Hello Magog the Ogre,

Is it possible to have the results of User:OgreBot/gallery on -- Geagea (talk) 02:01, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

@Geagea: maybe. Can you give me an explanation of what you're hoping for? Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:29, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
I'm hopin for the pages created by the tool like User:Geagea/IDF or User:Geagea/Media from the Israeli Police/New files can have the output to he:משתמש:Geagea/IDF for example. I want that the usrers in will help categorized and find possible copyright issues. -- Geagea (talk) 11:07, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
@Geagea: that's a pretty serious request. I'd need to go through a bot approval process, update the configs, and add new logic. Is there a reason that users can't create a gallery on Commons? Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:46, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
In Commons is like a "different planet". Even though that most of them speaks English the find it hard to conduct in Commons. Hebrew is written from right to left which make it harder to them. I want them to be more involved in photographs and files.
I can understand if you find it to hard to do. I can help with bot approval process, and I'm sure you'l find good users that will help you with the tecnicl issues. Generally I think it is a good idea to do so in other projects in other languages. Anyway thank for your attention. -- Geagea (talk) 01:16, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
I'll put it on the list for things to think about. It needs to go after a few other bugs fixes though. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:15, 30 November 2020 (UTC)


Hello Margot the Ogre , First of all I apologize if the edits I made brought problems, it was not my intention to generate that, I tried to advise myself with other users and correct what I was doing wrong, I only claim a wikipedia and a Wikimedia, credible and collaborate with that end, I am uploading files again previously I used another system that made me do it wrong now I hope I am doing it well, so I ask you please if you see that I made or made a mistake bear with me, I will put all my effort as I put it in the article of the Club Almirante Brown, in what you can help me and correct me to do it better and better I will thank you, Greetings! You have a good day ! AleAscenso (talk) 14:28, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello Magog ! I am uploading a historical file from 1913 of the article from the Almirante Brown Club, as I was not satisfied with the quality of the image, I uploaded another file the same, as I am learning I made the mistake of reverting and I need to ask you please if you can help me to keep the file that corresponds, thank you very much in advance and sorry for the inconvenience, Greetings! , Este es el archivo que va 00:04 23 nov 2020 AleAscenso (talk) 00:36, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

@AleAscenso: why are you messaging me? I've never talked with you before. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:50, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Emilio Segrè Visual Archives (More than 30,000 photos of scientists and their work)Edit

Hi Magog the Ogre! I am sorry to bug you once more, but this time it is not about copyright or anything. This great archive is moving to adopt open access starting in January. The notice reads:

"Attention ESVA patrons:
"The Emilio Segrè Visual Archives’ site is moving soon and adopting an open access approach to digital image sharing. Once we have transitioned to the new site in 2021, we will no longer charge for our high-resolution digital images or usage fees (note that we do not hold copyright to all the images in our collections and you will still need to obtain permission for those which we do not own).
"If you are working on a long-term project, we advise you to wait until 2021 so that you may obtain our copies for free. If you cannot wait until 2021, email us at and we will do what we can to assist you. We will not be offering refunds for past purchases."

This is very exciting as they have tens of thousands of excellent, high-quality photographs of famous physicists that can be used to radically improve the quality of our images for those scientists. I'm not sure if anyone else noticed it coming, but I think it would be great if we had a bot that could scan all these pages and pick out high-quality images (making sure the new licenses are correct, as some photos are not owned by them). I believe this is about to become the single greatest source of scientific photographs available to us, and it might also be good to mention that somewhere, sort of like how we mention Flikr is a great place to upload from. Footlessmouse (talk) 17:41, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

@Footlessmouse: this sounds intriguing. My bot is not well equipped for such edits; maybe you could bring the issue up on at the village pump? User:Fæ does a lot of mass uploads and might be able to help too. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:58, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
It is an interesting collection. Please do ping me when they change their credit requirements. However an initial look shows the photos appear to have an ESVA credit line and may be part of a named donated collection, this is not the same thing as a copyright statement. It is highly likely that the archives receive donations of prints without either asking for a copyright release from the photographer, or possibly even more likely, never checking that the photographer is known. Consequently a mass upload of any kind might be impossible to do, instead this may need manual checks or limiting upload to photographs that are old enough to be certain to be public domain by age. -- (talk) 10:00, 24 November 2020 (UTC)


Hi! Someone asked for a license review of this file from I'm pretty sure that Morwen made the file because we have lots of maps sourced to Morwen and I have been reading discussions about these files once. But I'm no longer an admin at so I can't see the original information. Perhaps you can find something? The link to does not work som you will have to look a bit for it. It would ofcourse be best if Morwen had specified the source because I think Morwen used some maps/sources to create the file. --MGA73 (talk) 09:57, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

@Morwen: this file was never properly licensed or sourced (although I'm reasonably sure you created it). Would you be so kind as to do so? If not, it has a lot of derivatives we'd have to delete.   Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:03, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Request for two bank map updatesEdit

Please update the Citizens Bank and Santander Bank maps on or after December 1st, 2020. The reason is because they both have significant Pennsylvania retail presence where I am. —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2601:44:180:a580:994b:542:3f38:f74a (talk) 22:13, November 23, 2020‎ (UTC)

  Done Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:23, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
Is there a location map for Fulton Financial Corporation in the Mid-Atlantic? If not, can you make one? —Preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 00:32, November 26, 2020‎ (UTC)
Can you update the PNC Bank map? —Preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 21:25, November 27, 2020‎ (UTC)
And the Wells Fargo and M&T maps? —Preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 19:50, November 28, 2020 (UTC)
The maps have a link with instructions on how you can do it. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 21:15, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Warning about Copyright ViolationEdit

I did receive a warning from you that my account will be blocked.

All my uploads are just improvements(Higher Resolution, Remove Watermark, Images with Exif Metadata, etc...) on photos that have been already uploaded by other people mostly from the same sources, my understanding is that the original uploader of the copyrighted material is the one responsible for the violation of the license, not every other person that improved on it, I have improved on more than 3000 photos and if I checked their license it would've taken me a lot more time to do the same, for me, it's better for every member to do what he does the best, and for me, I'm good mostly with improving the quality of images.Remitamine (talk) 00:59, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

@Remitamine: Did you know it was a copyright violation when you uploaded? The image you uploaded had metadata which showed it was taken by an AP photographer, and I couldn't find this resolution on their site. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 13:40, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
I don't check the file, I just extract a better quality from the same source and overwrite the file uploaded to Commons, VOA News is one of the websites, that I frequently check for new files uploaded from it, and upload better quality from the same source(as a proof that I'm uploading from the same source, I have re-uploaded more than 700 photos from VOA News, and they were sourced from different photographers, it's not feasible to have access to all these sources unless I did get the photos from VOA News, lots of the photos were only posted on VOA News websites, ex: [1], [2], [3], etc...).Remitamine (talk) 15:00, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
@Magog the Ogre: I think I did explain the situation and did provide evidence that the images that I'm uploading are from the same source, so would you mind reverting the last warning before blocking.Remitamine (talk) 18:10, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
@Remitamine: OK. You can remove it, as you can with any warnings from your talk page as long as the removal is made in good faith. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:37, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

2020 county change map?Edit

The map should probably show the percent difference between first place and second place, not the percentage received by the winner.

Both of these counties currently show as gray (within 2%). Los Angeles County, California 2016: 71.76%–22.41% 2020: 71.0%–26.9% (my two sources have different numbers of decimal places)

Waukesha County, Wisconsin (suburb of Milwaukee known for being heavily Republican) 2016: 33.13%–59.62% 2020: 38.8%–59.6%

So while the leading candidate got about the same percentage both times, both counties actually got closer due to the trailing candidate doing better. Your map shows blue counties getting bluer and red counties getting redder, which didn't actually happen this election and is only shown that way because percentages of the two major candidates add up to 98% instead of 94%, increasing the percentage of both major candidates and making it the color of the winner. In actuality, outside the Northeast (where everything with complete results got bluer), suburbs got bluer, major cities such as Los Angeles and Chicago got redder (and Philadelphia, which is in the Northeast), and rural areas are mixed.

You can see the "blue areas get bluer and red areas get redder" in effect in Iowa (the only six counties colored blue are the already blue ones, but there should be a few others) and western Colorado (where the blue counties are the second shade of blue (5-10%) but the red counties are gray; in actuality, all of western Colorado got bluer). In addition, if a county went 47-46 in 2016 but 50-49 in 2020 (in either direction), why should it show in color if nothing changed except the loss of third party votes? For example, it makes no sense that Jefferson County, IA is in light red despite going 49.6%-48.2%; the leading candidate didn't even win by 2%. HotdogPi (talk) 14:26, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

@HotdogPi you're right. The current map uses winner's percent only, not loser. I'll fix this in the next few days. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 21:11, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Question about two filesEdit

Hello Magog the Ogre,

I transferred a file from enwiki that now I am not sure has the correct permissions. Perhaps it needs permission from the person who took the image?

After I categorized it I noticed another file already on the Commons with the same problem:

Could you decide what to do, please?

Thank you! Krok6kola (talk) 02:46, 1 December 2020 (UTC)