User talk:Hansmuller/Archive 2016

Help! I can't keep up!

Hi Hans (and others on this project) - there's a gargantuan backlog of Naturalis Biodiversity Center files in need of recategorising, they are accumulating faster than I and anyone else dealing with them can cope. Would it be possible you could have a moratorium on new uploads, and spend time dealing with the backlog instead, please? What is needed is (a) a check of the name against current taxonomy (at IOC for birds) for updates, (b) creation of subcategories [[Category:Genus species (museum specimens)]] where needed, (c) moving the files to those categories, and (d) removing them from the genus categories. It would also be nice if future uploading of files could be done all of one genus at a go, instead of bit by bit mixed in with other uploads - I've had to empty e.g. Category:Turdus twice a day, every day, for the last ten days. It is getting very tedious to have to remember to revisit the same categories over, and over, and over; it further delays recategorisation. I do also find myself wondering, what is the purpose of uploading so many files? What possible use could Commons have for over 500 Turdus merula skins?? Thanks! - MPF (talk) 13:34, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

One other point to watch for! Category:Oenanthe is for the plant genus; the bird genus is at Category:Oenanthe (bird). All of the bird skins have been turning up in the plant category! - MPF (talk) 17:25, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi MPF, sorry, yes it is a lot, but it seems the only way to incorporate a worldclass bird collection into Commons, my apologies!

• If you wait a week and a day we've got all the songbird skins and i will be done. My first priority was to upload the images and sort them in suitable categories, i am aware of the mess this creates, but i see no better quick method (many other daily uploads to Commons lack any category or good description..) With these images from Naturalis, it is "take them of leave them" for me.
• Uploads occur in the order of the registration number at Naturalis, so that in case of upload crash etcetera one can see easily where to start again.
• I apologize for the 586 Turdus merula merula skins (young/old, male/female, locations, enough for population research :-))
• "False" friends crop up on many more occasions, for instance Ficus (plant/mollusc), Chiton (Greek clothing/mollusc) etcetera which required a separate category and a "See also" redirection.
• I will put up a comprehensive list of uploaded species, like before for instance List of species and genera in Category:Kawahara Collection at Naturalis Biodiversity Center. Taxonomy problems for species (old names, synonyms) are unfortunately unavoidable.

Thanks for all your work! - if you know a better method for my uploads, please tell me, best regards, Hansmuller (talk) 18:52, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the extra details! Yes, 8 more days is no problem, for all I knew they might be going on for another 8 months (or 8 years!!) yet :-) but with a short time like this "the end is in sight"! If I think of a better way, I will, but I'm not sure there is; it is true that adding the genus category as well as species creates more work, but is very useful as an indicator of taxa which still have files for review so is worth keeping. Best wishes! MPF (talk) 21:09, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

@MPF, @Allforrous, @FunkMonk and other interested people:

1. uploads with GWToolset have slowed down - now about 1000 files/day instead of 6500/day since November 25, so my prediction of finishing dead bird uploads (causing overcategorisation) tomorrow will not come true. We're now at record 24055, the finish is at record 28434, so i'll need about 4 more days, i'm sorry. See [1].
2. i've put up a list of the genera and species to be uploaded (so nearly done) in List of species and genera in Category:Songbird specimens at Naturalis Biodiversity Center
3. there are a number of these dead bird images (5000?) which contain other views of the same specimen as older versions, instead of as separate photos. For instance File:Naturalis Biodiversity Center - RMNH.AVES.121218 - Phoenicircus carnifex (Linnaeus, 1758) - Cotingidae - bird skin specimen.jpeg. These other views are downloadable, but cannot be used as images in wikimedia-projects (how to refer to them? If possible, most people will not know, like me.). Shall i upload the older versions (= other views) again as separate images - not putting them into two categories (genus + species) this time ;-) ? What do you think? Thanks, Hansmuller (talk) 12:08, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Help decide the future of Wikimania

The Wikimedia Foundation is currently running a consultation on the value and planning process of Wikimania, and is open until 18 January 2016. The goals are to (1) build a shared understanding of the value of Wikimania to help guide conference planning and evaluation, and (2) gather broad community input on what new form(s) Wikimania could take (starting in 2018).

After reviewing the consultation, we'd like to hear your feedback on on this survey.

In addition, feel free to share any personal experiences you have had at at a Wikimedia movement conference, including Wikimania. We plan to compile and share back outcomes from this consultation in February.

With thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF) (talk), from Community Resources 23:46, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Please, dont overcat

Don't place an item into a category and its parent. For example, a black and white photo of the Eiffel Tower should be placed in Black and white photographs of the Eiffel Tower. It should not be placed in both that category and the Paris category at the same time.

Shortcut

• COM:OVERCAT

Hi Hansmuller,

please use only a category for species or subspecies. Please dont put the photos in species- AND genus-category. (I´m so sorry for my bad English). Please see also Commons:Categories#Over-categorization. Thx --Hystrix (talk) 23:48, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your remark - see User_talk:Hansmuller#Don.27t_over-categorize.21 above on this page - sorry for the trouble.

• I have uploaded 270.000+ images of donor Naturalis Biodiversity Center and i'm sorry i don't know an automated way to sort out before upload whether the correct taxonomic categories for the uploaded images exist. I want to try to make sure though, that the uploaded images get at least one good category. I do this by categorising using both species AND genus name (best taxonomic guess according to the donor Naturalis, shooting with hail, hoping i hit at least one existing category) - sometimes however none of which exist. If both categories happen to exist (good!) already, then it's overcategorisation indeed (the lesser evil?). Next week i will add a list of all uploaded bird species with their family categories to make these cases visible (but then there are plants, molluscs, Greek mythology figures etcetera who share biological bird genus names etc.).
• So i know i cause a mess, but otherwise i couldn't upload these images at all at short notice, not knowing an automated way to sort out the categories before upload. It is a problem with all mass uploads, some of which don't choose categories at all for their images. My present upload hopefully finishes Monday.
• If you happen to know an automated tool, please let me know. Best regards, Hansmuller (talk) 19:07, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

I have added the List of species and genera in Category:Songbird specimens at Naturalis Biodiversity Center with (missing) links. Hansmuller (talk) 21:41, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Thx for your answer. --Hystrix (talk) 20:01, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

No more dead birds?

I've not seen any more dead birds at Special:NewFiles in the past couple of days - have they finally come to an end? Just out of curiosity, how many were there? Well done and thanks for all your effort with uploading them! Optimist on the run (talk) 09:29, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Dear Optimist,

Thank you, you're right. The deceased birds reside in Category:Songbird_specimens_at_Naturalis_Biodiversity_Center and number now 136.232. A few thousand of multiple views have been uploaded erroneously as "new versions" - old ones cannot be used in articles - with their first view (1 specimen, more photo's).

• Shall i do a repair run for those images, and reduce the overcategorisation beforehand this time? Compare question above. Best regards, Hansmuller (talk) 11:52, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Personally, I'd say that uploading images is more important than correctly categorising them. But if you've finished and have the means (and inclination!) to repair them, this can only improve things so go ahead. Optimist on the run (talk) 20:30, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Re:boekbanden

Dank je Hans, het is inderdaad fraai om al die oude banden zo bijeen te zien. Ik ga er deze week nog wat meer ruchtbaarheid aan geven binnen de community, via WP:K, mailinglijsten etc. De upload met de GWToolset heb ik afg vrijdag gedaan, hij was ongekend snel, binnen 1,5 uur waren alle banden geupload. De snelheid van GWTset kennende had ik er op gerekend dat dit het hele weekeinde zou duren: maar niet dus. Groet, --OlafJanssen (talk) 00:19, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Towards a New Wikimania results

Last December, I invited you to share your views on the value of Wikimedia conferences and the planning process of Wikimania. We have completed analysis of these results and have prepared this report summarizing your feedback and important changes for Wikimania starting in 2018 as an experiment. Feedback and comments are welcome at the discussion page. Thank you so much for your participation. I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, 22:47, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Conus

Hello Hans, Thanks for the wonderful and useful pictures that you uploaded. But I discovered the situation of Category:Conus: it contains 2700 pictures. 2600 of these pictures are from you. A picture like that one is currently placed in 2 categories: the species cat (Conus_timorensis for example) and the genus cat (Conus). They should not be in Conus ! In fact Conus should contain only pictures representing the whole genus, which is rare. How am I to move 2600 pictures out of Category:Conus ? If I do it with cat-a-lot, I risk to move pictures that are not placed in species cat. Cheers Liné1 (talk) 13:08, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Dear Liné, Thanks for all your biological work! Sorry for this Conus mess, but it seemed to be the only way of putting 100.000+ mollusc images (15565 species) efficiently on Commons AND guaranteeing no mollusc image lacks a taxonomic category. Can you have a look at this discussion above? To check whether a mollusc picture has found a home in a species category, i have made a list List of species and genera in Category:Mollusc specimens at Naturalis Biodiversity Center. If a link is red, those molluscs lack a species category but still are saved in a genus category - if it exists at all! - so we can track them and they are not lost. You see that most Conus molluscs do have a species category: good news. But some don't, for instance Category:Conus purissimus. Can we create this category? The register WoRMS doesn't recognise this species as listed under genus Conus, but perhaps ... there actually is Conus purissimus Filmer (some research to be done). Mass removing molluscs with double categories from Cat:Conus is no problem with VisualFileChange. But please don't remove a species from a genus category before a species category has been found. Thanks, best regards, Hansmuller (talk) 12:11, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

PS. For example Category:Abbottella contains Naturalis images of three species that lack a species category. This way they are still categorised, species categories can be created, and then the images can be removed from Category:Abbottella. Cheers, Hansmuller (talk) 12:17, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello Hans, Creating taxonomic categories is my job ;-) I will work on your list. You should use fr:Utilisateur:Liné1/WikipediaBioReferences. It is a java free tool meant for this. You type a taxon scientific name (let us say Acella) and it returns wikicommons syntax to be copied in wikicommons (for example). Of course, you have to clean the generated syntax (like this) and copy the {{Taxonavigation}} and category from the parent (like this). It is very convenient for synonyms. If you are interested, try and call me for help. Cheers Liné1 (talk) 14:54, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

I programmed my bot to suppress genus categories when species category is present. I just hope that you did not provide images with 2 species. Cheers Liné1 (talk) 15:46, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Bonjour Liné, I would be very grateful if you could repair some of this with your tools! (Could you please not use : or <br> for each line here - they are not necessary - because this talk page gets very long). I see that you fixed Category:Conus purissimus, great! I am studying your interesting WikipediaBioReferences. Thank you very much, Hansmuller (talk) 13:30, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

PS. No, fortunately i did not upload Naturalis molluscs (file name starting with "Naturalis Biodiversity Center") with more species in one image. It is fantastic but to a simple human also a bit exhausting, isn't it, this incredible bounty of species!Hansmuller (talk) 13:42, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Anybody can remove the superfluous twice categorised images from say Category:Conus (or any category) with VisualFileChange (click "category", "just try", "custom replace", replace string "[[Category:Conus]]" with one space) keeping the other images, takes a few minutes, if only all underlying species categories exist. Regards, Hansmuller (talk) 15:21, 22 February 2016 (UTC)  Done for Conus. Hansmuller (talk) 16:04, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

About Cornus, I don't know if that was a good idea. Suppressing the current category from media can be done with cat-a-lot with one click. But you have to check if all the species categories have been created. That is the job of my bot. Currently 76K images analysed in and 22K genus categories removed (30%). 200K still to done... My bot started with birds as the files are named File:Naturalis Biodiversity Center - RMNH.AVES... o now, the most important is to create the genus and species cat (To give work to my bot). I finished the birds genus cat. I am beginning the bids species cat. Cheers Liné1 (talk) 20:07, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

There is a problem. Some pictures's species cat have been changed automatically (due to {{Category redirect}} to a synonym managed by a bot). Look at this file: it is in Category:Poecile gambeli and Category:Parus. My bot will not be able to detect the genus cat to suppress as there is no inclusion of categories. Liné1 (talk) 09:02, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Dear Liné1, Thank you ever so much for your work, it is really fantastic! I could never have done all those corrections! Redirected species are exceptions i hope/think, you can keep track of them? If not, it is a minor error compared with the great progress you made. (Redirected species possibly show the power of the easily adjustable taxonomy here over static older museum taxonomy. Detail: i moved it to a "(museum specimens)" category by hand.) Naturalis probably will come up with more images. I had problems with Cat-a-lot, not finishing with >100 number of files.) Thanks again, Hansmuller (talk) 09:59, 24 February 2016 (UTC) PS. With Category:Conus, i created missing species categories beforehand of course, using the List of species and genera in Category:Mollusc specimens at Naturalis Biodiversity Center and checking with WoRMS. For the birds etc. there are similar lists, so i could see how many missing genera you solved! Best regards, Hansmuller (talk) 10:09, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I just came across this conversation. I'm glad that somebody used a bot to deal with this problem with double categories. I've been working on Conus for the last year and half in en:wikipedia, dealing with the recent massive reorganizing in the family Conidae (154 families condensed into four families), totalling more than 800 species. We already had a lot of pictures of Conus species, uploaded some time ago by our Russian collaborator. And then there was this massive upload from Naturalis. I must have delinked manually about 1,000 images from the category Conus - a hell of a job. But on the other hand, each time I also checked the validity of the scientific name. Most were exact, but some had already become a synonym in the genus Conus or in the genus Conasprella. In this case, I had to adapt the description of the species and redirect to the new category. A tiring job, if this concerns a lot of pictures. But luckily now this is all over. The new situation saves us a lot of work, although at the expense of some accuracy. But I rather have it this way.Thanks for it all. JoJan (talk) 18:22, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your expert work! Are you sure it was at the "cost of some accuracy"? I hope not and checked the new Conus species categories i created with WoRMS and indeed some species were diverted to genus Conasprella species, as i noted in List of species and genera in Category:Mollusc specimens at Naturalis Biodiversity Center under C - Conus. Best regards, Hansmuller (talk) 15:21, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Sadly, this is over only for Category:Conus, not for the 271K pictures.

My bot has almost finished his first run. It suppressed only 80K double categorisation. I will have to rerun it in the future.

I will continue to create the genera and species missing when I am back from vacation. I started with birds and did not finish. I fear that I will have to check all genera.

Remember that for birds, IOC (COI) is our reference.

Did you check fr:Utilisateur:Liné1/WikipediaBioReferences ? Cheers Liné1 (talk) 15:28, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

I have almost finished the birds. I am looking at all the genera because Allforrous created hundred of duplicated species categories (syn species for which we already have a category)...

He didn't understoud that we follow IOC. Even if I added the list of genera and species in all categories. Boring.

He also created categories like Category:Carollia sp.. Where did he find such categories. We name them Category:Unidentified Carollia.

I am beginning the mammals. It smaller, but I came there a long time ago. Some my list of subtaxa are older. Might be a lot of work.

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 13:13, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your enormous work! You complete the Naturalis donation project by giving the (sub)species their correct taxon home categories - many red links in for instance List of species and genera in Category:Songbird specimens at Naturalis Biodiversity Center have turned blue. Thanks again for your invaluable work, Hansmuller (talk) 14:02, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Loe de Jong

Tag Hans,

das passt schon, wie fleißig ich mit Loe de Jong war. Aber ich dachte, es wäre gut, zu sehen, ob wir uns in ws-nl entschließen könnten! Ich hoffe im Stillen, dass sich „WWII-Liebhaber“ melden um bei dieser (nicht sehr großen) Korrekturlese-Arbeit zu helfen. Das Problem vom Teil 1, habe ich übrigens noch nicht angepackt. Ich werde es in Kürze bei der NIOD probieren. Ich arbeite auf WS-en gelegentlich in Abschnitt 2 (und der Registrierung; die ist ganz schrecklich, natürlich). Zu ihrer Frage nach dem Namen der Datei: Autor + voller Titel betrifft: Ich werde es versuchen. Ich werde schauen, wie die Regeln in WS-en sind. Aber ich muss zugeben, dass ich gelegentlich ein bisschen Ekel für die unheimlich langen Dateinamen habe. Dus het schiet er wel eens bij in. Verzeihen Sie mir! --Dick Bosch (talk) 18:28, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Lieber @Dick_Bos, Vielen Dank!. Es kan ziemlich einfach sein, z.B.

L. de Jong - Het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden in de Tweede Wereldoorlog 1939-1945 Register op de wetenschappelijke editie.pdf, schon da, und

Koninkrijk Register 0001omslagwit.jpg => L. de Jong - Het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden in de Tweede Wereldoorlog 1939-1945 Register op de wetenschappelijke editie - omslag wit.jpg.

Dann treffen sich die Dateien. Siehe vielleicht auch Wikipedia:File_names. Tschüs! Hansmuller (talk) 09:43, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:African Studies Center - Coutinho Collection - G 09 - Life in Ziguinchor - Senegal - First hospital ambulance with driver.tif

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:African Studies Center - Coutinho Collection - G 09 - Life in Ziguinchor - Senegal - First hospital ambulance with driver.tif. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:22, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

@Magog the Ogre, OTRS is pending as my notice says. Perhaps the tone of the standard message you use is a bit too aggressive ;-). Cheers, Hansmuller (talk) 09:28, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:KITLV - 10434 - Lambert & Co., G.R. - Singapore - Dayak woman at Kuching in Sarawak - circa 1888.tif

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:KITLV - 10434 - Lambert & Co., G.R. - Singapore - Dayak woman at Kuching in Sarawak - circa 1888.tif. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

And also:

• File:KITLV - 107244 - Kurkdjian, Ohannes - Bas-reliefs of the upper terrace of the Candi Panataran temple complex near Blitar - circa 1901.tif
• File:KITLV - 118374 - Anna Marie Philippina Vlier in Surinam - circa 1867.tif
• File:KITLV - 29195 - Lambert & Co., G.R. - Singapore - Wat Pho Buddhist temple complex in Bangkok (Wat Phra Chetuphon Vimolmangklararm Rajwaramahaviharn) - circa 1897.tif
• File:KITLV - 40324 - Stafhell & Kleingrothe - Medan - Site preparation of a tobacco field with buffaloes ploughing near Medan, Sumatra - circa 1889.tif
• File:KITLV - 407159 - Kurkdjian - Sourabaia - European couple with child in Surabaya - circa 1916.tif
• File:KITLV - 500058 - Kurkdjian, Photo - Soerabaja - "Smeroe", volcano Semeru, Java - circa 1930.tif
• File:KITLV - 57103 - Billboard with information about the sale of ice from the steam ice factory of the Sträter, Esser & Co. firm, Paramaribo - circa 1891.tif
• File:KITLV - 5826 - Kurkdjian - Soerabaja - Crater lake at the Ijen Plateau in East Java - circa 1909.tif
• File:KITLV - 90263 - Kurkdjian - Soerabaia - Decorated automobile in a procession, presumably to commemorate the armistice of the First World War, Surabaya - circa 1918.tif

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:15, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Dear Magog, Thank you for pointing these errors out, due to incomplete templates ("}}" missing). Repaired. Best regards, Hansmuller (talk) 05:59, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Hans, you forgot the first one, and I think you can also just remove the templates, as they're now clearly fixed and ok. Basvb (talk) 09:31, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

T133286 - GWToolset

Hi, could you please have a look on phab:T133286 and test if uploading from asc-test.nl works? Thanks, --Urbanecm (talk) 17:41, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your work on this whitelisting! Is it OK if i upload next week? The point is that testing one image in practice equals preparing the whole upload. I just got the final metadata and massaging them for GWToolset, perhaps adjusting translations etc.. can take a few working days.

The procedure of whitelisting has worked excellently with me say 10 times ever since May 2014, thanks to you guys (testing was never necessary, it is a new feature). So i trust it works this time as well. Best regards, Hansmuller (talk) 08:49, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

PS Can the domain NOT be divulged? Thanks, Hansmuller (talk) 08:49, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

I'll reply you on Phabricator. --Urbanecm (talk) 10:09, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Pictures of specimen

Hi, Im currently conducting research for Otus siaoensis in Siau Island, Indonesia. Please, I need help to find specimen pictures of this species. Its labeled as
"Scops siaoënsis Schlegel, 1873a: 13":
"Holotype, RMNH 88345, Ad., skin. Loc.: Siao Oudang between Celebes and Sangi, Indonesia. Leg.: L.D.H. Renesse van Duivenbode, 1866."
Regards, Ariefrahman (talk) 00:00, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

@Ariefrahman Dear Ariefrahman,

Thanks for the beautiful photographs you uploaded (snakes, birds)! Searching in the public database of Naturalis Biodiversity Center, Leiden at

http://bioportal.naturalis.nl/?language=en

for "RMNH.AVES.88345" i get

http://bioportal.naturalis.nl/nba/result?nba_request=http%253A%252F%252Fapi.biodiversitydata.nl%252Fv0%252F%252Fspecimen%252Fget-specimen%252F%253FunitID%253DRMNH.AVES.88345

which gives metadata but no images (that's why i didn't upload an image). Probably Naturalis has taken pictures of this owl specimen, but is still in the process of putting them online. You might contact staff via http://www.naturalis.nl/en/. I'll send you an email with further details. Best regards, Hansmuller (talk) 06:11, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

PS. Unfortunately, on Commons there is not (yet) much: Category:Otus siaoensis Hansmuller (talk) 06:11, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. Still searching the species in the wild, and really hope it's still exist here. The specimen pictures will help us here. I have contacted the naturalis (as you mentioned in email). Regards, Ariefrahman (talk) 11:02, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

@Ariefrahman Dear Ariefrahman, I have the pictures for you and can send them by email, but I don't have you mail-adres. Later (I hope soonǃ) we will upload them to Wikimedia together with other types from our collection. Whe are preparing this. --TeklaLilith (talk) 13:52, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

We can use "wp-email this user". Hansmuller (talk) 13:58, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Coutinho Collection

Ik heb de bestanden die je gemarkeerd hebt als 'speedy' verwijderd, maar eigenlijk was je daar te laat mee. Tot een week na het uploaden wordt normaal gesproken nog wel gehoor gegeven aan een verzoek van de uploader om een bestand weer te verwijderen, maar daarna wordt al snel verwezen naar het feit dat de vrijgave officieel niet kan worden teruggedraaid. Dus bij deze het advies daar in de toekomst op bedacht te zijn. Jcb (talk) 20:20, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Dankjewel! Het is een probleem met persoonlijke donoren, vrijdag kwam dit verzoek. Hansmuller (talk) 08:24, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

problem with pomp

In some recent Yogyakarta photos I have noticed, the use of the word in an image title - the pomp of a Sultan of Yogyakarta seems a really poor choice of words - would you know of any synonyms from the dutch words used that might help an english speaker (I have Indonesian and English, but my nederlands is practically zero), as to how to re-word the titles ? Any thoughts would be appreciated. JarrahTree (talk) 15:31, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

the pomp of the sultan simply is like a heisenbergian uncertainty item, perhaps Bohrian, but it is anthropologically unfathomable (I have done fieldwork in Yogyakarta), and I could have never identified in a museum or curatorial sense an object as being related to 'pomp'. But am caught short as to what an alternative term might be, unless I sleep on it..so to speak. ciao JarrahTree (talk) 15:42, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

I am glad somebody (you!) noticed these images, not many people use this collection on Wikipedia. "Pomp" is splendid display at a public event, magnificence, splendour according to the dictionary. Here it describes the objects used by a royal to impress his subjects. It is current oldish English i thought, compare "pomp and circumstance". I hoped the translations in Bahasa Indonesia would explain. In May 2015 - not that recent, it is just that the bot "category needed" just passed by this month - i uploaded those files: the first has the caption

• Bahasa Indonesia: Tombak-tombak, kemungkinan bagian dari benda-benda kebesaran milik Sultan Yogyakarta.

Translations in BI were done by the Dutch-Indonesian wikipedian Meursault2004/Revo Soekatno. A better word is welcome, please. Kind regards, Hansmuller (talk) 15:59, 22 July 2016 (UTC) PS. How can i make this collection known on the Indonesian Wikipedia? Thxs. Hansmuller (talk) 15:59, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

If you see history of some of the earlier stages of the collection I was editing parts, I have a thing about Cephas the photographer, he had access to things (that I was looking at in my post grad fieldwork in Java in 95/96) about a hundred years before me... interesting

I have known Revo (not in real life but online) for some years now. As to getting the collection better publicised, give me time again to think about ways to do so. cheers JarrahTree (talk) 03:59, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I have added "(ceremonial display objects)" to the descriptions. Kind regards, Hansmuller (talk) 08:09, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

During my honours thesis, fieldwork, and time after - flags, banners, and pikes and unused weapons are attributed with the essence of the sultans power and resonance throughout his realm - and if paraded or exhibited at appropriate times in the javanese calendar are attributed powers to protect, heal and save from calamity - the javanese term is pusaka - and any one sultan might have either gained or lost pusaka - due to the way he rules. Pusaka are not in any way attributed with 'pomp', but mystical powers attained from a ruler who has attained sufficient power either literally and physically, or spriritually and 'invisibilty'. Even the historian Merle Ricklefs as a classically trained historian has had to in some of his books attribute the 'unseen' in Javanese cultural context - so pusaka are not something to be taken lightly in the specific javanese cultural sense, and are not 'pomp' but even a piece of cloth or a piece of wood viewed by outsider/dutch colonials as of nothing but 'show', can due to associations with royal or spiritual power from javanese people from the past have meaning and contexts that are only partially understood or comprehended by non-javanese. I would offer further examples or details to this, but would strongly suggest that the use of the word 'pomp' if used to explain anything from palaces that might in the slightest be associated with sultans power or pusaka, be treated with a lot more care and respect. Javanese in the palaces always like telling me about arrogant dutch curators who had no sense of respect to old things from the palaces that needed resgtoration/repair, I suspect they would expect the pusaka to have sufficient inherent power to get 'revenge' on those who treated them badly. Japanese (note Japan not Java) and Javanese have by coincidence beliefs in 'things' having inherent/inbuilt spirits within inanimate things. The Javanese pusaka beliefs would suggest that 'pomp' and 'display' is a mis-reading of objects found in palaces. Cheers. Lecture over :) JarrahTree (talk) 08:55, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Also my wife (whose fieldwork was 10 years before mine in Java) consider that the usage of 'pomp' in english has a 'derogatory' tone to it possible - not something that is needed for an encyclopediac title - Revo suggests 'regalia' being more neutral by the way where actual specifics about pusaka are uncertain JarrahTree (talk) 09:32, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

All of this was not meant to offend or bother you - but simply me thinking aloud as to how to designate things that might have once been considered sacred or close to - by javanese who allow themselves to sustain such beliefs - but may have no meaning transferrred to those who might curate the images due to lack of transmitted information. Being an australian with scottish ancestry, I am in no way a javanese of mystical bent, but more an australian sometime hasbeen/wannabe ethnographer of traditional javanese ideas.. it would have been good to have had a conversation over quite a lot of the Yogyakartan image titles and descriptions, I do hope I havent killed the conversation with my previous message JarrahTree (talk) 00:28, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Naturalis Biodiversity Center - RMNH.MOL.225252 1 - Clavus bilineata (Reeve, 1845) - Drilliidae - Mollusc shell.jpeg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Naturalis Biodiversity Center - RMNH.MOL.225252 1 - Clavus bilineata (Reeve, 1845) - Drilliidae - Mollusc shell.jpeg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JoJan (talk) 16:00, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Missing permission? The OTRS ticket can't be missed! Vysotsky (talk) 16:50, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

File tagging File:Naturalis Biodiversity Center - RMNH.MOL.225319 - Clavus auriculifera (Lamarck, 1816) - Drilliidae - Mollusc shell.jpeg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Naturalis Biodiversity Center - RMNH.MOL.225319 - Clavus auriculifera (Lamarck, 1816) - Drilliidae - Mollusc shell.jpeg. 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 ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

 

JoJan (talk) 16:06, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Missing permission? There is a clear OTRS ticket! Vysotsky (talk) 16:49, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

We'd love your feedback on Pattypan uploader!

Hi! We are about to sum up our "Pattypan uploader" project (or, at least, its first stage). Yarl released the new version 0.3 a few weeks ago, and also, we are looking for user feedback. Thank you for being one of the main users and uploaders! Let us know what works, and what could be improved; or any other suggestions or comment. We are gathering comments in the form of online survey here - we'd be very grateful for your feedback. Thank you! --Marta Malina Moraczewska

Categorieën KITLV afbeeldingen

Hallo Hans,

Een mooie set afbeeldingen van de KITLV heb je in April geüpload. Een duizendtal van de foto's zie deze search query is echter nog ongecategoriseerd. Zijn er mogelijkheden/plannen om deze afbeeldingen te categoriseren? Eventueel op een wat ruwere manier met een aantal basis categorieën. De "Media needing categories" beloofd namelijk niet een al te snelle oplossing met een backlog van 4 jaar (en immer groeiend). Misschien dat een helder overzicht en een kroegberichtje wat aandacht en input kan genereren?

Mvg, Basvb (talk) 19:27, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Beste @Basvb, dank je wel. Ik had het in de smiezen en heb daar "categorie" strikt inhoudelijk opgevat. Alle foto's zitten wel in (hidden) categorieën voor hun herkomst (fotograaf), in die zin zijn ze wel gecategoriseerd. Ik kom er op terug, ben nu honderden andere foto's aan het beschrijven (is urgenter). Vriendelijke groet, Hansmuller (talk) 06:38, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Conocephalus dorsalis - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Conocephalus dorsalis - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:27, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Conocephalus fuscus - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Conocephalus fuscus - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:28, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Decticus verrucivorus - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Decticus verrucivorus - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:29, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Ephippiger ephippiger - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Ephippiger ephippiger - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:29, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Euchorthippus declivus - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Euchorthippus declivus - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:30, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Euthystira brachyptera - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Euthystira brachyptera - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:31, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Gampsocleis glabra - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Gampsocleis glabra - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:32, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Gomphocerippus rufus - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Gomphocerippus rufus - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:33, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Gryllotalpa gryllotalpa - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Gryllotalpa gryllotalpa - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:33, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Gryllus campestris - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Gryllus campestris - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:34, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Isophya kraussii - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Isophya kraussii - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:34, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Leptophyes albovittata - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Leptophyes albovittata - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:35, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Leptophyes punctatissima - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Leptophyes punctatissima - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:35, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Psophus stridulus - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Psophus stridulus - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:38, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Stenobothrus lineatus - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Stenobothrus lineatus - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:39, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Stenobothrus nigromaculatus - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Stenobothrus nigromaculatus - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:39, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Stenobothrus stigmaticus - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Stenobothrus stigmaticus - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:40, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Stethophyma grossum - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Stethophyma grossum - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:40, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Tettigonia cantans - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Tettigonia cantans - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:41, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Tettigonia viridissima - sound.ogg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Tettigonia viridissima - sound.ogg. 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 VRT 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 deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 06:41, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Mapping script Iconographia Zoologica

Beste Hans,

Ik ben sinds 1 september in dienst bij UvA Erfgoed als Digital curator en ga me ook bezighouden met de upload van de afbeeldingen van de Iconographia Zoologica. Jij hebt daar een tijd geleden al voorwerk voor gedaan , zoals denk ik het maken van de mapping van de Excel metadatabestanden naar Wikimedia Commons. Heb jij dat met behulp van een script gedaan en zo ja, is dat script nog beschikbaar? Dat zou mij veel gepuzzel schelen. Ik hoor graag van je.

Groet,

Erik — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebastia1 (talk • contribs) 11:38, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

@Ebastia1 Beste Erik,

Mooi dat er iets mee gebeurt. Je bent blijkbaar User:Ebastia1. Ondertekening van een bericht kun je hier doen met vier slingertjes (tildes, 4x ~). Kun je me een gewone mail sturen van je werkadres dan weet ik hoe je heet enz. Vriendelijke groet, Hansmuller (talk) 11:48, 17 October 2016 (UTC)