User talk:Mike Peel/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Structured Data - file captions coming this week (January 2019)

Hi all, following up on last month's announcement...

Multilingual file captions will be released this week, on either Wednesday, 9 November or Thursday, 10 November 2019. Captions are a feature to add short, translatable descriptions to files. Here's some links you might want to look follow before the release, if you haven't already:

1. Read over the help page for using captions - I wrote the page on mediawiki.org because captions are available for any MediaWiki user, feel free to host/modify a copy of the page here on Commons.
2. Test out using captions on Beta Commons.
3. Leave feedback about the test on the captions test talk page, if you have anything you'd like to say prior to release.

Additionally, there will be an IRC office hour on Thursday, 10 January with the Structured Data team to talk about file captions, as well as anything else the community may be interested in. Date/time conversion, as well as a link to join, are on Meta.

Thanks for your time, I look forward to seeing those who can make it to the IRC office hour on Thursday. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 20:22, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your CSS code to hide these captions! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:04, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

File:Smolyan-eclipse.jpg

File:Smolyan-eclipse.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

B dash (talk) 06:38, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

What ever happened to Alexa's Texas

Does she still work in the porn industry — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 5.62.43.24 (talk) 07:39, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

This is an LTA that often asks this non-sensical question, just don't search the name in a search engine. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 23:44, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Technical Barnstar
	I wanted to thank you last year. But thanks for all the hard work in getting Wikidata infoboxes on Wikimedia Commons. Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 23:47, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

@Donald Trung: Thank you! Mike Peel (talk) 09:12, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Code issues in User:Mike Peel/vector.css

Hi Mike Peel, I am a bored bot (this is kind of a computer program) that is watching the recent changes and tapping buttons like I did now.

Curious about the reason? Possibly not but I will tell you anyway:

1. You edited User:Mike Peel/vector.css. Glad to see you coding in css! Have you ever considered becoming a MediaWiki hacker?
2. Though, that change appears to introduce 1 new prettyCss issue — the page's status is now having warnings. Note that invalid or ambiguous code often has unwanted side effects like breaking other tools for you. If you cannot find out how to fix it, I suggest blanking the page for now.
3. To help you understanding where the issues are, I have aggregated a report here and now. If you have questions, don't hesitate to ask users experienced in css writing for help. But do not ask the bot's operators (chronically overwrought) unless you suspect an error of mine. If you prefer not getting spammed by me, you can opt-out reports by adding {{ValidationOptOut|type=all}} to your user page or cmb-opt-out anywhere on your your global user page on Meta. Good luck at Wikimedia Commons and happy hacking!

1. WARNING: suggest-relative-unit:px: line 1 char number 31 - Evidence: 124px

Your CommonsMaintenanceBot (talk) at 19:14, 13 January 2019 (UTC).

Infobox in Category:Copyright violations

I think will be reasonable to exclude hidden categories from User:Pi bot tasks list. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:49, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

@EugeneZelenko: I'm not sure as I can imagine it being quite useful for users who don't understand English. I've added a bit more info about the category on Wikidata, perhaps that will help. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:01, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

M Roelofs - name of his children

Dear

I have a painting of a M Roelofs. Do you have any idea who that is? Maybe related to William or Arthur Roelofs? Thank you

My email is differenzao@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2A02:1810:3D3A:DF00:C46:92BD:4E8C:8B7B (talk) 19:28, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

This doesn't sound like something I can help with, sorry. Mike Peel (talk) 00:26, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

RfC on copying file descriptions to file captions

Are you still planning on creating an RfC to copy file descriptions to file captions? Because it's a good idea, although I've seen some counter arguments by Fæ which were also quite good. For that reason having an RfC could probably let the community decide what to do with all this data going forward.

If you are still planning on launching it you should probably also propose raising the character limit to reflect file descriptions' limit. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 23:05, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

It's on my to-do list, but it's a long list. The main thing I want to do first is to make sure that it's actually possible to copy the descriptions to the captions. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 23:07, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

I was thinking that maybe an opt-in system could be proposed as an alternative if the copyright © issues with copying would be too great, where users could opt-in to have their {{Own}} copyrighted file descriptions released under a Creative Commons 0 license so they could be copied by a bot. It's not a perfect alternative but at least that way we could address the backlog in a meaningful way. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 23:17, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

On a related note, could I start a village pump discussion regarding the character limit? That way newer uploads could already have both, but from what I can tell the copyright status of file captions is still unclear so I might have to wait for that to resolve first. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 08:26, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

The character limit is quite a different topic from what I was thinking of, so I'd say go for it. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 14:22, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Please do not remove deletion requests

---

Please do not remove deletion request tags from images before an administrator has closed the debate. If you do not agree that the image should be deleted, you can express your opinion on the deletion request page. You can find this page via a link in the deletion request tag or at Commons:Deletion requests. Thank you.

Patrick Rogel (talk) 23:13, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

@Patrick Rogel: I removed the permission tag as the license info was present on the website. Thanks for taking it to a deletion debate, which is the better venue here. If it helps, consider that I am an admin and otrs agent... Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 00:32, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Q1078748

Category:Porubka (river) is about river in the Czech Republic, Porúbka (Q1078748) is about municipality of Slovakia. Please don´t adding.--Alena Pokorná (talk) 06:27, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

@Alena Pokorná: Looks like you mostly fixed this, just needed this sitelink removing and adding to Porubka (Q2105478). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 11:14, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank You.--Alena Pokorná (talk) 12:04, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Bot Captation Code

Hi Mike Peel, By chance, I saw your captation auto-copying bot proposal. Actually, I had the same idea and wanted to code something similar soon. I still have some trouble understanding how to edit captations with the pywikibot framework. Are you willing to share the code you used? --Schlurcher (talk) 12:52, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

@Schlurcher: The code's at [1]. Saving the captions was a pain to get working! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 12:59, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

stripping off links and wikicode from strings

Mike, maybe you know. I am looking at some extension to Module:Artwork to detect cases where there is a title for an artwork on Commons encoded using {{Title}} template, but there is missing title (P1476) statement on Wikidata in some language. One challenge I run into is striping all the links and wikicode from the string. I can start experimenting with Lua's mw.text.unstrip and similar functions and look if there are already written codes for this, but maybe you know if there is some already written and tested template or lua code. --Jarekt (talk) 14:48, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

@Jarekt: I'm not sure this is something I can help with, sorry - I could help with Python code but not Lua code. Maybe @RexxS: might have some ideas. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 14:50, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi Jarekt, the string handling functions in Lua use 'patterns' which are very similar to regexes. The string.gsub function is also available as mw.ustring.gsub for unicode characters. To strip out all html tags from str, you can use:

• str = str:gsub("<[^>]*>", "")

Wikicode can be a bit harder, depending on what you are trying to get rid of, but the following will remove bold and italics:

• str = str:gsub("'''", ""):gsub("''", "")

and the following will remove piped links, leaving the displayed text:

• str = str:gsub("%[[^|]*|", ""):gsub("]]", "")

The corresponding mw.ustring (if needed) doesn't have the same syntactic sugar, so you have to write things like:

• str = mw.ustring.gsub( mw.ustring.gsub(str, "%[[^|]*|", ""), "]]", "" )

You probably won't need the unicode functions as the Wikicode that you're trying to match is straight ASCII. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 16:38, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. I was thinking more of some existing codes that do it, but I guess there is not that much coding that one would have to strip through Regexp. Thanks for recipes. --Jarekt (talk) 13:00, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

@Jarekt: Well, I use something like that to strip out the metadata from the string returned from your {{Complex date}} in Module:WikidataIB around lines 350-370, so that's one real application. Incidentally, if you ever want to test out code snippets, I find the interactive Lua demo very handy for a quick check (obviously it hasn't got the mw. extensions). Cheers --RexxS (talk) 16:31, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

"COM:TOOSOON"

Your proposal for mass-copying file descriptions to file captions and my proposal for having categories be automatically eligible for Wikidata "items" will fail because they were launched prematurely. Because the whole copyright © licensing debacle with file captions by clarifying their licenses to "the public" (as in those who don't read up on the developments in "the Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons world") will probably also attract some reactionary oppositions. These proposals would probably succeed a couple of months down the line but as my pregnant 🤰🏻 wife will give birth then I won't have the time to contribute here anymore so I'll be forced to retire. But I think that those proposals (either done by us or by others) will probably be brought up again once their needs are brought to the attention of the community.

For file captions I think that they might get imported after the community will realise that there is a massive amount of files lacking them and though I don't think that all file descriptions will be copied around that time, several millions will. As for the Wikidata notability discussions, they won't be resolved in our favour until the need will be shown when users will complain about certain common subjects with Wikimedia Commons categories but no Wikidata "items" being unable to be added using file depicts. These issues will be resolved eventually but before the needs for them will arise to those not as heavily invested in the Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons project we would probably have to be patient. For this reason I also haven't proposed expanding the file captions limit, I think that the discussion around the copyright © should be fully held first.

Unrelated: Could your bot also add links to the Internet Archive's Wayback machine en masse? As you've seem to have edited millions of pages in a short while. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 12:22, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

@Donald Trung: Congratulations on the pending little one! You're probably right about TOOSOON. I've basically abandoned that proposal now, we'll see how things go I guess. With the Internet Archive, I think you're looking for User:InternetArchiveBot, that's run by @Cyberpower678: and has made ~7.7 million edits to fix internet archive links on various Wikipedias, I suspect that could be turned on for Commons quite easily. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 12:46, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Removing (fruit) and anything with "Boundary stone" from the distributed game

Hey Mike, can you remove anything that has the (fruit) after species name categories and "Boundary stone"? They both have a lot of potential to introduce errors (I have caught myself making mistakes a couple times), and you reverted me on one of the Boundary stone items. The chance of these being a match is quite low. Sadads (talk) 02:20, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

And also "(juvenile)" and "(herbarium specimen)" ? Sadads (talk) 03:38, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

And (leaves) and (illustrations) -- they are all part of the subcategory hierarchy of plant species. Sadads (talk) 04:03, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

and (interior) -- we will never match against that with Wikidata items. Sadads (talk) 04:12, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@Sadads: I can do that, but it will slow down the game a bit, and ideally those categories would have Wikidata items. I'll try to look into it tomorrow. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 00:34, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

I think the problem with these is that that all they all require qualifier or compounded Wikidata statements (except for the boundary stones). thank you! Sadads (talk) 12:46, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

@Sadads: OK, this change has now been made, please test it! Ideally those categories would have Wikidata entries with instance of (P31)=Wikimedia category (Q4167836) accompanied by category combines topics (P971) statements, but that is more controversial if the only sitelink is to commons. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 00:20, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Most definitely. That is definitely something I will probably start working on as SDC kicks in: but for right now, really focused on stage one matching of stuff :D Sadads (talk) 01:58, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

@Sadads: I'm hoping we're coming to the end of stage one, most of the remaining possibilities should be loaded into the game either already or in the near future. If you find any silos of wikimedia -> commons sitelinks then I'm happy to write bot code to import them, or add them into the game if they're less reliable. Then with stage two we run into issues like d:Wikidata:Requests for comment/Allow for Wikidata items to be created that only link to a single Wikimedia Commons category (Wikidata notability discussion)... Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:11, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Structured Data - development update, March 2019

This text is also posted on the Structured Data hub talk page. You can reply there with questions, comments, or concerns.

A development update for the current work by the Structured Data on Commons team:

After the release of multilingual file captions, work began on getting depicts and other statements ready for release. These were originally scheduled for release in February and into March, however there are currently two major blockers to finishing this work (T215642, T217157). We will know more next week about when depicts and statements can likely be ready for testing and then release; until then I've tentatively updated the release schedule.

Once the depicts feature is ready for testing, it will take place in two stages on TestCommons. The first is checking the very basics; is the design comfortable, how does the simple workflow of adding/editing/removing statements work, and building up help and process pages from there. The second part is a more detailed test of depicts and other statements, checking the edge-case examples of using the features, bugs that did not come up during simple testing, etc. Additionally we'll be looking with the community for bugs in interaction with bots, gadgets, and other scripts once the features are live on Commons. Please let me know if you're interesting in helping test and fix these bugs if they show up upon release, it is really hard to find them in a test environment or, in some cases, bugs won't show up in a testing environment at all.

One new thing is definitely coming within the next few weeks, pending testing: the ability to search for captions. This is done using the inlabel keyword in search strings, and will be the first step in helping users find content that is specifically structured data. I'll post a notice when that feature is live and ready for use.

Thanks, let me know if you have questions about these plans. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 21:34, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Category:Antonio Mosca (libretto personale esercito)

The correct code of Wikidata Infobox is Q3619927 Antonio Mosca not Q57315476 Antonio Moscatiello --Albertomos (talk) 14:49, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

@Albertomos: Fixed with this edit on Wikidata, @Spinster: it looks like this category is about a book written by the person rather than about a person. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 15:05, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for catching this, apologies for my mistake! Spinster (talk) 16:01, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Pi bot error?

Hi Mike - your Pi bot keeps adding a Commons category link to Iduna aedon at Wikidata; the Commons category page is just a redirect, so it shouldn't have a link from Wikidata (numerous other similar redirects don't). Can you sort this one out, please? Thanks! - MPF (talk) 09:37, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

@MPF: In Iduna aedon (Q19682735), Commons category (P373) is set to Category:Iduna aedon - the bot just copies that over to the sitelink. Remove the P373 value from the Wikidata item and the bot will stop adding the sitelink. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 12:34, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Done :-) MPF (talk) 13:12, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata infobox error :D

Hi Mike, I included at Wikidata a second image with description and than: Category:Golden Retriever, the description of the second image is in the infobox, not the image, so now it's weird, I don't know what to do :). Any light here? Thank you for your time. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 05:16, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

@Rodrigo.Argenton: It's a known issue, sorry. Ideally it wouldn't arise in the first place, since there should only be one image (P18) value per Wikidata item. The temporary solution is to remove one of the images from the Wikidata entry, or to add a caption for the first one as well. The full solution will hopefully be to switch to using the Structured Data on Commons captions when they are accessible through Lua, hopefully later this year. I almost wonder whether image of interior (P5775) would be appropriate here! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 12:41, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Structured Data - early depicts testing

The Structured Data on Commons development team has the very basic version of depicts statements available for early testing on Test-Commons. You can add very basic depicts statements to the file page by going into the new “Structured Data” tab located below the "Open in Media Viewer button." You can use the Latest Files link in the left side nav bar to select existing images, or use the UploadWizard to upload new ones to test with (although those images won’t actually show up on the site). The test site is not a fully functional replica of Commons, so there may be some overall problems in using the site, but you should be able to get a general idea of what using the feature is like.

Early next week I will call for broad, community-wide testing of the feature similar to what we did for Captions, with instructions for testing, known bugs, and a dedicated space to discuss the feature as well as a simple help page for using statements. Until then, you're welcome to post on the SDC talk page with what you might find while testing depicts.

Thanks in advance for trying it out, you'll be hearing more from me next week. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 21:59, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

BOT/BCD

I recently moved Category:British overseas territories to Category:British Overseas Territories, and tried to fix the links to connect it to British overseas territories (Q46395). The infobox was showing data for Crown Dependencies (Q185086), which links to Category:British Crown Dependencies. Not the same at all.

I added |qid=Q46395 to the British Overseas Territories infobox to point to the right item. Pi bot took out the |qid= and it reverted to British Crown Dependencies. I can't see where it is getting that connection from. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:31, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Aymatth2: What a mess on Wikidata. The entry for Category:British Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies (Q8875148) had two main topics. Both Category:British Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies (Q8875148) and Category:British Overseas Territories (Q8266795) had sitelinks to Category:British Overseas Territories on Commons. One missed out the word 'category' which allowed it to circumvent the rule that only one sitelink can be made to one project.

I think I've fixed it all on Wikidata now. Please check that it's working as expected. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 21:14, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

That looks like it works. I would never have found Category:British Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies (Q8875148) as the culprit. Thanks a lot. Aymatth2 (talk) 21:48, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Template:main subject

Hi Mike,

I've been experimenting with a template {{Main subject}}, to add to the top of categories that don't have Wikidata items and then can't have infoboxes.

I have been adding it to "old maps" categories, eg Category:Old_county_maps_of_Kent, as I've been editing them (about 30 so far), and wondered what you thought. Are there changes you would make? And do you think this (or something like it) might be suitable for broad roll-out?

I'm finding it useful in giving a direct link to underlying categories and wikidata items that the category is about (which in the "old maps" hierarchy can often be an unpredictable number of jumps up the tree); also it's a summation of the category that's automatically internationalised, since it draws on wikidata; it will save this identification being done twice (or multiple times) when the time comes for feeding structured data; and, by looking at all the templates in a sub-tree of a particular category, it can be mined to create a look-up set of appropriate category names for categories of type 'X' for a set of wikidata items.

Given the fantastic success of the infoboxes, I thought you'd be a good person to ask whether you think the idea has legs, or needs more thought. Jheald (talk) 16:09, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

@Jheald: Interesting. I haven't given up hope yet of having Wikidata entries for all categories, in which case what you're doing can go into category combines topics (P971) and we can then have the infobox in the category, but I'm not sure of the timeline for that happening. One suggestion is that if {{Main subject}} is going to be used more widely, then it should add more multilingual value to the category. For example, see the code I put together at User:Mike Peel/Depicts - in this case it expands to:

antique map (instance of type of map)
county map (instance of type of map)
Kent (instance of ceremonial county of England; location South East England, England)

which isn't great, but it's at least giving some context of what 'Kent' is. I hope that helps, and I'll try to think more about this. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 16:22, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Interesting. On the other hand the template might gain more acceptance if it was less obtrusive; and in most cases there will be a link to a Category/WP article/WD item to give more info. But an expansion drop-down for more information, like the creator template, might work. The nice thing about a template, of course, is that one wouldn't need to change the input format to have any of those possible outputs, that all being down to the back-end. Jheald (talk) 16:38, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Structured Data - testing qualifiers for depicts

As you might have seen, testing is underway for adding qualifiers to depicts statements. If you have not left feedback already, the Structured Data on Commons development team is very interested in hearing about your experience using qualifiers on the file page and in the UploadWizard. To get started you can visit Test-Commons and chose a random file to test out, or upload your own file to try out the UploadWizard. Questions, comments, and concerns can be left on the Structured data talk page and the team will address them as best as they can. Thank you for your time. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 19:08, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Delete-own

Similar to reupload-own, would it be technically feasible to implement delete-own and deleterevision-own to allow a user who has those rights to delete and revision delete their own uploads and own overwrites? - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 17:57, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: I think you're asking the wrong person (or at least, I have no idea what to say in reply beyond pointing to phabricator)! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:29, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

On Phabricator I can only create a feature request I think? I don't want to request this as a feature before there is community consensus. I don't want to poll for community consensus before I know if it's even feasible from a technical point of view. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 19:34, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

I asked on Commons:Village pump/Technical#Delete-own. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 19:37, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: Hopefully someone there can help. If not, perhaps ask on wikitech-l, or perhaps @Jdforrester (WMF): can point to the right person to ask? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:39, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: I'm afraid that Trust & Safety's policy is that communities can't hand out deletion tools (even limited deletion tools) to anyone that hasn't gone through the community's sysop process. I imagine that that cultural would apply if we implemented this feature. You could ask them? Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 15:59, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

@Jdforrester (WMF): thanks, I'll have a look. But this is true for undelete, that I know, not for delete afaik. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 16:05, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Pi bot

Hi Mike Peel,

Does it still add {{Wikidata Infobox}} ? I find that most helpful, but I noticed it hasn't run in some time. Maybe database lag is better now and it can work again. Jura1 (talk) 15:15, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

@Jura1: It's stuck pending the resolution of phab:T226050. The main way I run it now is to take the output of a Quarry query as a candidate set to add the infobox to, and I haven't been able to run that query successfully for quite a while. I've been trying daily, the last time it worked was the last set of infoboxes that pi bot added, back on 7 June. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:02, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

I just added LIMIT 1000 and it gave some results. Maybe there is a way to avoid some of the joins to get it to run quicker (even if it's not sparql, d:Wikidata:Request a query might help). Jura1 (talk) 17:52, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

@Jura1: I'm running through that now, thanks - most of them are cases where the infobox isn't currently wanted, such as ones using {{Disambig}} or {{MDcat}}. Typically the query was returning around 19k of unwanted results. I've tried removing the joins, but that didn't help - maybe more should be added to avoid the unwanted results... Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:06, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

@Jura1: Quarry seems to be working again now, so I'm running through the complete set now. Thanks to @Rudolphous: adding them over the last month, there's only around 7,000 for pi bot to add now. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 07:02, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Great, thanks. Occasionally, I bookmark a category I just linked from Wikidata to see how it ends up looking. Some I did earlier in June are just getting used now (e.g. d:Q16795429). Jura1 (talk) 12:57, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

BTW, would you update the template from the sandbox? I added a few properties. Jura1 (talk) 14:51, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

@Jura1: With the infobox changes, I don't understand why you do "check for health by region" etc. rather than just include the properties as normal? Are there cases where we wouldn't want to display those properties if they've been set on Wikidata? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 16:21, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

The idea is to display them on Category:Health in Gabon instead of Category:Gabon. Wikidata has it on the item for Gabon. Similarly for Category:Education in Norway and Category:Economy of Mauritania. Country categories might get to much stuff. Jura1 (talk) 18:33, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Updates seem to be complete. Even categories linked yesterday got boxes. Thanks for this. BTW I had done a short summary on Template talk:Wikidata Infobox#Health infobox for countries. Jura1 (talk) 17:47, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Was just talking to Magnus. He's not aware of any smoking gun that would have explained the slow-down you were seeing with the query, but there may have been some changes at about that time relating to the tables for how (i) edit-summaries and (ii) user IDs/anon IPs were stored, involving tables behind the scenes being either split or merged or respecified. Magnus thinks that some of the -p tables may be views of other tables (cutting out some columns that most users shouldn't see), rather than actual tables in their own right; he conjectures that perhaps one or more of these views might not have been reset-up properly in the change, and perhaps an index got missed. But great, if as you seem to say above this issue now seems to have gone away again. Jheald (talk) 15:03, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

@Jheald: There was a conversation at [2] - and apparently something on IRC that then seemed to get this sorted out. I haven't looked at the IRC logs to find out exactly what was changed, though. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 16:03, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Mike Peel (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Science Competition 2019

Hi, we are organizing the 2019 edition of WSC, if you are interested let me know. Maybe this year we will invest less energy on country whose chapter is not interested but we are expecting much better results in countries were local organizers are active. Let me know if you are interested to join, I can find some role.

Also, we are creating a new User group that acts as a global coordination project on meta for scientific subjects. See m:Science Wiki User Group. It will take some months to shape it but we are very motivated. Specifically, one of the main target of the group are people with an academic degree and/or who are involved in scientific research in real life, we want to reach out to the scientific community through that way. Please join us, especially if you have a sufficient knowledge of English or of meta since we are still building it (we will translate the page in the future when its identity is stable). Every comment is welcome (see the talk page). One of the topic of this UG is to provide an official support also for WSC in the future.--Alexmar983 (talk) 15:25, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

@Alexmar983: I'm happy to help if I can. I now live in Spain rather than Brazil though, for Brazil you might want to involve @Joalpe and Sturm. Sorry, but I view UGs as a waste of time - it's better to work with chapters and to get them to handle the admin side of things instead (or form a chapter where they don't already exist). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 16:17, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

I have already involved some Brazilians. I know where you live, I was told by another guy there. Chapters are always involved in WSC if they want to, but the international organization require a framework. Actually, if you give chapters all the power is not as optimal as you think. You need balance with everything in life. And I am sorry there is no proof it is better even at the administrative level. It can be better or worse, it really depends. For example if a chapter put the manager of Wiki Loves Monuments to do WSC the result depending on the profile can actually be worse. it's not nice for a scientist who produced a good scientific image to be discarded and maybe not even sent to the itnernational level because an unbalnced jury though something else was just "nice", even if it is super common and not original to an expert eye. The UG is an effort ot rationalize the academic background. The day chapters will create academic committee and some peer-reviewed evaluation of scientific activity, i agree with you. But only big, robust chapters could do so (so the UG is still useful for smaller one) and they seem always interested in doing so so far.--Alexmar983 (talk) 16:27, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Ragrding Spain, They did in 2017 so they can redo it. It's mostly up to them. I will still however need a comment on some astronomic images at the very last steps to be sure they are fine. --Alexmar983 (talk) 16:29, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

@Alexmar983: I think we have different ideas of what the work of a UG/chapter is. For me, it's mostly bureaucratic/secretarial - sort out the paperwork, pay for the prizes, make sure people do the actions they've agreed to do, etc. Things like jury selection are better done by some sort of committee, but that doesn't have to be a UG. But whatever works best for you! My days of being involved in Wikimedia organisations are mostly over now. :-) Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:52, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Don't let me start on the different situations you can have there... look I do this for free so far so I wouldn't do something if I did not know that is the most functional way. At least, that's what I hope. BTW the level of the jury should probably increase, which means better contact and they will be there for people when needed in the future.---Alexmar983 (talk) 18:23, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Mike Peel (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Structured Data on Commons - IRC office hours this week, 18 July

The Structured Data team is hosting an IRC office hour this week on Thursday, 18 July, from 17:00-18:00 UTC. Joining information as well as date and time conversion is available on Meta. Potential topics for discussion are the testing of "other statements", properties that may need to be created for Commons on Wikidata soon, plans for the rest of SDC development, or whatever you might want to discuss. The development team looks forward to seeing you there. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 18:51, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Mike Peel (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Persistent vandalism by Pi bot

Good morning. I seriously doubt that someone with your experience and position is interested in getting a vandalism report.

Your Pi bot is persistently and stubbornly [3] adding entirely wrong Wikidata boxes even after having been reverted twice.

Please make sure that this vandalism by Pi bot is being stopped and that it no longer obviously runs entirely uncontrolled. Thank you. Regards --Uli Elch (talk) 08:39, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

@Uli Elch: Thanks for letting me know. Your earlier reverts didn't notify the bot; this one did but I hadn't spotted it yet. I've corrected the sitelink, so the infobox should be added to the right category now. I've also created Bergen Air Transport (Q65707014) so that the right info is displayed in the infobox in this category. How does that look? In the future, please revert the bot clearly so it gets a notification, or fix the info on Wikidata directly. Or let me know as you have here. :-) Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 08:49, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Mike Peel (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Structured Data - testing other statements

You can now test using other statements for structured data on the file page on Test-Commons. Some datatypes are not yet available, such a coordinates, but further support will be extended soon. You can find more information about testing on the SDC talk page. The team looks forward to your feedback. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 16:41, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Mike Peel (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Help with database query

Hi Mike, I was wondering you could help me. I am trying to find a way to export the full list of external links to NARA's catalog from Wikimedia Commons. That is, exactly what Special:LinkSearch does, except I have hit the limit. I think there are at least 300,000 of these links, so I cannot get them all from the special page. I believe this is something where a database query (i.e. Quarry) should be able to get me what I need, but I am not familiar enough with the system to do this myself. Is there any chance you would be able to help me out with the query? Thanks! Dominic (talk) 17:15, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

@Dominic: I'm not sure. Perhaps @Jheald and Jarekt: could help? Otherwise, perhaps ask at d:Wikidata:Request a query - even though it's not Wikidata, people there might be able to help regardless. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:16, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

@Samwalton9: Do you have a quick and simple way for that on urls? Sadads (talk) 00:04, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

@Sadads and Dominic: This Quarry query should have the results you want. It's just the list of links, not where they're from, but that's retrievable too if useful. Sam Walton (talk) 12:43, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

@Samwalton9: Thank you so much! It says it is completed, but I'm not seeing the data. Does that mean there was an error? Dominic (talk) 15:24, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

@Dominic: Hmm. I had the same thing when I first looked, I believe the issue is that the dataset is extremely large. If you leave the page open for a little while (in this case a few minutes), the results should load. Alternatively, you can go directly to this URL to download the results in a file without waiting. Edit the URL from csv to json or html for other formats. Sam Walton (talk) 18:35, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

@Samwalton9: Got it, thanks! Dominic (talk) 19:30, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Mike Peel (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

File:Universal Studios Hollywood 2012 58.jpg

File:Universal Studios Hollywood 2012 58.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Kees08 (talk) 18:57, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Mike Peel (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

New copyright redaction templates which may interest you

I've created a new set of templates I believe may interest you due to your past related efforts. These templates help identify and track files with embedded media needing redaction for copyright reasons. They're derived from the conceptually similar "non-free frame" templates.

• Template:Non-free embedded
• Template:Non-free embedded revdel
• Template:Non-free embedded removed

The first two are flagging templates, useful for fixing copyright issues. The last is an informational template allowing users to know that a file doesn't quite match the original, and to give a definitive place to specify what changes were made.

My primary motivation for these is in the context of preparing scans for Wikisource, where authenticity is a particularly important factor. I've seen copyright redaction instances before but only recently one necessary for my own upload. (I may make a point to find and tag files with such redactions, but of course, it's not something that's easy to search for.) djr13 (talk) 22:15, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm unlikely to watch the templates, but if cases come up that I can help with to avoid a file being deleted, please ping me. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:36, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't mean this as a request for you to watch the templates or their tracking categories... Rather, since you've assisted with copyright redactions before (and seemingly been a "go-to guy" for it at least a couple times), I'm just letting you know these exist. They help systematize the effort (so no need to "know a guy") and to better document when redactions have been done. djr13 (talk) 20:02, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Mike Peel (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Hawaiian music vs Music of Hawaii

Hi Mike, these two categories serve different purposes. Hawaiian music specifically refers to a genre of music (think "Aloha ʻOe"), whereas Music of Hawaii was meant for any music related to Hawaii. By merging the two categories, you have conflated the two, so if you could please undo your changes (the category redirect and subsequent category changes), that would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 17:30, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

@Howcheng: Can you elaborate on-wiki about how they are different, please? Enwp only has en:Music of Hawaii, and as far as I can tell there's only music of Hawaii (Q1071834) describing the topic (which is linked to Category:Hawaiian music (Q6459222) as a category about that topic item). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:35, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Mike Peel (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Category: "Amarna letters" in WikiCommons

The photo used in the Category:Amarna letters is of Amarna letter EA 161, and is slightly out of focus. A better example letter would be the letter for Amarna letter EA 10 which was recently put into WikiCommons. I also put on the English EA 10 page: the title is in Italian?.... https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:TablillaBurnaburiashAAjenat%C3%B3n_(31261052197).jpg

I am suggesting this photo ( 1 ) because of its clarity. And ( 2 ) because it shows paragraphing (as does the EA 161, but out of focus). Thanks Mmcannis (talk) 03:08, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

@Mmcannis: You can change this yourself by editing Amarna letters (Q235502) (linked to from the bottom of the infobox). :-) Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 06:49, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Mike Peel (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

MonumentID

Hi Mike Peel, I just noticed Template:MonumentID. I am fine with the function of the template, I even like the idea, but I am not with the look. If used in Wiki Loves Monuments, it is inserted in the description field (where the monument ID is added, and it seems that the position can't be changed where it is put on the file page), while it has been designed to be below the Information template. There are fout options I can think of now, or the earlier template to indicate the ID is restored, or the design of this template is changed so that it does not have the look of templates for below the Information template, or a different template is created, or Template:On Wikidata is used instead. Greetings from WLM's campaign manager - Romaine (talk) 20:50, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

@Romaine: It's easy to change the look. Want to edit the formatting in Template:MonumentID/sandbox directly, or point me to an example template you'd like me to match the style of? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 06:58, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

I am really bad with styles and looks, I usually leave that to others. With monuments we commonly use the style of Template:Rijksmonument, a style that is broadly used, but I can imagine that such look it not wanted for this template. Or this style is used: Template:WLM-PT. As this template serves the role of Template:On Wikidata but then more broadly, perhaps this style can be used?

Also please note, in many languages the word "monument" can refer to cultural heritage monuments as well as memorials to commemorate a person or event. In Wiki Loves Monuments we only refer to the the cultural heritage monuments. In the template you use the monument (Q4989906) as label (monument to commemorate a person or event), but WLM is not about this kind of monuments (memorials), but about cultural property (Q2065736). In Dutch and various other language this gives a wrong label, as it means something else then for what we add the identifiers to file pages. Greetings - Romaine (talk) 07:32, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

@Romaine: OK, how does the demo at User:Mike Peel/sandbox look now? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 07:42, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! The blue thing is gone, so that is fine to me. People might consider it a bit empty as look. Perhaps you can consider to use the logo of Wikidata so that people instantly recognise the data comes from Wikidata (and that the data can be edited on Wikidata, like adding translations, etc). Romaine (talk) 08:17, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

@Romaine: I've added the usual blue pen icon at the end of the line. I think you wanted the Wikidata icon to be on the left-hand side, but that won't work so well when you pass multiple QIDs to the template. I've also made the changes live now. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 13:49, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! I already noticed that on the left hand side there is not so much space, so I thought more on the right side. Romaine (talk) 13:53, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Mike Peel (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

September 2019: it's Wiki Loves Monuments time again!

Hi

You're receiving this message because you've previously contributed to the annual Wiki Loves Monuments contest in the UK. We'd be delighted if you would do so again this year and help record our local built environment for future generations.

You can find more details at the Wiki Loves Monuments UK website. Or, if you have images taken in other countries, you can check the international options. This year's contest runs until 30 September 2019.

Many thanks for your help once more! MichaelMaggs (talk) 15:35, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Mike Peel (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Category:Rozenoord (Amsterdam):

For this category on commons you entered data from Wikidata. However, the place shifted with your action from one border of the river Amstel to the other.:-) Can you correct this? Thank you,Ceescamel (talk) 19:23, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

@Ceescamel: I think it was a coordinate precision problem on Wikidata. I removed the coordinate and added it back again (from enwp), [4] - does that look better now? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:26, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Great,Ceescamel (talk) 19:29, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Mike, I was yesterday at the spot. There were doubts about if the place still exists and it does! (and will be for a while). However it seems the coordinates are still wrong, because the monument is not placed along the Amstel/Amsteldijk but along a foot/cyclepath near the Amstel. The right coordinates you will find in the dutch article.Ceescamel (talk) 09:46, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

@Ceescamel: It's a small change in coordinate, but done. (You can make this kind of change directly on wikidata yourself if you want. :-) ) Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:03, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Also, thank you for visiting it and checking that it's still there! It's great that you uploaded new photos of it as well. Keep up the good work! :-) Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:10, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

I keep away from wikidata; I don't get the system/get in into my system......So now and then I change a date of birth or dying, but that's all. Luckily, someone else is always ready to correct something for me, if I can't manage that myself, thank you. This monument was strange..... I was just passing and see what was left of the first monument. Everyone was following the other. Even a committee about warmonuments noted it was gone, I could not imagine that, so I went for a look. And there it was.... I had to change two articles (en and nl) and send out messages to get it corrected. In spring I was writing about a particular street in Amsterdam that's full of "rijksmonumenten". When I came there I saw only building that seemed to be too young for that; they were from 1996!!! The world is going too fast for the offices that must keep score<Ceescamel (talk) 20:24, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Mike Peel (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Mike Peel/Archive 7,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikimedia Commons and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 01:15, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Mike Peel (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Structured Data - computer-aided tagging

The development team is starting work on one of the last planned features for SDC v1.0, a lightweight tool to suggest depicts tags for images. I've published a project page for it, please have a look. I plan to share this page with everyone on Commons much more broadly in the coming days. The tool has been carefully designed to try to not increase any workload on Commons volunteers; for starters, it will be opt-in for auto-confirmed users only and will not generate any sort of backlog here on Commons. Additionally, the tool is highly privacy-minded for the contributors and publicly-minded for the third party being used, in this case Google. The implementation and usage notes contain more information about these and other potential concerns as a starting place. It's really important that the tool is implemented properly from the start, so feedback is welcome. Questions, comments, concerns are welcome on the talk page and I will get answers as quickly as possible as things come up. On the talk page you can also sign up to make sure you're a part of the feedback for designs and prototype testing. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:57, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Mike Peel (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Mike Peel/Archive 7,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 15:24, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Mike Peel (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Commons sitelinks for names categories

Hi! A recent vandalising edit caused a lot of errors. You suggested using Commons sitelinks for names categories. I think that will not only solve the problems of homonymous Chinese names but also prevent common vandalism/testing on English labels. Would you like to implement the design? Or if we should seek consensus on village pump first?--Roy17 (talk) 19:24, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

@Roy17: There's two issues. One is the coding, for which I think we've got all of the Lua pieces of but it will take me a while to get around to (unless @RexxS: wants to write this up nicely in a separate Lua function!). The other is how we deal with the cases where the sitelinks don't exist (either because they haven't been added yet, or because they're redlinks), which is more of a community question (perhaps at Template talk:Wikidata Infobox). I'm mostly going to be offline this week, but I'll try to look into this some more when I'm back. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:32, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

@Mike Peel: I'm always happy to write a function for you, Mike, but I'm unclear what you want. I assume that getCommonsLink doesn't do what you want?

{{#invoke:WikidataIB |getCommonsLink |qid=Q12397773}} → Category:Irina (given name)

I take it you want a function that will return a sitelink if it exists rather than a label? I'm pretty sure we do that as a matter of course in most cases, so I know the code is straightforward. However, do you always want the Commons sitelink? or do you want the sitelink for the wiki that the code is running on? Then what do you want returned if there is no sitelink? If it's the label, then what language do you want the label in? Finally, what do you want returned if there is no label in the language you specify? As usual, some test cases would be really valuable. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 20:38, 23 June 2019 (UTC)