Busy desk.svg
Always busy.

Bahasa Indonesia  dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  euskara  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  română  español  português  English  français  Nederlands  polski  galego  Simple English  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  українська  ქართული  հայերեն  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ไทย  မြန်မာဘာသာ  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Welcome to my talk page. Use it; don't send me e-mail.

I reply to messages left on my talk, on my talk page. If I left a message on your talk page, I will reply there (unless you specify otherwise).


Just for the formEdit

schilderijen van UB LeidenEdit

Hallo Maarten,

Ik heb vandaag uit de beeldbank van de UB Leiden (http://digitalcollections.universiteitleiden.nl) een selectie gemaakt van schilderijen die vrij downloadbaar zijn voor het project Sum of all Paintings. Het zijn 279 records met de volgende variabelen: item, label, shelfmark, materiaal (=schilderij), handle. Als je mij je email stuurt, kan ik het spreadsheet opsturen. Kan je daarmee de images toevoegen aan wikimedia commons?

Wil je ze dan, behalve in Sum of all Paintings, ook toevoegen aan een categorie "Paintings" in "Category:Collections of Leiden University Library".

Een stukje uit het bestand:

itemnr Label handle
item:1581995 Portret van Stephanus Marchant\, hoogleraar Rechtsgeleerdheid te Leiden Icones 101 http://hdl.handle.net/1887.1/item:1581995
item:1582018 Portret van Lucas Schacht\, hoogleraar Geneeskunde te Leiden Icones 103 http://hdl.handle.net/1887.1/item:1582018

Als je de link met de handle in een browser plakt, zie je een pagina van een portret met metadata. Onder de downloadknop met het pijltje zit een medium sized JPGEG. De link voor downloaden van de JPG die hoort bij het eerste item:1581995 is http://digitalcollections.universiteitleiden.nl//view/item/1581995/datastream/JPG/download.

De hoogleraren op deze portretten zijn allen waarschijnlijk als persoon al opgenomen in wikidata. Zou je die portretten ook nog aan de hoogleraren kunnen koppelen?

Ik heb wel je Wikimedia Usernaam, maar niet je email adres. Mijn mail adres is e.m.van.wijk@library.leidenuniv.nl.

Liesbeth van Wijk deelnemer Wiki Techstorm 2019 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wijkemvan (talk • contribs) 20:20, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Quadro di RubensEdit

Ciao, spero sia il posto giusto dove fatto questa domanda, in caso errato scusami e indicami come dialogare con te Ti contatto per il dipinto "Circoncisione" di Rubens che, se non sbaglio, hai inserito in WikiMedia https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Circoncisione_di_Gesù_-_Rubens.jpg

Quella foto l'ho fatta io nel 1998 quando facevo il fotografo di Arte e Architettura (ovviamente ho l'originale) Vorrei potermela attribuire ma non so come farlo, se non caricandola tra le mie e poi inserendola in Wikipedia

Puoi darmi indicazioni? grazie michele


PS la puoi vedere tra queste: https://www.micheleferraris.it/project/arte-architettura-genova/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by IMic70 (talk • contribs) 20:52, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Category:European pressphoto agency

....... Adding structured data: date, copyright, source & author thanks a million..............how to thank a bot...............Multichill (great code)Edit

  The da Vinci Barnstar
........one more time....amazing code for a bot..............A barnstar for you Multichill (Structured data) great work *(how to thank a bot)*


following the breadcrumbs.............

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q8343766

Photo deletion questionEdit

Hi, I am new at this. First upload. I have received autorisation from author to use this photo. How can I make this clear and avoid deletion? Thank you

Renaming fileEdit

Hello again, could you rename this file to "Free-ranging mixed breed dog"? Thank you. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mexican_Street_Dog.jpg

follow the breadcrumbs of Php and say thanks for the workEdit

curprev 13:22, 10 October 2020‎ BotMultichillT talk contribs‎ 2,047 bytes +1,514‎ ‎Changed an entity: Adding structured data: date & copyright undo


—Preceding unsigned comment was added by 186.69.189.65 (talk) 13:53, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

 
great work, virtual slice of pizza Multichill

—Preceding unsigned comment was added by 186.69.189.65 (talk) 13:56, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Nizami 48Edit

Hi.Please delete photo Nizami 48 building —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.135.166.226 (talk) 12:20, 13 October 2021 (UTC)


follow the digital breadcrumbs to say... great job, once again :MultichillEdit

curprev 22:03, 5 October 2020‎ BotMultichillT talk contribs‎ 3,999 bytes +2,909‎ ‎Changed an entity: Adding structured data: copyright, source, date & author undo

following the digital breadcrumbs to say... great job, once again :Multichill structured data great job

boxed water....amazing in the U.S.A.


—Preceding unsigned comment was added by 186.69.189.65 (talk) 06:27, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

 
‎Changed an entity: Adding structured data: copyright, source, date & author ...i say thanks with a virtual slice of pizza....cheers..structured data.

a barnstar for you! :SchlurcherEdit

Barnstar. Adding structured data: copyright & date ....:Multichill BOT wikimedia & wikidataEdit

 
Barnstar. Adding structured data: copyright & date ....:Multichill BOT wikimedia & wikidata

—Preceding unsigned comment was added by 186.69.189.65 (talk) 17:11, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

  The Technical Barnstar
For your amazing work on Adding structured data: copyright & date ....:Multichill BOT wikimedia & wikidata...17th of October 2021 (UTC)

questions about p6243Edit

I remember you. I remember you every time I get that one warning when uploading an image that I don't need to upload. Your improvements to commons have made me more sloppy and carefree!

I was glad to see your software making changes to the structured data. I added p6243 to my files to keep that bot off them. It seemed that there was a relationship between the bot (not the author) and my real life involving free drinks and other crap like that. Of course, without actual evidence or anything real that would correlate this, I very well might be wrong. Putting my own structured data on my files could hardly be considered an over-reaction.

My relationship with p6243 is mostly via scans. Any "label" I use to link the files stru. data to the item will always feel like I am saying "red is red". Scans are weird things. They have duplicates sometimes at Internet Archive and/or Hathitrust and/or Library of Congress and/or other sources (colleges, governments, etc). Many times, the file here is not an exact duplicate of the source as some blank pages are removed, flaws in pagination are fixed, I have one that needs a whole section removed and a different scan used instead. I tried to link the p6243 to what that file was a version of and got complaints.

Wikidata has an item p996: "document file on Commons", it would be nice for my "red is red or 2 is 2" problem (self-definition is supposed to be avoided except in proofs where it is the goal) if there were a "Item on wikidata" for scans. It is a hair split, but wikidata seems to be a magnet for hairsplitters.

Okay, all of that being said, I am curious what the new requirements for the structured data are. I read here and there about "Main subject", which, for the current set of scans I am working on will be "childrens literature", I suppose. "Main subject" will be more of a challenge with novels and starts to border on "genre" which is such a nightmare and I avoid more anything else here other than the psychological profiles of fictional characters. Eek!

I completely understand that scans (pdf, djvu and other uncollated files) are a small portion of the files here and in many ways, a weird case. Also, if you are the same MultiChill, it is always nice to see your activity. If you are not the same, well, it is always nice to remember "smarter" times here.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 17:40, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Discussion at administrator noticeboard about User:BotMultichillTEdit

Hi. Just to let you know, a user has started a discussion over at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections about your bot. From Hill To Shore (talk) 23:45, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Essential singularityEdit

Hello I'm a mathematics student! I have a doubt about the graph plot under "Essential singularity". The hue represents the absolute value and the luminance represents the argument, right? It's given otherwise there. Kindly correct me if I'm wrong. Raina Mary Thomas rainamthom@gmail.com 2409:4073:294:4895:2C3F:2325:6A6F:727 14:15, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

File:Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima, larger.jpegEdit

Hi, What's the problem with these coordinates ː https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Raising_the_Flag_on_Iwo_Jima,_larger.jpeg&diff=622082751&oldid=622082442&diffmode=source Thanks, Yann (talk)

@Yann: nothing wrong with these coordinates, just the wrong location. The coordinates shouldn't be on M77731066, but on Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima (Q117693). That's where I moved the coordinates of depicted place (P9149). Just the template logic still needs to be updated to show the {{Object location}}. See also Commons:Structured_data/Modeling/Depiction#Works_of_art. 16:04, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Vervangen van RCE categorie-suggesties?Edit

Je bot zet hier een (template) categorie-suggestie om in een niet bestaande categorielink. Lijkt me niet de bedoeling toch? Ciell (talk) 20:46, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@Ciell: dat is bewust om dit eindelijk maar eens weg te kunnen werken. Zie Commons_talk:Rijksdienst_voor_het_Cultureel_Erfgoed#Oude_templates_opruimen. Multichill (talk) 20:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

author = Creator not CategoryEdit

Moin Moin Multichill from Germany, your bot did the following edit and not we have around 500 pictures in the Category:Uses of Wikidata Infobox with no instance of because the Category include the Wikidata Infobox. I think it will be better to use Creator like my diff shows, then they will not be displayed in the Issue-Category. Could you switch this? Thanks and Nog een prettige dag. ;) --Crazy1880 (talk) 10:26, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

@Crazy1880: looks like I made a copy & paste mistake in {{RCE-author}}. I corrected that and ran the bot again. Should be all fixed now. Thanks for pointing out. Multichill (talk) 11:20, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
Thanks a lot, yes, looks good --Crazy1880 (talk) 11:23, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Something is not workingEdit

Hi! There is something after this edit Special:Diff/555269412 that makes the page crash. Perhaps you can have a look? --MGA73 (talk) 10:47, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Moin, its the parameter "author" its too long. Perhaps this has to be shown in the parameter title? Regards --Crazy1880 (talk) 11:26, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
@MGA73 and Crazy1880: User:Jarekt is working on Module:Artwork to do author parsing. I removed the code that is causing the template to explode. I'll collect some test cases in Category:Pages with script errors so we can improve the code. Multichill (talk) 11:32, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
Sounds good. (And yes the author is not used correctly on this example) --MGA73 (talk) 11:40, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
See Module_talk:Artwork#line_1485:_attempt_to_get_length_of_field_'?'_(a_nil_value). Multichill (talk) 11:42, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

FYI: Geograph Update Bot now providing references with its SDC updatesEdit

Now that we have references in SDC, I've arranged for Geograph Update Bot, when updating an SDC statement, to also add a reference indicating that the information comes from Geograph. It follows the guidance at d:Help:Sources for referencing databases. For example, Special:Diff/623606324 is the bot's most recent SDC edit. I mention this in case you want to either suggest improvements or to adopt a similar scheme for GeographBot's uploads. --bjh21 (talk) 14:36, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

@Bjh21: that looks nice. I'll see if I can update the upload bot to do the same. Multichill (talk) 18:20, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Creator templates maintenance categoriesEdit

Hi, Category:Creator templates without home category contains 1,161 pages. Category:Creator templates with Wikidata link: item missing linkback contains 276 pages. I emptied the later manually a few weeks ago, and it is a tedious work. Would it be possible to fix these with a bot? Thanks, Yann (talk) 19:33, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

@Yann: the instructions for Category:Creator templates with Wikidata link: item missing linkback are on that category. Jarek wrote that and might have some ideas. Multichill (talk) 20:56, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
I am sure it is possible to do with a bot, but the 3 step process outlined in the Category:Creator templates with Wikidata link: item missing linkback is quite quick. You touch every page, run this query and paste the results in QuickStatements. This "manual" process only takes minutes. Category:Creator templates without home category is more work. --Jarekt (talk) 02:42, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

File:Eugene McCown - Three Heads - 43.109 - Detroit Institute of Arts.jpgEdit

 
File:Eugene McCown - Three Heads - 43.109 - Detroit Institute of Arts.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!

Lord Belbury (talk) 14:31, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

File:Posing in front of the Kaaba - Flickr - Al Jazeera English.jpgEdit

 
File:Posing in front of the Kaaba - Flickr - Al Jazeera English.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!

--Minorax«¦talk¦» 05:03, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

File:Expositieruimte met kunstvoorwerpen en aanzicht op diverse gevels - Boxmeer - 20330107 - RCE.jpgEdit

 
File:Expositieruimte met kunstvoorwerpen en aanzicht op diverse gevels - Boxmeer - 20330107 - RCE.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!

JopkeB (talk) 04:04, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

File:Expositieruimte met kunstvoorwerpen en aanzicht op diverse gevels - Boxmeer - 20330108 - RCE.jpgEdit

 
File:Expositieruimte met kunstvoorwerpen en aanzicht op diverse gevels - Boxmeer - 20330108 - RCE.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!

JopkeB (talk) 04:05, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

bad bot editEdit

This bot edit is wrong and so is this. I can correct it and possibly others but I am afraid that the bot will just rediscover missing statement and will re-add it. Is it safe to undo? --Jarekt (talk) 22:38, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Jarekt: first one is caused by this edit. You can correct it, bot only works on missing statements.
The second edit was just the copy of digital representation of (P6243) so it can be cleaned up. I guess you found it in Category:Artworks digital representation of not a work of art? The nested template will probably trigger this again, but I'm not sure because that is not my robot. Better to create the missing item to be sure. Multichill (talk) 18:31, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
I was cleaning Category:Artworks with wrong Wikidata item which sounds similar to Category:Artworks digital representation of not a work of art. I am a bit confused by File:Andrés_Manuel_del_Río_(Rafael_Ximeno_y_Planes_1825)_retrato.png how is that one connecting to wikidata, but File:Julio Romero de Torres (1928) José Félix Huerta Calopa.png is not? Am I missing something? --Jarekt (talk) 04:09, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

File tagging File:Expositie rineke hollemans.jpgEdit

العربية  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  հայերեն  italiano  日本語  ಕನ್ನಡ  한국어  lietuvių  latviešu  македонски  മലയാളം  मराठी  မြန်မာဘာသာ  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk  polski  português  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  اردو  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Expositie rineke hollemans.jpg. 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.

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.

Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 19:55, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Flag nominationsEdit

[1] & [2]. Multichill (talk) 22:11, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

File:Coexhotel03.jpgEdit

 
File:Coexhotel03.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!

plicit 14:52, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

PDMEdit

When we use Creative Commons Public Domain Mark (Q7257361) in copyright license (P275), like this, it creates a constraint violation, because the property (rightfully) thinks public domain works should not have copyright licenses. And yet, I've found no where better to add PDM, if the data source is using it and we would like to reflect that. Do you have any better ideas about how we should do this? (I'm not the only one, there's over 2000 files using it in that property, including WMSE uploads). If there is not a better way, should we just allow it in the property constraints? Dominic (talk) 17:29, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

@Dominic: that usage is incorrect. The public domain mark is not a license so should never be used in copyright license (P275). Please remove. Multichill (talk) 23:03, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, I would like to remove it! I was trying to figure out the ideal way to do this, so I know what to replace it with. Just having x copyright status (P6216) public domain (Q19652) seems insufficient, if a source has applied PDM themselves, and we should represent that somewhere as well. Dominic (talk) 19:06, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
@Dominic: we have many reasons why something is public domain, see Category:PD license tags.
In structured data the basic statement some file copyright status (P6216) public domain (Q19652) should have one or more determination method (P459) qualifiers. That should contain the real reason why we think it's public domein (for example due to age or US government work). I'm a bit reluctant to put the PDM reason in there because that would be {{Public domain}} all over again.
What about using statement supported by (P3680)? Something like "GLAM source added the PDM"? Multichill (talk) 18:26, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
I agree that PDM is not the reason, as you say, just the mark. And I'm already using a different determination method anyway. Using something else as a qualifier to the P275 statement would be fine with me.
I like P3680, but it appears from the scope that the values of that property are intended to be the entity making the statement (i.e., the institution), rather than the reason for it. Maybe criterion used (P1013) is more like what you are suggesting?
Here's another idea: using identity of object in context (P4626), and then maybe we can simply use Creative Commons Public Domain Mark (Q7257361) in the value, instead of creating a new "GLAM source added the PDM" item. What would you think of that? The reference provided is still the source for the context. Dominic (talk) 15:44, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

File:Tomruen test.svgEdit

 
File:Tomruen test.svg 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!

Ixfd64 (talk) 06:35, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Participation in a virtual session for Wikimedians and Researchers?Edit

Hey Multichill, we are organizing this session to bring together Wikimedians and researchers who work in a multilingual and multi-modal (e.g., text and images) setting, and I was wondering whether you could participate in the session? It's less than an hour on April 29, 2022. More information is here: [3], the workshop is described here: meta:Wiki-M3L. If you are interested, could you send me a mail to lucie.kaffee[@]gmail.com? Would love to have you there! --Frimelle (talk) 13:41, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Geograph uploads, descriptions, structured data and "mills"Edit

First of all, thank you for uploading files from geograph.or.uk with your bot. There are a few issues, however. For one, I wish you'd include the descriptions of the files, as these often contain valuable information that helps with finer categorisation. Another are the keywords ("Depicts") in the structured data that are added to the files, or rather one of these words. It seems that whenever the word "mill" appears in the file name, the keyword "molinology" appears in the data, and in many cases this is just plain odd and often wrong - it is well known that in England "mill" is frequently used as a synonym for "factory", probably because early factories were powered by water wheels, but most of them aren't mills in the proper sense. I am not sure how this fluidity in terms should be addressed, but at any rate, it should. --Schlosser67 (talk) 07:46, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Description often contains too much irrelevant text. I had a look at it several times and always concluded that it shouldn't be included on Commons.
Mapping of tags to items is done at User:GeographBot/Tags. Looking at current usage it seems to be a mix of windmill (Q38720), watermill (Q185187) & factory (Q83405) (aka mill) which are all subclass of industrial building (Q12144897) so I changed the mapping to that. Multichill (talk) 21:10, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
Concerning mills: Thank you, this is probably the best that can be done at the moment, considering that the geograph tags aren't well defined, either. Concerning the descriptions, I don't quite agree. There are many that are fairly irrelevant and/or wordy, so much is true, but there are more that actually add information which helps to locate and interpret the image, in particular when the image title is very generic (such as "Ordnance Survey Cut Mark" or "M6 motorway"). I have usually found the useful bit of information at the beginning of the descriptions. Maybe limit the number of characters? --Schlosser67 (talk) 11:56, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Perl HarborEdit

Please correct description of the file below: "File:US Navy 040702-N-4304S-136 Warships from several nations sit pierside at Naval Station Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.jpg" from: "Warships from several nations sit pierside at Naval" to eg: "Warships of several nations dock on either side of the Naval" The filename should be corrected as well. Regards Alice —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 37.225.78.239 (talk) 14:23, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

The filename File:US Navy 040702-N-4304S-136 Warships from several nations sit pierside at Naval Station Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.jpg is good enough. We generally keep file names stable.
Description is from the navy website. Multichill (talk) 14:57, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Technical Barnstar
Your bot is fantastic, it saves us so much work. ReneeWrites (talk) 20:34, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
@ReneeWrites: thank you! Always nice to see that my work is appreciated. Multichill (talk) 14:55, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Category:Media_needing_categories_to_be_checked_by_a_botEdit

 

Category:Media_needing_categories_to_be_checked_by_a_bot has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


A1Cafel (talk) 10:10, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with beeld* heilig landstichtingEdit

Files found with Special:Search/beeld* heilig landstichtingEdit

Copyright violation. These sculptures are in an open air museum in the Netherlands, so no "public place" because there is no free admission, and therefor FOP is not applicable. And there are no VRT tickets. The photos by RCE are only licensed for the photos, not for the works of art.

JopkeB (talk) 04:54, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Category:Dina Bélanger Help please.Edit

Hello,

My request is about the category "Category:Dina Bélanger" .

I have imported 1 file yesterday, and 6 today, but now, when I click on "Wiki Commons" in the Dina Bélanger articles of the French and English wiki, only one file is displayed ( this one: File:Dina Bélanger (1897-1929) en 1922.pdf: Revision history) but not the others (for example this one: File:Dina Bélanger (1897-1929) en 1917.jpg: Revision history ).

What should I do to fix this and what is the problem? Have I made a mistake? Can you please help me?

Thanks in advance for your kind help. Contributeur2019 (talk) 13:46, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

  • Since I wrote to you a few minutes ago, the problem seems to have been resolved. What happened in the meantime? Tks. Contributeur2019 (talk) 13:54, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
I have no idea. Commons:Help desk might be a more suitable place than my talk page to ask this question. I do notice that the files in Category:Dina Bélanger have questionable copyright tagging. How can it be both PD-old & CC0 with an unknown author? Multichill (talk) 14:54, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Tks for your reply. No need to contact C:HD as now all seems to be ok. Concerning copyright tagging you're right, no need of CCO. I will correct. Tks again and sorry for disturbing. Contributeur2019 (talk) 10:12, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Upload requestEdit

Hello Multichill. As you operate GeographBot, will you have time to make it upload the John Spence Community High School image from https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/4043149 (CC BY-SA 2.0) ? This is to illustrate the article. --Oroborvs (talk) 13:27, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@Oroborvs: the bot will eventually upload that image, but that might take a while. You might want to try https://geograph2commons.toolforge.org/ if you don't want to wait. Multichill (talk) 13:57, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
I just used this toolforge which gave me all the information but seems to take a while to upload. So I will upload it myself. Thank you for the link. --Oroborvs (talk) 14:38, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Skip problematic filesEdit

hi! might it be a good idea if your bot would skip files like File:Sultan Baba.jpg that are tagged with any delete/SD/nsd/npd... templates? RZuo (talk) 06:38, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

@RZuo: I recall looking into that, but deletion requests sometimes take forever. The bot ends up running over the same file multiple times a day for as long as the deletion request is open. It's easier to just process it. Multichill (talk) 20:34, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Geograph from structured dataEdit

Hi Multichill, I need some help please. Can you tell me why I cannot edit an image with {{Geograph from structured data}} on it. For instance, I cropped File:Araf-Slow on the B4302 - geograph.org.uk - 2395618.jpg to File:Araf-Slow on the B4302 - geograph.org.uk - 2395618 (cropped).jpg, but I cannot add a description etc etc. Thank you. SethWhales talk 08:55, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

@Seth Whales: Look at the structured data tab on each file. Here you can edit it. I'm currently not aware of an easy way to copy over all data from one file to another. Multichill (talk) 20:32, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

to-be-deleted files from Beeldcollectie van het Historisch Archief Haarlemmermeer te HoofddorpEdit

Hi Multichill, only as a reassurance before I start deleting, with the approx. 1600 files you marked for quick deletion, such as File:12 foto's van de ouderenwoningen De Beemsterborg aan de Beemsterstraat in Hoofddorp, Inventarisnummer NL-HlmNHA Hmr 03134.JPG, the deletion is uncontroversial? --Túrelio (talk) 12:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

@Túrelio: let's double check if user:Vysotsky agrees. Multichill (talk) 20:13, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
I checked 15 files, such as this one. All licenses of the images in the Beeldcollectie van het Historisch Archief Haarlemmermeer te Hoofddorp were changed at the archive since the uploads by User:Mr.Nostalgic to Commons. So I won't object against these speedy removals, except for one category (for one of these files I have sent a request to the archive a week or so ago): the municipal maps, such as this one. I expect the Municipality of Hoofddorp owns copyright of these maps, but I am not sure yet. Do you want me to challenge these 54 speedies seperately? Vysotsky (talk) 20:37, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
@Vysotsky: just rollback the bot edits on the files you think that can be saved. Bots don't have feelings and don't care about that. Multichill (talk) 20:43, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

File:LSG Apeler See und Umland (Niedersachsen).jpgEdit

Hello Multichill, could you please have a look at the mentioned file. It shows a caution notice because of discrepancy in coordinates. I already corrected the coordinates in the description, but I don't know how to fix it properly so that the notice does not appear anymore. Thanks in advance. --Olga Ernst (talk) 09:18, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi again Multichill, I tried again and was successful ;-)) Regards --Olga Ernst (talk) 08:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Hundreds of wrong speedy deletion tagsEdit

Hi, Your bot tagged hundreds of old images with a speedy deletion tag (e.g. File:Loods Oude Spaarneweg, Inventarisnummer NL-HlmNHA Hmr 07033.JPG). This is not OK. Could you please revert that, and create a regular DR instead. Thanks, Yann (talk) 10:05, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

It's a bit more complicated, as the Noord-Hollands Archief changed the license last year, see this discussion. We were already working on it. No prob, I was planning to look at each file anyway. Vysotsky (talk) 21:03, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
@Yann: I'm afraid you made it worse. None of the files in Category:Beeldcollectie van het Historisch Archief Haarlemmermeer te Hoofddorp have a valid CC0 release as you can read on Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Beeldcollectie van het Historisch Archief Haarlemmermeer te Hoofddorp. So basically all files should be deleted as missing permission.
Every file was placed in Category:Historisch Archief Haarlemmermeer (license check) to be able to safe some of them. I just tagged the easy ones for speedy deletion so that no human has to check these all by hand. Because you removed the speedy deletion tag you broke this system. Multichill (talk) 14:50, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
The remaining 769 files in the Category:Historisch Archief Haarlemmermeer (license check) will be checked manually. Vysotsky (talk) 15:09, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
It doesn't make sense. If these files are admissible for speedy deletion, you can delete them right away instead of tagging them. If you tag them for SD but don't delete them, it means another admin has to check them if the tag is OK or not. Doing that for 700+ files is not really possible seeing the manpower and time available. If a review is needed, then a DR is the way to go. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:27, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
To give an example from this collection: why would we delete a rare photograph of a departure hall of an airport in 1934 if the license is OK? (I corrected the link & the license to match the source and added a category just a minute ago). All other ways of handling these files would cost more time without the possibility to keep hundreds of these files in Commons. Vysotsky (talk) 19:10, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Note that I don't oppose deletion, only the procedure. And strictly speaking, these are not obvious copyright violations, so not eligible for SD. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:37, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletionEdit

 
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Rosenzweig τ 14:18, 22 May 2022 (UTC)