elsa Dorfman gehandelt hat? Oder wie sonst vorgehen? Kann man irgendwelche Erben bzw. Copyright-Inhaber anfragen? Besonders schlecht ist, dass manche der Bilder noch nicht einmal diese Herkunft vorweisen können, so dass wir sie wohl löschen müssen, wenn wir keine Erlaubnis bekommen oder anderweitig herausfinden, dass sie commonskomptibel sind. Ich hab mir noch nicht einmal alle Bilder angehsehen, aber bereits das vierte und fünfte zeigen die Probleme: File:Audre lorde.jpg (was bei Nichtlöschung aufgeteilt werden sollte) und File:Bruce Cratsley And Honey.jpg, siehe hier auch Autor in den Metadaten. — Speravir – 22:55, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Ach so: Statt auf Deiner Nutzerseite können wir das natürlich gern auch an anderer passenden Stelle weiterdiskutieren, wenn dir das hier missfällt, nur eben wo, im enwiki oder hier in Commons? COM:VP/Copyright?. — Speravir – 23:03, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Hallo Speravir, zu allererst: Wir können das gerne hier diskutieren. Ich denke, das ist nicht so ganz einfach. en:User:Elsad ist seit 2014 inaktiv und ist offenbar kein verifiziertes Nutzerkonto, aber bei der Anzahl an hochgeladenen Bildern mit "self"-Lizenz kann man wohl durchaus davon ausgehen, dass das die echte Frau Dorfman war. Auf der offiziellen Homepage wird das Sterbedatum übrigens bestätigt, und ein Hinweis auf der Benutzerdisk bezieht sich offenbar auf Bearbeitungen wie diese. Wer es ganz genau wissen möchte, sollte vielleicht mal an diese Assistentin schreiben, die auf der Homepage genannt wird. en:Template:Deceased Wikipedian würde ich daher auch erstmal sein lassen, aber ich sehe auch keinen akuten Grund wegen möglicher URVs aktiv zu werden. Die Bilder sind seit 2006 im Wikimedia-Universum im Umlauf, und bis auf en:File:Guggenheim-kids.jpg hat es wohl bisher keine Probleme mit der Lizensierung/Urheberschaft gegeben. De728631 (talk) 12:10, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Es gibt ein Ticket von 2006[1], in dem sich Elsa Dorfman von einer offiziellen E-Mail-Adresse als user:Elsad identifiziert. Das hat also alles seine Richtigkeit. --Seewolf (talk) 16:12, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

@Seewolf: Oh, das ist gut. Kannst du bitte {{Verified account}} en:User:Elsad setzen? Dann ist das auch öffentlich sichtbar. Den "deceased" Baustein mache ich dann schon mal mit Link auf diese Disk. De728631 (talk) 17:14, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Das trifft hier nicht richtig zu, wie ich bereits auf ihre Benutzerdiskussionsseite geschrieben habe. --Seewolf (talk) 17:18, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Ok, dann hat sich das ja erledigt. De728631 (talk) 17:22, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Von mir aus auch OK. Gut, dass Du im OTRS-Team bist, Seewolf. — Speravir – 21:51, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
@Seewolf: Nein, bin ich nicht?! Darum hatte ich dich ja gebeten, den Baustein draufzusetzen. De728631 (talk) 21:55, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Hast Du uns zwei andere verwechselt? Du meinst, Seewolf soll die Info nicht auf dei Talkseite, sondern auf die Userseite setzen, oder? Was ich ursprünglich stattdessen hätte fragen wollen: Ich weiß nicht, ob das so üblich ist, aber könnte man solche Seiten nicht auf schreibgeschützt setzen? Und im speziellen Fall des Seewolfs Beitrag außerhalb der Chronologie ganz an den Beginn der Talkseite setzen? — Speravir – 23:25, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
Oh, ja. Da habe ich euch wohl verwechselt. Die Benutzer-Hauptseite wird üblicherweise gesperrt, um Vandalismus vorzubeugen, aber die Disk lässt man eigentlich offen für Kondolenzbeiträge und Ähnliches. Auf jeden Fall ist ja die Bestätigung durch Seewolf in der Bearbeitungsgeschichte der Seite gespeichert, also wenn überhaupt, kann da nur kurzfristig was wegkommen. De728631 (talk) 18:33, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
Ah, OK. — Speravir – 23:23, 3 August 2020 (UTC)


Hi. I just finished vectorizing one of Paasikivi's maps and noticed at one point you had blocked them for copyright violations. I'm wondering if the map I vectorized is good in terms of copyright. Can you check it out? Thanks, TheAwesomeHwyh 15:00, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

The map I vectorized
@TheAwesomeHwyh: Hello there, I think there's nothing wrong with this map and Paasikivi's original. De728631 (talk) 16:41, 5 August 2020 (UTC)