Open main menu
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Category:Schleuse 33 & Category:Schleuse 34

Dear Huntster, not sure why you had rejected my SLA on these two categories. Both are definately no longer needed and I'd checked potential links to other projects as well. I'm currently clean up a little of my old contribution and prefer to get a similar look and feel somehow. My next steps would hit a couple other ones in the cat above called Canal_locks_of_Ludwig_Canal. I'm pretty sure that many other locks been called "Schleuse 33" (German for lock 33) in Germany. Please let me know why do you think this redirect is needed. Thx & rgds --Derzno (talk) 05:46, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Derzno, generally, categories don't need to be deleted unless they are needed for another purpose, and redirects can help users when searching for categories. However, since you've explained that this is a generic name that may be widely applied, I'll delete them. In the future, when making a deletion request, be specific about why it should be deleted rather than simply saying "not needed anymore" so that an administrator can make an informed decision. Make sense? Huntster (t @ c) 05:51, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
thx a lot for your support. --Derzno (talk) 06:14, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Huntster!

Image tracing

Hi, I am trying to find a good solution for the easy tracing tool hosted at labs. Would you be kind and give me links to 5 different images that I could use as a benchmark for the tracing tool? It should be images that you would possibly use the tool for. I could surely pick random images but I think it is better if I try it out on some hand picked candidates. Thanks. --Wesalius (talk) 09:52, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the help!

Hello Huntster, I just wanted to say thank you for your help with the deletion request of my image. I don't upload many images to Wikipedia and have not yet learned all the proper procedures. I was getting frustrated because to person who nominated the image wasn't contributing to the discussion but I'll make sure to let an admin remove the deletion tag, instead of doing it myself, from now on. Cheers! -Owen1962 (talk) 20:16, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Image help

Looks like this image is labeled for reuse, is it allowed on Wikimedia Commons?Lost Whispers (talk) 02:55, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Lost Whispers, no. Look at the other photographs...they've come from a variety of sources. He's simply taken images from other locations, and has no right to label them under a free license. Unless there is clear evidence an image was produced by the uploader on Flickr, it's best to avoid that site. Huntster (t @ c) 05:40, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
thanks for clarifying –Lost Whispers (talk) 09:40, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Convert to webm?

Hi, what do you use to convert video files to webm? Thanks, Originalwana (talk) 11:35, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Originalwana, I actually just use https://tools.wmflabs.org/videoconvert/index.php on Wikimedia Labs. It's relatively straightforward, and has pretty massive capacity. I was going to convert and upload the full HD media version, but it uses proprietary codec that the converter doesn't recognize. Ah well, second best! Huntster (t @ c) 14:46, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi Hunster, I'm trying to upload a video (after having successfully converted it) using the tool you suggested above but I keep getting an error with the following message: Status: An error occured: An error occured: internal_api_error_DBQueryError: [WRoLSQpAEDIAAI5UI1gAAACX] Database query error . Do you know what that means? Am I doing something wrong? Thanks, Originalwana (talk) 20:32, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Originalwana, you're clicking on the "Commons-Upload" button and its saying that? It may be a Labs database issue. Give it a day and try again, or download it to your computer ("Preview/Download" button) and manually upload. I've personally never seen that error message. Huntster (t @ c) 05:49, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Yes when I click on the "Commons-Upload" button I get that error. I can't manually upload it as the converted file size is 1GB. As far as I know you can only upload files >100MB via the videoconvert tool. I abandoned that file and tried a different file. This time I had a different problem. Have a look at this file
Elttrailer
. Not sure what happened here either. Originalwana (talk) 10:18, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Originalwana, I'm guessing you were trying to convert one of the 4K Ultra HD videos? After playing around with it myself, I suspect that the system isn't able to handle H.264/H.265 encoded files, and/or they were encoded using some kind of proprietary codec. I ended up taking the Full HD Preview version and converting it, deleting the corrupt file, then manually uploading in its place. I suppose you can't expect one program to be the solution for everything! I also renamed it to be unambiguous...file is now at File:Official ESO trailer for the Extremely Large Telescope.webm. Huntster (t @ c) 02:53, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Your VFC installation method is deprecated

Hello Huntster, we are aware that using the old installation method of VFC (via common.js, which you are using) may not work reliably anymore and can break other scripts as well. A detailed explanation can be found here. Important: To prevent problems please remove the old VFC installation code from your common.js and instead enable the VFC gadget in your preferences. Thanks! --VFC devs (q) 16:23, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

File:OSIRIS-REx instrument deck.png

This is exactly the same image as File:OSIRIS-REx Instrument Deck.png plus the logo. Taking out the logo is a modification that is not acceptable, as it is a corruption of the original image (http://www.asteroidmission.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Social-Media-Card-Spacecraft-Image.png) to avoid a possible copyright infringment. Both images are to me possible copyvio, not images from NASA at all but from the consortium that build the satellite (http://www.asteroidmission.org/galleries/#graphics), and I would like to hear your arguments before I propose for deletion.

Pierre cb (talk) 18:24, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Pierre cb, sorry for the delay in responding, I had to leave for work. If you feel you need to submit these to DR, you are free to do so. However, these works are part of a mission performed under a NASA contract, which means they are public domain. Further, watermarks on Commons are highly discouraged, and removing them from a public domain work does not in any way change the copyright status or corrupt the image. I do not understand where you get the idea that removing such logos, etc, is not acceptable, as it has been done on Commons almost since the beginning. Also, per COM:Dupe, please remember that tagging duplicates is only permissible when the duplicate is an exact or scaled down copy of the primary file. These two files are not exact copies of each other, and so are not eligible for the duplicate deletion process. Huntster (t @ c) 21:56, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Flickr2Commons

I have just come across a few images you have recently uploaded from Flickr. I would appreciate it if in the future, you used the Flickr2Commons tool. This tool allows images to be moved to Commons from Flickr without having to download the images to your own computer. It also brings in the largest resolution of the image, as well making sure to list the correct license and url, making it easy for the automated Flickr Review system. Also, it is fairly easy to categorize images with this tool. Elisfkc (talk) 19:10, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm perfectly aware of the tool, but it doesn't do what I need. NASA images usually have the wrong license on Flickr, requiring manual upload.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Huntster (talk • contribs) 01:00, 12 June 2017‎ (UTC)
That issue has been fixed (at least NASA Kennedy Flickr stream), as evident by File:KSC-20170517-PH CSH02 0002 (34578273942).jpg, as the tool has an override in it now if the photo from that Flickr account has the NASA image use policy link in the caption. Elisfkc (talk) 19:54, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

こんにちは

注意されているがない活動2年6日、この学校が分かりにくいための作成しましたが分かりましたので投稿だけ差し戻しす、と思われるが分かりにくいため、るウィキペディアンその責はやめて下さいんだと分からないよ受験の作成しましたがある分かりましたのでどこはやめて下さいんだと分からないよ(意味が分かりにくいため追加につながるのに続きなので書いた。この会社はやめて下さいんだと分からないと分からないよ(意味ですがない)--活性化中 (talk) 15:14, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

活性化中, I'm sorry, but I do not speak Japanese, and Google Translate is not helping. (申し訳ありませんが、私は日本語を話せません.Google翻訳は役に立たないです。) Huntster (t @ c) 18:15, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

ok,I'm sorry.--活性化中 (talk) 14:37, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Commons Conference project

Hello

I'm writing you as one of the most active Commons users right now. Since a while now, the idea of a dedicated Commons conference has been floating around. But since the last Wikimania concrete steps have been taken to actually make it happen next year. If you're interested in participation or maybe willing to help organize the first ever Commons Conference, I invite you to check out the project page and leave your comments; or just show your support for the idea, by signing up.

Cheers,

--Touzrimounir (talk) 22:17, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

WISE artist concept (PIA17254).jpg, WISE artist concept (PIA17254, crop).jpg

First off: new here, so not sure of protocols. Apologies if this is out of place.

But I note that you uploaded File:WISE_artist_concept_(PIA17254).jpg and File:WISE_artist_concept_(PIA17254,_crop).jpg. The image source have since been updated on JPL's website and I wonder if you could update these images to the latest version. (Created this account in the hopes of doing so myself, but commons reports I'm unable to overwrite...)

For background, the difference is the presence of the sunshade at the aperture. In the original version, the aperture cover had been photoshopped off but the sunshade had not been added, which winds up being not only inaccurate but weird looking to folks familiar with the spacecraft. And of course, wikipedia is the top image hit, so this "odd" image pops up everywhere. At some point it must have bugged somebody at JPL enough to fix it on the source, but wikicommons isn't updated.

Thanks, --hbygott (talk) 15:55, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Hbygott, done. Thanks for letting me know about it. Let me know if you ever have questions about Commons or Wikipedia. Huntster (t @ c) 06:01, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Astronaut transfer vans

hi Hunster, I am trying to sort out the various kinds of Astronaut Transfer Vans but feel I am not doing it quite right. Thank you for trying to fix things, and please try one more time to get things sorted out. I will be very glad to go with what you think best. cheers and best wishes, Daderot (talk) 22:25, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Daderot, I've reformulated the category structure. Check out Category:Astronaut transfer vehicles and let me know what you think. Huntster (t @ c) 02:52, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes! now things look very good. Thank you for excellent work. Daderot (talk) 10:17, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Daderot, good deal. I'm also going through and fixing category names for some other creations. In particular, naming schemes for collections are typically "item at location" (for outdoors objects) or "item in location" (for indoor objects). Parentheses are normally only used to disambiguate shared common names for different things: good examples are names like "John Smith (politician)" or "Ocean (ship, 1996)". Let me know any time you have questions about the site. Huntster (t @ c) 01:58, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

ESA images

Hi, Could I check whether this image's CC BY-SA IGO 3.0 is valid for reuse in Wikipedia? T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 10:14, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Evolution_and_evolvability, it is not, which is why I had already nominated it for deletion. The Cc-by-sa-3.0-igo license only applies to the Rosetta/NAVCAM component, not the Rosetta/MPS images. Huntster (t @ c) 18:43, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
Ah, thank you for the explanation! I've contacted some people at ESA to see if there is any version of the image published under a compatible license. It'd be pretty disappointing for such a significant image to be inaccessible to Wikipedia. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 04:36, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Evolution_and_evolvability, yeah, it's great that the Navcam images were released freely, but there are *so* many from MPS, CIVA and Philae that we could use. Good luck on your request...ESA said a year ago or so that they were working to relicense as many of their images under IGO as possible, but there's not been much progress. Huntster (t @ c) 06:39, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

The Life of Hurricane Irene from Caribbean to Canada Viewed by Satellites.webm

Thank you for your video upload. Is there an "easy" way to crop such videos? I work with FFmpeg and commands like "ffmpeg -i ###.mp4 -codec:v libvpx-vp9 -b:v 2000k -quality good -filter:v "crop=914:720:183:0" -an ###.webm are exhaustive. Warm regards --Ras67 (talk) 15:21, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Ras67, honestly, I just use online tools for my video needs. I certainly can't afford any proper software. I just regret the lack of precision and good compression, especially from our own conversion tool... Video Convert is convenient but the output files are horrifically size-inflated from what they should be. I'll drop here a few links to the sites I use when I get home from work. Huntster (t @ c) 17:06, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Category:Photographs_of_the_Milky_Way

Themightyquill (talk) 08:17, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Chandrayaan-1 (transparent).png

I noticed that an image of Chandrayaan-1 that you uploaded in April 2017 is apparently erroneously labeled. The image is of NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, as shown in the projects website gallery. Then again, the source of the image you originally posted ([1]) actually does attribute the image to 'Chandrayaan-1'. This seems to be some of the few mistakes that NASA makes from time to time. My suggestion is to rename the commons file to something like LRO (transparent).png. Kind regards, Hms1103 (talk) 08:51, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Hms1103, excellent catch. I'll start removing it from articles and perform a rename. Huntster (t @ c) 16:24, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Categories

I see that you've categorized a number of images that I uploaded. I just wanted to say thank you for that. I should really put more effort into categorizing my uploads but even after all these years I still don't really know what I'm doing in that regard. I sometimes copy-paste categories from other similar images, but I have no idea where to start in most cases. I'd be happy to pull my own weight a little more if you can give me a few pointers. (Please ping me if you do.) Cheers. nagualdesign 22:52, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Nagualdesign, honestly, the easiest thing to do is simply search for the term you're primarily working with. For the simple items like the question mark symbol, that's not hard to find. For general photographs and such, just remember the Five Ws: Who, What, Where, When, Why. If you can find categories that fit some of those concepts you'll be in great shape. Just remember, the more specific the category, the better. I'm always available if you have questions on how to better categorise images, I'm more than happy to help. Huntster (t @ c) 01:49, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Much appreciated. I didn't realize until now that after you do a search using basic search terms there's a link to "Search categories"! I'd always tried searching for things like "Commons:Categories" or other pages that turned out not to exist, looking for some sort of index or whatever. *facepalm*
One more question; Is it best to drill down into the subcategories of subcategories and just use one or two of those, rather than including the parent categories? (You'll have to forgive my ignorance on the subject!) nagualdesign 03:50, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Nagualdesign, yes, absolutely! You always want to use the most specific category you can (such as Category:Photos of Phobos (moon) by HiRISE rather than just Category:High Resolution Imaging Science Experiment (HiRISE) or Category:Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter) that fulfils those 5 Ws. Of course, sometimes you'll find a single category that fulfils several of them, such as Category:AV-070; while it is usually requested to have an image in two or more categories, sometimes it just isn't necessary.
Now, there are rare exceptions. Categories like Category:Aircraft by registration are intended as top level containers that hold all related categories. Those individual aircraft registrations may additionally be included in more specific categories, such as Category:Boeing 747SP by registration. Huntster (t @ c) 22:26, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Okey dokey. Thanks for the feedback. Have a good weekend. Regards, nagualdesign 23:05, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Philae close-up labelled.jpg

Hi Huntster, I've noticed that you edited this image wrt the license. We actually received a CC by-sa 4.0 license for all the images of OSIRIS (in ESA Missions). If you're aware of other files that can be restored, or if you want to organise the import of other photos (or know some user that is interested), just tell me. Cheers --Ruthven (msg) 18:12, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Ruthven, interesting. I'm curious why they would OTRS a CC-by-sa-4.0 license (would it be possible to have the contents of that emailed to me, so I can see exactly how they worded it?); I worked with them to get https://imagearchives.esac.esa.int/index.php?/page/copyright_information changed from a Commons-incompatible license to CC-by-sa-3.0-igo, which they did, and now they've changed to 4.0 for OSIRIS while leaving NAVCAM as 3.0 IGO! Ah, bureaucracy. I'll look around and see what else I've nominated in the past and undelete them.
I have zero experience with mass import of material, mostly because I prefer to pick and choose quality images rather than simply dumping everything into a big pile. User preference, that's all. Let me know if there's anything else ESA related that we can work toward. Huntster (t @ c) 06:36, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Unfortunately I cannot mail you all the details of the permission because of the OTRS Users Confidentiality Agreement. What I can say is that a person in charge of the OSIRIS program stated that OSIRIS material comes from a European contribution to Rosetta, thus it is not ESA; which is the reason why they can license their material differently. They now decided to release all the OSIRIS data under CC BY-SA 4.0 (the phrasing is: "The permission thus refers to the full data set of OSIRIS, narrow and wide angle camera, and all mission phases of Rosetta", which we will use for an eventual customised license template). I haven't found this information on the website – I admit that I haven't searched a lot – but all these images should now be freely accessible thru ESA and OSIRIS servers, hopefully with the CC BY-SA 4.0 license attached. So, if you think that there is material we can import (better to select the more useful files, as you said), and have a source for it, we can work on it and prepare a customised license template to be used also by other users. If you undelete stuff, ping me, so that I can add the OTRS permission template. --Ruthven (msg) 07:27, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Ruthven: Sure. I was OTRS long ago but never had time to properly devote to it; I suppose things have changed a bit. Probably easiest to base the template code and name on {{ESA-ROSETTA-NAVCAM}} (which I hate being all caps, but oh well), mixed with the OTRS bit from {{Cc-zero-SpaceX}}. The link I provided above covers the OSIRIS license. If you'd like, I can work on the template tomorrow.
The interesting thing is that several legacy OSIRIS releases are specifically released under the 3.0 IGO license, such as http://www.esa.int/spaceinimages/Images/2007/02/Image_of_Mars_seen_by_OSIRIS_A_cloudy_day_on_Mars. I might have the template (say, {{ESA-Rosetta-OSIRIS}}) have a parameter to use the 3.0 as an alternate. Huntster (t @ c) 10:28, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
I suppose that they decided that the other day, answering to this ticket: see the relative post on twitter. Contact me when the template is ready, I'll have busy days this week and don't have a lot of time to dedicate. In any case, consider applying again to OTRS. Even one ticket a day can be helpful! --Ruthven (msg) 12:12, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Ruthven, let me present {{ESA-Rosetta-OSIRIS}}. Mash-up between {{ESA-ROSETTA-NAVCAM}} and {{Cc-zero-SpaceX}} with the OTRS tag from the image above attached. Thoughts? Huntster (t @ c) 02:29, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
It seems perfect. Congrats! I added the ESA logo – which gives a touch of officiality – and protected the template. From this search it seems that there are some files that can be undeleted and use this template. --Ruthven (msg) 05:36, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Huntster/Archive 6".