Open main menu

User talk:Fæ

Notice If you want to see Python source code that supports some of my projects, go to Github and help yourself. The code is not written with reuse in mind... -- (talk) 15:57, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

If you are concerned that a category gets flooded with automated uploads, check that a template like {{Disambig}}, {{Photographs}}, {{Categorise}}, {{CatDiffuse}} or {{CatCat}} has been applied before complaining. In the case of my batch upload projects, any category marked this way will not be added to new photographs. -- (talk) 16:32, 20 September 2018 (UTC)




Thank you!Edit

Dear Fæ,

I just wanted to say ‘Thank you!’ for your incredible restless work, which saves millions of images, many of them very valuable, for the benefit of all of us and maybe even for the benefit of future generations.

Thank you very much! --Aristeas (talk) 14:58, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! -- (talk) 09:04, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations 🎉, againEdit

I just saw that you had passed the six million edit mark, I think that probably almost half free files on Wikimedia Commons were uploaded by you.     --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 11:55, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Original Barnstar
Hello Fæ! I recently found the large and very important collections of artworks you've uploaded by George Cruikshank and Gustave Doré. I had to buy books of their works when I was studying illustration, satirical art, and life art in college, and what you've uploaded for free use is much more extensive and larger with more detail. As an artist, being able to download and examine these works is really priceless! I put Cruikshank on the high level of William Hogarth, and Doré really has no equal, especially in the beautiful, painstaking detail of his backgrounds. His London series alone is so full of detail I'll probably spend months on them. You uploaded some works by Hablot K. Browne too, the illustrator of several Dickens novels, and a very interesting and talented artist in his own right. I also downloaded the Hogarth and Bruegel collections. I'll be poring over these for years, and it's only a 5 gig collection all told. Thanks so much for these hugely valuable artworks. Anyone who says Commons is crap has to be an absolute philistine...   Jenny 04:45, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback! It's encouraging to read of how some of the images I upload are so useful for research, and enjoyed.   -- (talk) 09:14, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Noah Silliman 2016-11-02 (Unsplash).jpgEdit

Request for batch uploadEdit

Hi Fæ! I hope you're well. I wanted to know if you might be interested in working on a medium-sized project of batch uploading some of the photos from the JFK Library [1]. I've been uploading images from this collection and have found many rare color photos of political leaders from the early 1960s (many are politicians from the new post-colonial countries and there are few if any photos of these individuals on Wikipedia). As far as I can tell the White House Photographers (government employees whose photos are in the public domain) were Knudsen, Robert L. (Robert LeRoy)[2], Stoughton, Cecil W. (Cecil William)[3], and Rowe, Abbie[4]. In total there are around 17,000 photographs from these photographers in the digital collection. Would you be able to upload them? If there's anything I can do to help please just let me know. I would love to see these on Commons and will gladly help add categories for them and use them on Wikipedia pages once uploaded.Monopoly31121993(2) (talk) 19:12, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Large Flickr upload requestEdit

Maybe you remember my asking about a Australian Flickr users images a few months ago. The discussion is entry 381 on your 2018 archive page User talk:Fæ/2018. At my request the user has now changed their licencing to a free licence and is quite happy for us to use them. It must now be approaching 50,000 images as he told me that on a recent weekend he took and uploaded about 1,000. I suppose when you get around to it, and I know you have time constraints, you will have to make and add a suitable attribution category, such as Category:Files from sheba also Flickr steam or similar, but also a "to be categorised" category, so I and hopefully some other editors can work their way through them because his categorisation does not seem too detailed. Some of his images may not be usable and would probably need to be deleted upon manual review. Please ping me when you get time to proceed. Thanks in advance. Ww2censor (talk) 13:28, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ww2censor: This has been set up to drop the files in Category:Photographs by Sheba Also. There is a test run filtering on albums matching "Bridges", for which there is only one with 121 files in it. Take a look and depending on your feedback I can either upload everything else with some conditions (min name length = 15, good license, Flickr ID does not exist on Commons, bad text not in general blacklist) or upload specific sets of albums that you think would be more likely to be okay than others.
There is some limited auto-categorization. This only happens when Flickr tags exactly match a Commons Category name, and the category does not have any of the normal "diffusion" templates. If anyone complains about flooding, they should always add a diffusion template to the "parent" category. For example File:New Years Eve-BW (111839472).jpg had been auto-added to Category:Brisbane.
Many titles appear to have "+" and "=" in the titles. These are being used without replacement in the Commons filenames, however I do have an easy way to mass rename these later, so long as they stay in the bucket category. In particular I normally filter out "=" or replace it with "-" as this causes wiki problems if the filename is needed inside templates. -- (talk) 16:36, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
I now actually see 211 images being both Bridges and Brisbane ComicCon. I was going to ask the photographer if he is happy with the overall category name you have given or would prefer something different. I don't see that you added a blanket "To be categorised" category because, as I understand it, placing them only within the photographer's own category alone means sifting through each one in that category, which will be huge, to find uncategorised files at a later stage. Personally I'd prefer to have such a additional category from the start and images can be removed from there once they have been categorised better. Unless you have a method of finding the uncategorised files easily without such a category; I don't know how you would do that. Getting rid of the "=" and "+" after the facts seems a good idea but not urgent. I'll look at his albums and see if there are some I think should be excluded or excluded at this time. Thanks for the quick response on this upload. Ww2censor (talk) 15:46, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
For now I have recategorised by batch task the 211 files into Category:Bridges in Brisbane and created a new category Category:Oz Comic-Con Brisbane 2017. Ww2censor (talk) 16:10, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
@Ww2censor: Keep in mind you can build a neat query using the normal Commons search that can list files in the bucket category matching any particular Flickr album or tag name, as these are in the descriptions.
I am starting the run on all files now, ping me if something looks wrong and I'll halt the run as soon as I notice the ping.
The {{chc}} template is being added, in line with your question about to be categorised. To list the relevant files you can use -- (talk) 16:53, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
Patrick Rogel: As this was my request, I'll review the Flickr users images to see if there any obvious upload excludables but with 45,000 images it may be easier to delete those that slip through. Maybe some individual albums can be excluded if they contain too many likely copyright images. Ww2censor (talk) 14:52, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
Fæ and Patrick Rogel: I've had a decent look at the albums and indeed there are occasional derivative works which can no doubt be deleted as they are uncovered. This album "Sultanate of Oman Display Brisbane Mall" has many possible personality rights images and I see some other personal images of the Flickr user himself plus some family photos interspersed within albums. These to can probably be weeded out as they are found. My estimate is maybe 1^ or 2% might need to be deleted, and even that is a pure guess. I defer to your greater experience and knowledge. Ww2censor (talk) 10:07, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ww2censor: The flickr uploader has run through the whole stream once. The total unique photographs by Flickr id gave a total to upload of 37,024 images. It could be that the total we currently have of 22,000 is correct as only files with valid licenses, are jpeg files and have a "Safe" status, AND have deducesable valid file names (i.e. not short or duff names like "DSC 10998-3" or "Duck") will have upload attempts. It may also be the case that images which are not in any albums may be skipped. If you can spot a photograph that you expected to be uploaded from Flickr and there is no obvious reason why it was skipped, please give me a link and I'll think about what has caused a skip. In the meantime there is a re-run that may add a few missed files due to internet glitches. Note that I'll be having another long weekend away from my desktop from Thursday. -- (talk) 12:38, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

A further 1,687 photographs have been added which were in no albums (Flickrsets). I normally avoid no-album photographs on the presumption that they are less interesting, however from what I have seen there is plenty of educational value in these remaining photographs. I'll draw the line here, if there is some reason that more useful files should be added, feel free to ping me with some examples. Thanks -- (talk) 11:16, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

PAS updatesEdit

Hi, Three months on, please could I trouble you to try updating our PAS downloads again, when you get chance? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:43, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the nudge. PAS has either been changing things, or letting things break, either way it will take investigation to get something running. -- (talk) 08:49, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing: Investigation:
  1. Tacking on some error-handling shows that querying a gallery page works, example
  2. However picking one image from that gallery page, like, gives a 401 error
  3. This may be a technical failure, though it could also be that the database structure has been redesigned but left in place the earlier web front end structure. Example I've tested the first 50+ pages of the gallery (by date sort order) and the error is consistent.
It could be that manually going through how it works again will give an alternate workflow, that'll be the next step.
P.S. I'll be away from my desktop from the end of Wednesday, so further investigation may be piecemeal. -- (talk) 10:43, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
It looks like the failures were because the d/b now insists on the image url including "recordtype/artefacts". Example new upload File:Seal_impression_(FindID_874200).jpg, which includes a new licence type of cc-by with an attribution not to PAS/BM (the previous standard). It could be that the changes are to get better attributions, which is clearly a good thing for us too.
Work-around warning: For images where there is no title, these will be skipped, e.g.
It could be that titles can be inherited from the find record, but I think I was getting these consistently from the label tag on the image. Unless there are a lot of these, I'll leave it as is for the moment.
BTW Housekeeping note this does mean that the "catalogue" links in previous uploads may all fail with 401 errors, but can be fixed...
Anyway   Done as the re-run is happening right now, and a sample looks okay to me so far. Ping me if something is going wonky and I should halt the run.
Please retweet!
-- (talk) 11:09, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
Update on images with no titles - after replacing these with the Find objecttype as a title, these then seem to have no available description field (desc). If some have descriptions they will be uploaded, otherwise I'm presuming their image metadata is too lacking without manual intervention. Re-running just in case this fixes some of the earlier skipped cases, however the first 25 pages of images have resulted in 0 fixes. Example coin image coin object page. -- (talk) 16:06, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for all this. I'll look at adding categories, tomorrow. Tweet retweeted! I'm confused by your coin example; the latter page has <span>A silver post medieval sixpence of Elizabeth I, probably dating to <abbr title="Anno Domini">AD</abbr> 1572</span><span>. </span><span>Reverse depicting a square shield on a long cross fourchée dividing the legend, with the date on top. Mint of London.</span><span> Probably ermine initial mark. North vol.II p.134 no.1997. Appears to be counterstamped at 2 o'clock on the obverse.</span>. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:37, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
Yes, it is confusing. There are descriptions that go with individual photographs, as well as the artefact/find itself. The photographs affected by missing titles and descriptions against the photograph are very much a minority, though we could inherit the find description and objecttype (instead of title) at the risk of, say, describing a detailed photograph of an axe head with the complete description of the axe. If I do revisit this it may be after Christmas... -- (talk) 23:41, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Update on unlabeled photographs - These now adopt the Find objecttype as a title and will adopt the Find description if the image has no label text. Example File:BUCKLE (FindID 891606).jpg and File:COIN (FindID 892338).jpg. The drawbacks are that the titles are going to be based on very short and not very descriptive texts for the object type and where multiple photographs (or drawings) for the object exist for unlabeled photographs, then they will share the same Find description. This may never be a problem if multiple object Finds always have the photographs labeled, e.g. Sixpence and Double Crown are the same id / findID (metadata terminology varies between Finds and Images!). I'm restarting from zero to catch these minority of cases.

Note that this will run today, but cannot be left unattended due to internet connection glitches requiring multiple restarts. So there may be a pause for several days while I'm away from my normal desktop. -- (talk) 12:24, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading this (and all the other) image(s)!Edit

Hello Fæ,

thank you for uploading this image from the LACMA (and all the countless other images, of course!)! It served us perfectly well as an illustration for a parochial periodical (in German Gemeindebrief). If you are interested, here is a PDF file of the issue; the image is on page 3, the attribution (for all images etc.) on page 25. Sidenote: This parochial periodical is kind of a non-commercial publication; it is free for all members of the parish; almost all work is done by volunteers; only the printing house get’s paid.

Best regards and thank you again, --Aristeas (talk) 08:56, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! A nice looking publication, and of course it's for high quality printed reuse that our archive quality GLAM collections are at their best.   -- (talk) 09:02, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for the nice words! Best, --Aristeas (talk) 10:23, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Train in station LCCN2016820305.jpgEdit

Hi Fae, this upload of yours had been tagged for speedy as dupe of its TIFF version. However, as it may be a sort of restored version, I am hesitating to perform the dupe-speedy. What's your opinion? --Túrelio (talk) 07:46, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

We keep all official LOC tiff/jpeg pairs. Per:
I have now upscaled the image to match the TIFF and corrected the gallery cross link. -- (talk) 09:37, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

"Production music" mood/style fields in information blocks...Edit

You implemented some for the Incompetech import, Could you leave a note about how they were implemented on my talk page so I can use them on to convert the red-linked categories into something more useable? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:07, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm probably not going to touch anything for a week, but you'll have to remind me what this was. Examples? -- (talk) 15:47, 5 December 2018 (UTC) being an example, with added fields. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:24, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Crescent Head Water Tank Art -03and (4259050882).jpgEdit

Bidgee (talk) 22:48, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Crescent Head Water Tank Art -04and (4259048722).jpgEdit

Bidgee (talk) 22:49, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Crescent Head Water Tank Art -02and (4258295493).jpgEdit

Bidgee (talk) 22:50, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Crescent Head Water Tank Art -01and (4258289739).jpgEdit

Bidgee (talk) 22:51, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletionEdit

Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:U and I (1993)


And also:

Extended content

Yours sincerely, B (talk) 00:40, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Official portrait of Dr Rosena Allin-Khan crop 3.jpgEdit

File:Official portrait of Dr Rosena Allin-Khan crop 2.jpgEdit

File:Official portrait of Dr Rosena Allin-Khan.jpgEdit

File:D'Arcy Norman, Professional iPhone Photographer (4728847341).jpgEdit

Notification about possible deletionEdit

Crace CollectionEdit

Hi Fae! About 18 months ago you did a fabulous job of scaping, de-zoomifying and uploading map images from the Goad fire-insurance map collection in the British Library c:Category:Goad fire insurance maps from the British Library.

I was wondering, if you still have the scripts to hand, would it be possible to do a similar job on the BL's Crace Collection of maps of London? [5] (about 1200 in all, of which about 285 have georeferencing). We have a few low-res uploads in c:Category:Crace_Collection, but it would be great to have the whole lot in high resolution -- there are some lovely maps there, eg a whole clutch from the Grosvenor Estate relating to the development of Pimlico [6].

It would be great to have these on Commons, both in their own right; and also because I'm hoping the "Layers of London" project [7] might be interested in some of the ones that have been georeferenced (and also some of the Goad maps) -- for them it would be a lot easier to deal with whole images from Commons as a starting point, rather than zoomified ones at the BL.

If you could find any time to look at these, I'd be really grateful. Best wishes, Jheald (talk) 14:55, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Tiny little extra to the request: it would be great if the Commons filenames could include the BL shelfmark, eg "- BL Maps Crace Port. 8.39" for [8] - this is quite helpful for seeing what's in a category, and where it's come from. Thanks! Jheald (talk) 18:52, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
I will take a look, but realistically a proper look may have to wait to the end of the month. -- (talk) 22:30, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Titanic Interior (13582352015).jpgEdit

File:Medical instructions towards the prevention and cure of chronic diseases peculiar to women; In which Fleuron T140684-2.pngEdit

File:El Paso, United States (Unsplash 2No3wDl633M).jpgEdit

File:El Paso, United States (Unsplash).jpgEdit

File:Chapala, Mexico (Unsplash).jpgEdit

File:Chapala, Mexico (Unsplash p1RYJM4oI4s).jpgEdit

File:Embraer EMB-120RT Brasilia, Atlant-Soyuz Airlines JP6510673.jpgEdit

File:Embraer EMB-120RT Brasilia AN0231048.jpgEdit

File:Embraer EMB-120RT Brasilia AN0231048.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Embraer EMB-120RT Brasilia AN0231048.jpg Marc Lacoste (talk) 10:05, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

@Marc Lacoste: rather than DRs, you can use {{duplicate}} for obvious duplicates. There may be many in the avionics uploads due to post-upload credit bar removal meaning that fresh uploads of the same file may be digitally different, even if the same resolution. -- (talk) 11:55, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Hanukkah (5221810353).jpgEdit

File:Number10 Downing Street MOD 45157213.jpgEdit

File:Number10 Downing Street MOD 45157215.jpgEdit

File:Ida M. Tarbell, No. 1 LCCN97509168.tifEdit

Just to make clear, the speedy delete rationale there has very little to do with you - I presume this is a batch upload - and a lot more at my frustration at having to redo TIFF descriptions twice because of secret uploads that aren't linked to the derivative files in use that I'm trying to fix up and get higher resolution on. You may have noticed I am very, very precise in documenting linkages between files, and I really hate not having proper, documented interlinking.

I am frustrated, but more at having had the well-documented TIFFs deleted several times already this month, solely because they're newer, and being worried at how many similar things have happened when I was on wikibreak. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:43, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Having uploaded around half a million files from the Library of Congress, I do take care to preserve as much metadata as possible. Obviously they are not massively categorized, most having simple bucket categories based on the collection. Were I to do anything else, my talk page would be full of complainants that I was flooding categories that they happen to be interested in. I strongly recommend avoiding creating duplicates in the first place. I make several checks to avoid duplicates, and you may find it a lot less frustrating to take the same precaution rather than creating problems and eating up volunteer time. -- (talk) 18:05, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Fribourg 2017 20170122 (31636169394).jpgEdit

Return to the user page of "Fæ".