Busy desk.svg Always busy.

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

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

GeographEdit

Hi! What is the status? Do you need anything or are you ready to go? --MGA73 (talk) 18:26, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

@MGA73: sorry, your message got a bit lost in the clutter. Let's see:
So getting there :-) Multichill (talk) 20:20, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Busy busy… Yeah it is a huge project you are working on. It seems hard to get everyone to agree on what the best way is. For example I like categories with like 100-200 images so it is easy to look at a bunch of photos and find the one I like the most. Other users like to categorize everything so there is perhaps 30-40 categories with around 5 files in each. Perhaps tags are better than categories because then we can just add tags like Ireland and churches and then we will get all files that matches those tags. Well who knows... Perhaps one day... :-)
Adding/using the extra location information that some users want will slow down the bot. But will it ruin something important? It seems it can take months to get a bot approved because of smaller things. For example I wonder why this one about license migration of GFDL can't just be approved. So perhaps it is faster to just include the info than to keep discussing it.
I have been looking at the tags. I think they are hard to match. At least the ones at the top. But that is probably the reason they are still there lol. If the tag can't be matched to anything what will happen? Will it be skipped or will it be added in description field or somewhere else? And do you think it is better to have no match than choosing one that is perhaps only 70 % good? --MGA73 (talk) 21:56, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
@MGA73: Wales is nearly done in OSM (700 out of 900). I'll puzzle a bit more with the tags. If a tag isn't matched (or just has a comment) it will just be skipped. I'm planning on completing that page before I start bulk uploading.
I already added the extra location lookup and used it in the last uploads. Bit slower, but that is not a problem. I'll have to look what the other open points are, but I first want to finish the tags. Multichill (talk) 19:39, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Tag, you are it! :-) Perhaps you could have a look and move the ones you think are done? Shitty job I know but it is a bit confusing now. Perhaps make a heading for those we know can't match? --MGA73 (talk) 10:33, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
@Multichill: are you happy with the tags or you want more done? --MGA73 (talk) 17:43, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
Probably want to finish that page before firing up the new bot. Might have a shot at it this weekend depending on the weather. Multichill (talk) 20:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
I finished what I could on User:GeographBot/Tags. Sometimes its a mess on Geograph and sometimes we just not have a good category that I could find. (The topic on my talk page was in the archive so I replied it here) --MGA73 (talk) 10:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

File:US Navy 030306-N-4309A-006 Members of the U.S. Army 4th Psychological Operations Group (POG) watch a news brief on their Product Distribution System (PDS).jpgEdit

 
File:US Navy 030306-N-4309A-006 Members of the U.S. Army 4th Psychological Operations Group (POG) watch a news brief on their Product Distribution System (PDS).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 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!

Gbawden (talk) 10:21, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

File:US Army 53191 Fort Belvoir Elementary School students read for the record.jpgEdit

 
File:US Army 53191 Fort Belvoir Elementary School students read for the record.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 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!

Editor-1 (talk) 08:29, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

File:Croquetten aan de lopende band Weeknummer, 73-36 - Open Beelden - 13318.ogvEdit

 
File:Croquetten aan de lopende band Weeknummer, 73-36 - Open Beelden - 13318.ogv 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 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!

Timk70 (talk) 01:25, 5 July 2020 (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 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:

And also:

@Multichill: I need to tell you that there may be issues with your bot. ミラP 05:00, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

File:Flickr - cyclonebill - Kaffe (5).jpgEdit

 
File:Flickr - cyclonebill - Kaffe (5).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 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!

Lars Gustavsen (talk) 19:34, 11 July 2020 (UTC)


File:AUSR88.pngEdit

 
File:AUSR88.png 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 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!

Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:59, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

File:Arrivo di Vittorio Emanuele II in Piazza della Signoria di Firenze.pngEdit

hi Mr. Multichill, I am writing to ask you please to restore this painting by Enrico Fanfani (1824 - 1885). the problem that I need that this file is restored to me, also to be able to safely replace the link of this file, because it is corrupt--37.183.21.241 16:03, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

File:Overzicht, prent - 's-Gravenhage - 20090543 - RCE.jpgEdit

 
File:Overzicht, prent - 's-Gravenhage - 20090543 - RCE.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk.

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you believe this file is not a copyright violation, you may replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.


  • This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Photographer is not the author of the work depicted: Commons Wikimedia does not recognize 1:1 photo's as a new creative work Most likely this work dates from the 1700's. That would make it PD..
Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans | العربية | asturianu | azərbaycanca | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | British English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lëtzebuergesch | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | မြန်မာဘာသာ | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

oSeveno (User talk) 13:18, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

File:Overzicht, prent - 's-Gravenhage - 20090543 - RCE.jpgEdit

 
File:Overzicht, prent - 's-Gravenhage - 20090543 - 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 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!

Jarekt (talk) 14:50, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

License migrationEdit

Hi! Can you remember how we can make license migration possible in files like File:Carlo crivelli, madonna col bambino, V&A, 1480 ca. 02.JPG? --MGA73 (talk) 20:16, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

@MGA73: no, couldn't remember, but {{Licensed-PD-Art}} contains an example near the bottom. I fixed it. Multichill (talk) 09:08, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! Lets just do it that way instead of messing with the template. --MGA73 (talk) 09:11, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

File:Visserswoning - Unknown - 20524874 - RCE.jpgEdit

 
File:Visserswoning - Unknown - 20524874 - 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 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) 15:47, 6 August 2020 (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 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:

And also:

File:Flickr - …trialsanderrors - I volatori, political cartoon, 1880.jpgEdit

 
File:Flickr - …trialsanderrors - I volatori, political cartoon, 1880.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 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!

Kj1595 (talk) 06:26, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Commons:Batch uploading/TropenmuseumEdit

Hi! I noticed that this is listed as Commons:Batch_uploading#Batch_uploads_in_progress. Is this not finished long ago? --MGA73 (talk) 15:12, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Most if not all. Haven't looked at that page for years. Doesn't look like it ever became really functional, maybe better to just archive the whole thing and accept failure. Multichill (talk) 18:03, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
If most are done it can't be a failure :-) --MGA73 (talk) 21:21, 15 August 2020 (UTC)


File:Australian State Route 100.pngEdit

 
File:Australian State Route 100.png 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 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!

Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:34, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

(Note: uploaded by your bot, not yourself, but technically posted here, maybe others). --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:34, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

I think this is vandalism or testEdit

I think this is vandalism or test but I figure you would have more context than I do. I hesitated to revert in case I was wrong. - Jmabel ! talk 13:55, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

It's Wiki Loves Monuments time again!Edit

  Welcome to
Wiki Loves Monuments 2020
­ India

Hello Multichill!

From September 1 to September 30, 2020, Wiki Loves Monuments, the largest photography competition of the world, will take place for the tenth time. And guess what! India is going to participate in the event again this year. You might remember this event as you had participated in one of the previous editions. We will be very delighted to see you take part in the competition again, help record our monuments for future generations and win exciting prizes! You can find more details in this page.

Regards,
Bodhisattwa
(on behalf of Wiki Loves Monuments 2020 in India team)
Sent through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:29, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Category:Swaziland was moved to Category:EswatiniEdit

Hello @Multichill: The Category:Swaziland was moved to Category:Eswatini and the redirect deleted. Reason: The new official name "Eswatini" has been officially recognized by the United Nations since August 2018 (UN M49 standard). See also ISO 3166 and goverment website http://www.gov.sz --Bestoernesto (talk) 06:12, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Bestoernesto: and why are you telling me this exactly? Multichill (talk) 14:51, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
@Multichill:, you should change it in your bot list.--Bestoernesto (talk) 03:42, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Editing speed of BotMultichillEdit

Hi Multichill, could you please limit somewhat the speed of your bot? Within a very short timeframe, my watchlist got flooded with edits by your bot (like this one). I do not like to mask out all bot edits on my files, hence I would be grateful if the amount of edits remains manageable. Thanks & kind regards, AFBorchert (talk) 21:55, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

And yet again more than 500 edits by your bot within less than an hour on just my files alone. This exceeds the maximum of the watchlist. --AFBorchert (talk) 05:17, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
You can turn off bots in your watch list? Isn't that handier? Rudolphous (talk) 05:26, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
AFBorchert, Supposedly adding $(document).ready($('.mw-special-Watchlist .mw-changeslist-line .mw-userlink[href="/wiki/User:BotMultichill"]').parent().parent().css("display", "none")); to your common.js should turn off any notifications from BotMultichill. There will be a lot of bot edits in the next couple years, as we are trying to add SDC to files. With 65M files it could take years even at high editing speeds. Lowering the speeds would make it into decades. --Jarekt (talk) 12:15, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Just tried it; yet as it seems, it hides not only BM's edits, but also all other user's edits done at the same time or earlier. --A.Savin 16:28, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
@A.Savin: What if you click filters and chose "Humans (not bot)". --MGA73 (talk) 16:40, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
I have no such filters, I only can disable displaying bot edits, minor edits, patrolled edits, own edits etc. --A.Savin 17:05, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
As mentioned by several people: You can filter out bot edits from your watchlist. That probably doesn't work if you use an ancient skin like Monobook. Either switch to a newer skin or wait for the bot to pass. Multichill (talk) 17:09, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
From what I understood, Jarekt meant a common.js line that hides only BotMultichill from the watchlist; I already stated why it doesn't work properly. --A.Savin 17:18, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
I do not find it acceptable to exclude all bot edits from my watchlist. Sometimes we have problematic edits by bots – these would go unnoticed. This is a real problem right now for all users who have uploaded a significant number of files. --AFBorchert (talk) 22:17, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
And this goes on and on, many of my images have now been visited for the third time by your bot within less than a month (example: [1], [2], [3]). What comes in the next run? Location, lens, or anything else from the EXIF data? Flooded watchlists are a real problem for me. My watchlist with 500 entries ends right now at 2:10 today and we are still in the morning. When I extend this to 1000 entries, it goes back to 16:34 yesterday. This project should support human contributors, not work against them. --AFBorchert (talk) 09:44, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
┌─────────────────────────────────┘
I think the edits are needed and I think reducing speed is a bad solution. Would it be possible to have the bot work on files based on uploader? That way a user will only have 1, 2 or 3 days of "watchlist madness" (depending on how many uploads the user have). Or will it make operating the bot more complicated? --MGA73 (talk) 12:31, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
If this is indeed considered as an important addition, it should at least be carefully planned to minimize the annoyance for contributors. Creating every other week another run through all photographs again is a bad idea. And the editing speed could be reduced per user affected without reducing the overall speed. This night the bot had a speed of up to 35 edits per minute just on photographs uploaded by me. --AFBorchert (talk) 14:29, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
I generally try to do everything in one edit, but that might fail for various reasons (like custom user templates) and the bot ends up doing another edit.
The whole point of a bot flag is that the edit is done by a trusted account and you can easily filter out the clutter on your watchlist. It's all or nothing. Multichill (talk) 18:21, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
There are still mess-ups with bot accounts even if they are run by experienced users. Take, for example, this one. I would miss this (and many other problems) if I would hide bot edits. This is a project run by humans for humans and humans (including those running bots) make mistakes. This is no big deal as long as we humans are able to check all edits including those of bots and, if a problem is noticed, report it such that it gets fixed. This is no longer possible as the amount of edits of your bot in my watchlist (and that of users with many uploads) is a serious problem. --AFBorchert (talk) 19:41, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
@AFBorchert: I understand your sentiment bots make errors as well, but with big projects like this it is needed, and something we need to sit out. How I deal with it if I have another flood is first put the filter 'human edits' on, deal with everything on there, then remove the filter again, and from the bot edits that pop up, randomly check a few, bit depending on the bot and the edits I see. If it is a bot transfering info to the wikibase part, I likely only check 1. After that I mark all edits as read (button above the filters). That is quite workable for me, and maybe for you as well? Akoopal (talk) 08:55, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Category:Photographs of paintings by User:SailkoEdit

I created Category:Photographs of paintings by User:Sailko yesterday for 36k paintings, hoping to be able to improve their SDC metadata a bit. Perhaps add {{Art photo}} to them or model if they have a frame or not. A lot of them are not connected to any wikidata items. Can you think of a way to connect some? --Jarekt (talk) 22:44, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@Sailko: --Jarekt (talk) 22:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
Thank you! I appreciate your interest and help. --Sailko (talk) 13:14, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
@Jarekt: I had a tool to make it easy to find images of paintings to connect to Wikidata items, see for example User:Multichill/Same image without Wikidata/Commons creator, institution and inventory number match.
It blew up somewhere last year because everything was done in memory and I ran out of memory. The logic of it is sound and someone could use it to implement it in a more structured way:
  • Get all the paintings on Wikidata and for each painting get the image, creator, location & collection where available.
  • Get all the images of paintings here on Commons and for each file get the Qid of {{Creator}}, Qid of {{Institution}} and the inventory number where available
  • Combine the two to get matches. Later on I was using some AI to filter out the obvious not matches
New tool should probably have two part:
  1. Some database to store this information in so we can query it to find matches. Should have some kind of update strategy that's better than my rebuilding it from scratch each time
  2. Some kind of nice front-end tool to have users process these matches
For the database part we could probably also use the new local SPARQL endpoint. We would have to add local creator, location/collection and inventory number statements to files. This can be used to match up. If we do this we also need to clean up the local statements after the match has been made.
For the front-end part I'm not really the right person. If we find someone able to do the front-end part, I'm willing to do the back-end part. Not much use on working on it now without any prospect of front-end. Multichill (talk) 14:01, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

ThanksEdit

Hi Multichill, thanks for adding structured data to my files ! --Olga Ernst (talk) 09:11, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Olga Ernst: thanks for your message. Always nice to hear my work is appreciated. Multichill (talk) 18:22, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Very quick work Multichill, it would take me plenty of time !! Thanks again and regards --Olga Ernst (talk) 11:36, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Just wanted to say hiEdit

Hi there,

You do some interesting things. Thank you for all your efforts. I hope you are happy with what you are doing.

Have a nice weekend!

Quite happy yes. Thank you, Multichill (talk) 18:24, 7 September 2020 (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 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, Mrcl lxmna (talk) 01:56, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Suggestions for BotMultichill on Authorship and MetadataEdit

Hi, Wouldn't it be wise to look at the exif data of photos when adding structured data of an image. When the user made the effort to add Authorship data in the exif this probably means it is his prefered way to be credited. Se this edit and the exif of the image. groetjes. Aloxe (talk) 06:43, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@Aloxe: currently exif is only used as a fallback if data is missing in the wikitext. If you want to have your name better visible, you should probably update the wikitext. You can ask someone with a robot to do that. Multichill (talk) 18:41, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Sore ears eyes and fingersEdit

Hi Multichill. Over the last decade I've made more than 100,000 edits on Wikimedia (I know there are plenty who have made many many times more) Do I have to receive 100,000 emails from your bot? I have been receiving 100s a day for some days now and I'd very much like to avoid the distress it gives me but still keep in touch with events in Commons. How can I do that? Please, Eddaido (talk) 10:04, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

@Eddaido: Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-personal uncheck "Email me when a page or a file on my watchlist is changed". That should prevent the flooding. Multichill (talk) 15:34, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
Oops

I know that. Then I hear nothing of any other events on Commons and that is the reason i tick 'Email me when a page or a file on my watchlist is changed'. Not so I can be told your bot has changed a file I changed previously.

I have just got up in the morning, in the last 7 hours I have received 97 emails originated by your actions. I'm sure I cannot be the only person upset by this. Surely one of the geeks can fix it. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 21:26, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

The day before that in the same period I received 387 emails because of your bot. It goes on, I amend a file, your bot picks it up. Revision history of "File:Queen Elizabeth II standing on platform of her railway carriage at Masterton. PHOTOGRAPHER J.F. Le Cren DATE 15 January 1954 (cropped).jpg" There are so many every time I sit down I go and delete 50 or 100 from my emails. Am I under some form of attack. What did I do? What are you doing, where can I read about why you are doing it! Eddaido (talk) 13:21, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
@Eddaido: sorry, I thought I already pointed out Commons:Structured data. We're currently filling it so that's why you see so many edits. Multichill (talk) 19:27, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
Email from Eddaido

Hello. Check your email—you've got mail! You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eddaido (talk • contribs) 10:26, 23 September 2020‎ (UTC)

@Eddaido: are you trying to harras me? That's not a very smart move. I'll leave an extra note at User talk:Eddaido to remind you of that. Multichill (talk) 15:33, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
@Eddaido:, I read your email and forgive me for intruding but I do like what MultichillI and others are doing by organizing the millions of images in Commons. Oh, you get emails? Everyone does. Everyone is getting them because they are currently filling in images so the images can be more useful to the world. It doesn't bother me - I understand the project. In the morning when I check my email, I search for emails from bots and delete them in one fell swoop. I copy -paste the name of the bot (it's not only this bot- other bots are categorizing images), I paste it into my email search. In one shot, I FIND the emails from the bot and in one shot, I mark all emails and in one shot, I delete them all! (Ok, so maybe 3 shots, find-mark-delete) That's it. It's not painful at all. It's quite easy. Take care.--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 11:38, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Arrogance

You have the gall to leave this message on my talk page:

"You send me an email that came across to me as harassment. You seem to be a bit frustrated with getting emails because of watchlist changes. You can solve that by updating your preferences. Sending me emails won't solve that. I will treat any future emails from you as harassment and I will act on them. Multichill (talk) 15:41, 23 September 2020 (UTC)"

This behaviour by you (and others) is all new. Why?

Take it to the highest authority right now (and prepare for a matching deluge from me). Eddaido (talk) 00:16, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

COM
AN/U

বাংলা | Deutsch | English | español | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Nederlands | português | русский | sicilianu | svenska | Tagalog | +/−


 
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. emails. Thank you.

Eddaido (talk) 13:00, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Mrcl lxmnaEdit

Well Mrcl lxmna (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log is making mass nominations again (even after you asked them to cease) using a custom VFC script, which I raised at AN/U. Bidgee (talk) 16:40, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

ReferenceError: mwCustomEditButtons is not defined in BotMultichillT ?Edit

I'm seeing a large amount of errors in our production logs which seem like they might relate to this bot given the pages throwing errors and the bots edit activity. Does it use any injected scripts either via user gadgets or scripts that could be associated? Jdlrobson (talk) 23:34, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jdlrobson: it's a Python bot (Pywikibot) and no Javascript is used. Do you have a link to examples in Logstash (yes, I can access that)? Multichill (talk) 10:20, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
I'm guessing it's another user with similiar visiting behaviour. Here's the logstash URI. Note this is just one of many but you should be able to filter to find the others. Jdlrobson (talk) 14:59, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
@Jdlrobson: my bots are doing somewhere between 500.000-800.000 edits a day. That might show up on a couple of watchlists (see previous topics).
Looks like https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Watchlist?hidepreviousrevisions=1&translations=filter&hidecategorization=1&hideWikibase=1&limit=500&days=30&urlversion=2 is the url triggering it.
Poked around a bit mwCustomEditButtons seems to be a long deprecated javascript function, but plenty of people still use it. Might that be the cause of this? @Krinkle: can you have a look? Multichill (talk) 16:58, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
I've looked at the Logstash entry. I don't see any connection to BotMultichillT. The stack trace contains InsertButtonsToToolBar which is a local function name used in 13 user's personal scripts, but not by Multichill or BotMultichillT. --Krinkle 19:34, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Don't worry I believe I got to the bottom of this after a little more detective work. The errors were caused by a user reviewing changes by the bot which is what misled me to believe the user related. I believe (but cannot be 100% sure!) that this error has been fixed now. Thanks for investigations! Jdlrobson (talk) 21:45, 13 September 2020 (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 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, Yuraily Lic (talk) 00:29, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

P275 license?Edit

I just noticed that my photos appear in Category:Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported missing SDC copyright license. What does this mean? Am I doing something wrong or is it just some bureaucratic change made somewhere for no reason? Thanks, mr.choppers (talk)-en- 05:22, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

@Mr.choppers: that's just a hidden tracker category for the addition of Structured data so that a robot can quickly add it.
Structured data opens up new possibilities like a a map of where you took photos or a timeline when you took photos. Multichill (talk) 10:09, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Ah, I was afraid it was some new requirement. Those are functions I always envisioned would be available. Now the CIA will be able to easily track my car photography adventures! Thank you, mr.choppers (talk)-en- 14:22, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
They could always do that, but now us mere humans can do nice things with this data. Multichill (talk) 15:25, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Verkeerd labelEdit

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Overzicht_van_de_hoek_van_de_vestinggracht,_gezien_vanaf_de_wal_-_%27s-Hertogenbosch_-_20420343_-_RCE.jpg&diff=355031680&oldid=328616880

Even ter info. Een kleine bevinding van mij. De bot legt hier een verkeerde relatie. Het is de tweede, die ik tegenkwam. Het betreft hier (d:Q18773740), en niet een kantoor van de Pnem Misschien kun je er iets mee. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ldhank (talk • contribs) 12:21, 11 September 2020‎ (UTC)

@Ldhank: even kijken. File:Overzicht van de hoek van de vestinggracht, gezien vanaf de wal - 's-Hertogenbosch - 20420343 - RCE.jpg komt van de RCE beeldbank en hier staat dat het om 522486 gaat. Is dat nummer correct of niet? Dat nummer staat namelijk op Q17599366 (Q17599366) dus die wordt toegevoegd.
Als het nummer niet klopt dan voegt de robot natuurlijk het verkeerde item toe. Moet het trouwens niet Former Halls of Justice (Q17599270) zijn? Multichill (talk) 15:35, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Grappig, een foutje van de RCE beeldbank, ik zal daar een reactie achterlaten. Het gebouw rechts is inderdaad het voormalig gerechtshof. Ldhank (talk) 15:47, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
@Ldhank: het zijn net mensen he? Ik moet zeggen dat ik weinig fouten ben tegengekomen op dit vlak, maar ik ben er dan ook niet actief naar op zoek geweest. Multichill (talk) 19:24, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
Gereageerd, en een bedankje over de melding ontvangen. Wat ik nog kwijt wilde ik vroeg mij dus vorige week af, wat de trigger was dat veel foto's een label hebben. Het was dus het monumentnummer. Eerlijk gezegd ben ik wel verrast door dit soort mogelijkheden, die 'onder water' zitten, en die ongetwijfeld bij veel ervaren wiki gebruikers en vooral wikidata sceptici onbekend zijn. Ldhank (talk) 20:14, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Your bot is too fastEdit

Hello! Is it possible to wait a few hours before adding Structured Data? I found the activity of your bot (Comment "Adding structured data: copyright, participant, source & camera") an hour after uploading. I need some time to add necessary informations, a hour is just to short. Me wish would be at least 4 up to 8 hours. The same for quality images. Thank you. --XRay talk 10:26, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

@XRay: I guess you're participating in {{Wiki Loves Monuments 2020}}? That's monitored by bots all the time and gets checked at least every 2 hours. This is intentional to quickly update this images. All the other license related tracker categories generally get checked twice a day. Multichill (talk) 15:37, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Wiki Loves Monuments, yes. And QI. It's not a problem, but for example my bot is fixing the geo location (rounding to 6 digits) and I've to remove the geo location with a lot of digits set by your bot first. --XRay talk 15:55, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
It would be if your checks the last edit date and wait at least 4 hours. --XRay talk 16:00, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Extra digits would be weird. I just grab the lat/lon from the template and use the api to get the Wikidata json. Do you have an example? Multichill (talk) 16:04, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Yes, File:Ahrweiler, Ursulinenkloster -- 2020 -- 8561.jpg. Uploaded with {{Location|50.541195|7.0814383333333}}, transferred to SDC by your bot with 50°32'28.30200"N, 7°4'53.17799"E, updated by my bot to {{Location|50.541195|7.081438|region:DE-RP}}, manually removed at SDC, later updated by another step of my bot to 50°32'28.2"N, 7°4'53.2"E in SDC. --XRay talk 08:09, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
Only decimal format is used, things like 50°32'28.30200"N, 7°4'53.17799"E are done by the user interface. So the bot is not setting a lot of digits, it's just copying whatever you set earlier. Multichill (talk) 19:23, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
I'd changed my bot. The bot updates the geo location if necessary. --XRay talk 09:06, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Bot minor editsEdit

Can you mark such edits as minor? I have many pages in my watchlist and now my mailbox has hundreds of letters about changing of watched pages.--Anatoliy (talk) 23:11, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

These edits are quite big so would be a bit weird to mark them as minor. The edits are marked with a bot flag. Multichill (talk) 08:13, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
@Ahonc: I checked the api. Edits can be marked as minor, but structured data edits don't have that option. I tried passing minor=1 to see what happens at File:Branč, hrad od juhu (7).jpg, but all I got was "WARNING: API warning (main): Unrecognized parameter: minor.". So even if I wanted to, I can't mark these edits as minor. Multichill (talk) 19:15, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Consider "Taken in" and "Taken on" templatesEdit

Hi, I noticed that your bot does not add inception properties for files using date-related templates like {{Taken in}} and {{Taken on}}, which I systematically use, such as for files File:Ulrich Junghanns (2004).jpg or File:Harsha de Silva (2009).jpg. You might wish to adjust the processing by the bot to get more complete info. Laddo (talk) 01:45, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@Laddo: I'm currently only handling a limited number of date formats (not less specific than a day). I do handle {{Taken on}}, but the number of cases should probably be expanded. Looks like my bot did handle your second example.
You might want to participate in Commons talk:Structured data/Modeling/Date. Multichill (talk) 19:20, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
OK, sorry indeed I missed that {{Taken on}} was processed. Thanks for the info. Laddo (talk) 16:31, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

bot edit rateEdit

Hello. Kindly lower your bot's edit rate. Editing 500 pages in 3/4 minutes is a little too fast. --Minoraxtalk 09:20, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

No, it's just fine. This is intentional and actually request by the WMF team at Commons_talk:Structured_data#Structured_copyright_and_licensing_for_search_indexing. It's not causing any technical issues like increased replication lag. What makes you think this is too fast? Multichill (talk) 14:16, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Bot have a blip?Edit

Did the bot have a blip about 21:05 UTC? It appears to have duplicated its edits on three of my recent uploads File:Spittal spa well.jpg, File:Spittal promenade shelter.jpg & File:Spittal level crossing.jpg. Nthep (talk) 21:01, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nthep: thanks for pointing that out. That's not supposed to happen. I filed phab:T263298 for this and killed some of the bot instances to reduce the chance of this happening.. Multichill (talk) 21:34, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Template to trigger a new visit of BotMultichillEdit

Is there a template your bot picks up on in case someone would like it to revisit a particular files, something similar to Template:GPS EXIF which allows me to ask for automated insertion of coordinates to the file page? I am asking since for new files your bot is much faster than DschwenBot resulting in missing coordinates in structured data stored for a file in a lot of cases. Perhaps your bot automatically considers all changes on file pages to have a look again, but I am not sure. Cheers --Marbot (talk) 08:40, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

@Marbot: right now the focus is to get the license information into structured data. I'm also catching easy cases of coordinates. A bit more cases have to be added before I can start considering emptying out Category:Pages with local camera coordinates and missing SDC coordinates. That's also the tracker category being added after the location template has been added so one of the robots will come back to add the coordinates to the structured data too. Multichill (talk) 08:48, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your reply! Perfect, so I do not have to worry about this by myself, i.e. do it manually. I just wanted to make sure that such cases can easily be tracked which is obviously true! Cool. --Marbot (talk) 08:53, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

"Missing" categorieënEdit

Hallo Multichill, als ik de upload-wizzard gebruik, komen mijn afbeeldingen ineens automatisch in twee door jou aangemaakte categorieën terecht die ik niet eerder gezien heb: Category:Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International missing SDC copyright license en Category:Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike missing SDC copyright status. Is het misschien een idee om een toelichting te plaatsen op de pagina's van deze beide categorieën? Nu weet de uploader alleen maar dat hij iets verkeerd heeft gedaan, zonder er verder iets aan te kunnen doen. Fransvannes (talk) 10:24, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Fransvannes: goed idee, ga je gang hoor. Robots zijn nu nog de achterstand aan het wegwerken, maar over het algemeen zal het binnen een dag worden aangevuld. Multichill (talk) 10:20, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Ik kan dat goede idee helaas niet zelf uitvoeren, want ik heb geen idee wat ermee bedoeld wordt. Fransvannes (talk) 11:37, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Structured Data for non-existing files?Edit

Hi, as an example: File:Grafenstein Pfarrkirche und Schloss 05112011 022.jpg. IMHO it does not make sense to add structured data when the file is missing. Of course, the error is somewhere else, and the bot's action is a consecutive problem, but maybe you could avoid it? Even better, if your bot stumbles across such cases, it would be cool to get a central error notice for that situations. best --Herzi Pinki (talk) 17:23, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Herzi Pinki: it's quite hard for the bot to detect this and doesn't seem to happen that often. Didn't we used to have a report somewhere of file pages without an actual file? Multichill (talk) 10:09, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
hard stuff is the challenge we need. :-) There is Category:Pages_with_broken_file_links, but as far as I see, this only lists usages of file links without a media file behind, not the description pages of file pages missing media directly. Thus it really seems to be hard. Thanks for the answer, the responsible user also did not care, so let's live with the inconsistency. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 11:28, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
@Herzi Pinki: this could be done with a database query but I expect it to be extremely slow:
SELECT * FROM page LEFT JOIN image ON page_title=img_name WHERE page_namespace=6 AND page_is_redirect=0 AND img_sha1 IS NULL LIMIT 1;
After 1 minute and 33 seconds it returned File:(Isabel Torres) Concentración en Plaza de Color por la unidad de España. (32108159907) (cropped).jpg. That's not really an option
I compared the search index for two files: with image and without image.
I poked around a bit with file search options and made this search query. It could probably use a bit more filtering, but it isn't that long. Just do a dummy save on the false positives and I expect them to drop out. Most cases seem to be broken redirects. Multichill (talk) 11:58, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Please pass over Category:Seikei ZusetsuEdit

Dear MultiChill,

Your dear bot BotMultiChillT has recently changed metadata and filenames in the above Category. However, Leiden University Library who uploaded these images is now on the verge of doling out more systematic filenames - by me, in the Naturalis style you know - and probably also wants another license than your CC-BY-SA-4.0. So could you please restrain your diligent and otherwise very useful bot and pass over this category? Thank you, groetjes, Hansmuller (talk) 12:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Hoi Hans, de robots komen vanzelf langs. Als er een nieuwe licentie wordt toegevoegd zoals bijvoorbeeld {{Cc-zero}} dan komt een van de robots vanzelf langs om dat ook toe te voegen. Multichill (talk) 10:04, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!Edit

Hello Bot Multichill - I just realized that you have been adding 'Structured Data' to my uploads. Thank you for doing this. I am grateful and realize it's a lot of work! --TwinofSedona (talk) 19:24, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Commons - Media Sarch, new feedback roundEdit

Greetings,

I'm following up on a message from earlier in the year about the prototype development for Special:MediaSearch. Based on community feedback, the Structured Data team has developed some new features for Special:MediaSearch and are seeking another round of comments and discussions about the tool. Commons:Structured_data/Media_search is updated with details about the new features plus some other development information, and feedback is welcome on Commons talk:Structured_data/Media_search. Media Search works in any language, so the team would especially appreciate input around support for languages other than English. I look forward to reading about what you think. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 20:05, 23 September 2020 (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 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:

And also:

Template:Cc-by-sa-layoutEdit

Hello, I'd kindly suggest you to write an actual tutorial for that template, because it's not very understandable so. Too much information, and unrelated. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 22:08, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

@Blackcat: tutorial? No, you shouldn't ever be using that template. This is incorrect usage, only templates like {{Cc-by-sa-3.0-nl}} should use it. Multichill (talk) 10:02, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Perfect, thanks for the explanation! -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 14:21, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
PS The problem is that there is not a CC-by-sa-4.0-it ....
@Blackcat: That's because the 4.0 version just has {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} and no country ports. 3.0 did have {{Cc-by-sa-3.0-it}}. Multichill (talk) 14:56, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Template:Cc-sa-1.0Edit

Hello Multichill. Is there any further discussion regarding your edit on CC-SA-1.0. I only was able to find the short discussion on the Village Pump. I know that CC declares CC-SA-1.0 as "retired [...] legal tool", but it also says CC just "does not recommend" to apply it to works - not that it is not allowed.
I would agree that it's an old licence, and there are later versions of similar licences out there, but it is not a bad licence. I can't think of any case where using this licence caused any problems. In my opinion it is better to have an old but OK standard licence than some home brewed licence that was not written by experts but tries to do the same thing because you denied the usage of the first one.
I also want to point out that you can alter CC-licences. You are not allowed to use the name "Creative Commons" any longer, but you can change up the legal code. So if I change up a few words und use pretty much the same licence, I am allowed to do that and use it as home brew licence for new uploads.
--D-Kuru (talk) 14:04, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

@D-Kuru: it's just marked as deprecated. From deprecation: In several fields, deprecation is the discouragement of use of some terminology, feature, design, or practice, typically because it has been superseded or is no longer considered efficient or safe, without completely removing it or prohibiting its use. Multichill (talk) 14:20, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Licence replacingEdit

Hi Multichill, your bot added structured data in some of the files, that I uploaded. During that process, it replaced the original licence-information (Template:PD-textlogo & Template:Trademarked) by Template:Cc-zero. Although both options basically allow the same rights for reuse & modifications, my original licence information is more precise in it's description, why I was allowed to upload the logo.

Somehow your bot edits make it appear, as if the licence information was missing before [4][5][6], but this is definitely not the case. I used the same licence information for several other logos, e.g. File:Share Logo.png.

Can I revert the edit, or is there any reason for the CC0-licence to be used instead of the PD-textlogo ? --Johannnes89 (talk) 18:07, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@Johannnes89: that sounds very far fetched. The bot doesn't touch the wikitext and didn't remove anything. You probably just forgot to add it. You can just update the wikitext. Nothing to revert. Multichill (talk) 19:22, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
I cannot explain it, but I was 100% sure, that the files always had the licence information that I mentioned. But according the version history it has been CC0 already when I uploaded the file [7]. Anyway thanks for responding, I've now updated the wikitext [8]. --Johannnes89 (talk) 19:39, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

ReplyEdit

Goedenmiddag Multichill- Regarding the discussion (now closed) at Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/01/Category:Images requiring attribution, I was responding there to your immediately preceding comment: "...custom attribution licenses ... should be changed to use Attribution only license". If that means actually changing the licenses (as opposed to just recat), I'd be concerned for the reason stated. Perhaps I misunderstood?  JGHowes  talk 22:10, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Structured data licensingEdit

I suggest for files in Category:Items with disputed copyright information, wrong information shouldn't be copied into structured data fields. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 11:26, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

You can update the structured data with statement disputed by (P1310) if you like. Multichill (talk) 11:29, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Invitation to present your botEdit

Hello, I work in the Foundation's GLAM & Culture team. We're hosting office hours about Structured Data on Commons on Monday 19 October 3.30-4.30pm UTC and Tuesday 20 October 11am-12pm UTC. Are you available at either of these times to share the work that your bot is doing to add structured data to files on Commons? (FRomeo (WMF) (talk) 11:20, 6 October 2020 (UTC))

@FRomeo (WMF): sorry for the late reply. I'm in a bit of a busy period at work so I wasn't sure if it would fit in. I'm afraid it doesn't. My Monday is already packed and I have to work the night too to do some changes. Adding this would be a bit too much. Multichill (talk) 16:43, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

General exclusion of e-mail notifications for bot changes: Bots cause a lot of e-mailsEdit

Hallo Multichill, die Tätigkeit des Bots BotMultichill ist aus meiner Sicht sehr wichtig und hilfreich. Danke dafür. Gleichzeitig würde ich mir wünschen, dass ich über die Änderungen nicht per E-Mail informiert werden würde. Dabei möchte ich aber nicht grundsätzlich auf Benachrichtigungen verzichten. Ich weiß, dass ist ein Spagat. Hättest Du eine Idee, wie das möglich wäre? Danke für Deine Arbeit. Viele Grüße --Molgreen (talk) 07:33, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

PS: Eine ähnliche Anfrage habe ich hier gestellt. --Molgreen (talk) 11:34, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

importing licensesEdit

Hi, Multichill! Thanks for your advising. It was my mistake, by copy-pasting the info from some other importings from gl.wiki. Certainly, I removed the Template:Cc-by-sa-3.0,2.5,2.0,1.0 for Template:GFDL, that the same user applied in other pictures. I'll check the other transfers.

Greetings! --Estevoaei (talk) 11:44, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

User talk:Estevoaei#Lost license in import. Multichill (talk) 11:49, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Instructions for ogg pronunciationEdit

Hello @BotMultichillT: and thank you for taking care of our files. I have been doing some recording audio at Category:Greek pronunciation. I see that you have added in almost all files example: Adding structured data: copyright, source & author. If I am to record more, is there something I should copypaste and add whenever I use the UploadWizard? Do you have any instructions for me? Or is it something robots do, not editors? Thank you. Sarri.greek (talk) 15:29, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

@Sarri.greek: nothing new yet for new uploads. The bot monitors new uploads and will update these files too. In the future this might change, but I don't think in the near future. Multichill (talk) 15:49, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Edit-WarEdit

Hi!

Could you please make your robot so, that it doesn't edit-war with real users?

Habitator terrae 🌍 22:35, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@Habitator terrae: don't remove it. That's basically vandalism. Multichill (talk) 09:08, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
No, please read creativecommons:by-sa/4.0/legalcode#s3a3. You have to remove it. Habitator terrae 🌍 09:31, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
The bot merely converts what is in wikitext to another format. Nothing changes in the attribution. So no, this does not apply. Multichill (talk) 09:38, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Yes, but that doesn't change, that you have to remove any attribution-information requested by me, to the extent reasonable practicable (of course it is because I myself can do it). Obvious it isn't needed, that the information changes. Habitator terrae 🌍 09:45, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
You don't get it. I'm not adding anything so nothing to remove unless of course you want to have something removed from the wikitext. Multichill (talk) 09:49, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
You copy the information to another database. And I want to have this information removed from _this_ database (not the wikitext-database). Habitator terrae 🌍 09:52, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
No, I don't copy it to another database. All revisions are part of the same database (the Wikimedia Commons database). You might want to read Commons:Structured data. Actually the structured data and the wikitext are stored in the same revision using a concept called multi content revisions. Multichill (talk) 09:56, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
OK, than I clarify my request: I want the doubled attribtution-information (formated as Structured Data) removed. Habitator terrae 🌍 10:08, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
That's not going to happen. You stated what you want, but not why you want this. Might be based on incorrect assumptions. Multichill (talk) 10:20, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
I don't have to clarify why I want this. It is my right. Habitator terrae 🌍 10:28, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
LoL. He´s got you there Multichill. "If requested by the Licensor, You must remove any of the information required by Section 3(a)(1)(A) to the extent reasonably practicable" - I want the same for my stuff. You could program a bot to do that, you know, just to make it "reasonably practicable". Alexpl (talk) 13:21, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
  • There is nothing to remove in the extand the content have been added by the copyright holder themselve, if someone wants another attribution, e.g. if they change their username, then such a request can be legitimate, but otherwise I don't see the issue. "Licensors may request removal of attribution", indeed but there is nothing in this specific edition that have not been added and claimed by the copyright hoder themself. The version that Habitator terrae wants to be restored includes exactly the same attribution than in the version edited by the BOT therefore this request don't fall within the scope of "Licensors may request removal of attribution". Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:06, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
    You have a missunderstanding of the legaltext (your link only go to a wiki, with disclaimer because of incompletness):
    It clearly say that this is about "any [required] information" "supplied by the Licensor with the Licensed Material". And obvious this is only the case if the information "have been added [=supplied] by the copyright holder [=Licensor] themselve". An interpretation to exept this case therefore leads ad absurdum.
    Habitator terrae 🌍 21:20, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
    • "your link only go to a wiki": this wiki is linked from the relevant section within the "Frequently Asked Questions", this link is provided in order to help the readers to understand the legaltext. It is a fact that you and me disagrees about the one of us both who have misunderstood this text, whether it is the legal part, the FAQ or the wiki. Christian Ferrer (talk) 21:40, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
    I don't say, you missunderstands the consequences of the Wiki-Text (in fact I didn't read it carefully), but it isn't complete (it's intention is to clarify the differences between the licenses, not primary the license itself).
    My whole point is, that your assumption (not basing on the Linked Text) literally disagree with the wording of the legaltext (as cited above). Habitator terrae 🌍 23:34, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
    The only thing about you that is used by the Structured Data is your username, or maybe do you require too that all your images to be exempt from adding structured data regardless of whatether the data are? this username have been provided by you and have been provided by you as an attribution, and as far I see you don't ask that this attribution be changed, otherwise I suggest you a username rename request, but I feel that is not what you ask for. Therefore if you don't ask your attribution to be changed then you ask nothing. How this works: your username is not indexed in an external database, neither in another Wikimedia project excepted by your own will. See mw:Extension:Wikibase Repository, the Structured Data works with a sofwate extension but the data is still here: "Wikibase Repository allows you to use your wiki as a structured data repository". Sorry but I fail to see the point of your request if not to require just for the principle of to require. Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:17, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
    Furthermore all your contributions and all the public logs that concern you and your username are already stored in databases, and are already publicly accessible [9], [10], [11], that is this way that we can see your accounts, your contributions, ect... Structured Data for Commons is just a tool to structure locally a part of this data that have already beeing made availble by you, me and the other users. Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:31, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
    Two points, you missunderstand:
    1. creativecommons:by-sa/4.0/legalcode#s3a3 isn't about change anything, it's about remove something (identification of the creator(s) of the Licensed Material and any others designated to receive attribution, in any reasonable manner requested by the Licensor (including by pseudonym if designated), a copyright notice, a notice that refers to this Public License, a notice that refers to the disclaimer of warranties, a URI or hyperlink to the Licensed Material to the extent reasonably practicable) which is "supplied", in other words "provided", by me with the licensed material. And it's my right to govern this, because of my right about my own information and attribution.
    2. And my will is, that the information put in this (local) structure (and further this structure is licensed under CC0). This tool, to structure locally, make it obvious easier to use this information. And this is my own information, I can decide wether remove it or not, particularly, if this platform accepts "CC BY-SA 4.0".
    Of course this only applies if it is reasonable practically; But this is the case, because to write a script, which determines a bot couldn't make edit-war with real users, is as a matter of course.
    Habitator terrae 🌍 11:05, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
  • No you don't want we remove anything, as the version you want to restore contains the exact same attribution in the wikitext. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:29, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
    Of course this is the same information, if it is not the information suplied by me to the licensed work, the whole paragraph wouldn't apply.
    And I want you to remove this (it must be a duppled information, in the other case it wouldn't apply), from the other structure. If the edit don't make any change, its "exact same" to where and how the information could be found, the adding of structured data would be senseless. Habitator terrae 🌍 15:08, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Also you are confusing something, we do not reuse your file, it is you who published the file here. And here, no, you can not decide what you want by decree. Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:19, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
    Of course you're using the file under the terms of the license I published it (reusing isn't needed). And of course I could decide, what I want; This the definition of free will. And, if the contract about publishing (the license) say, you must do some defined thing, if I want and a further condition apply (it is reasonable practicable); you must to this, if I decide I want this and the further condition apply  . Habitator terrae 🌍 15:08, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
    No, if I say here in this talk page that the attribution of the file File:Fotoausflug Kiel - Westensee 2020-06-49.jpg is: Habitator terrae, you can not prevent it, because 1/ you don't own this talk page 2/ you made it publicly available and this info is still true 3/ I'm absolutly not reusing your file when doing this. You don't own more the Structured area of the file page concerned that you own this talk page. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:06, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
    I couldn't prevent it, but I could let it remove, because Wikimedia is using the file and therefore obligated by the license to remove it if requested (only if it reasonable practicable). Habitator terrae 🌍 07:03, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

"I'm not adding anything", is fully bullshit, because your bot obvious disagrees with you: "Adding structured data". Habitator terrae 🌍 14:00, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Mogelijk copyrightEdit

Since you know your way around on Commons please have a look at File:Rapenburgconcert 2002.jpg and File:Zandvoort_.jpg. Possible copyright? --VanBuren (talk) 19:42, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@VanBuren: ik denk het ook. Beiden zijn al verwijderd en de paar andere uploads betwijfel ik ook of het wel eigen werk is. Ziet er meer uit als een stel oude foto's die door een scanner zijn gehaald. Multichill (talk) 15:12, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
Weet jij~Multichill ook waarom deze als bewerkingssamenvatting "Cross-wiki upload from nl.wikipedia.org" hebben? Ze zijn nooit lokaal geupload, en ik meende dat je om gebruik te maken van de uploadfunctie in de VE eerst 10 gewone uploads op Commons moet hebben gedaan? Maar misschien is dat laatste uitgezet? Ciell (talk) 16:15, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
@Ciell: geen idee. Ik had die cross wiki dingen wel eens eerder gezien, maar wist niet dat het uit VE kwam. Zit blijkbaar geen limiet meer op want het account is nog geen uur oud bij de eerste upload. Multichill (talk) 15:52, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
Het is mijn aanname dat het door de VE komt. Volgens mij hadden we in 2007/2008 een soortgelijke omschrijving toen we alle bestanden van nlwiki hebben overgezet naar Commons, maar deze bestanden hebben geen geschiedenis op nl-wikipedia. VE leek me een logische andere optie, omdat je dan voor een upload nl-wikipedia niet verlaat, maar het via de SUL gedaan wordt. Ciell (talk) 15:57, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

370 MB te groot voor upload? Decretum Gratiani.Edit

Beste Multichill,

Misschien weet jij raad. Deed net upload van een mooi verlucht middeleeuws juridisch manuscript File:Gratiani decretum cum glosa - Decretum Gratiani with Commentary by Bartholomew of Brescia - Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, BSB Clm 23552.pdf van de World Digital Library, 315 MB. Blijkt toch al snel dat de bron Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, München, betere plaatjes zonder blokjes heeft in bestand van 370 MB. Maar bij "Een nieuwe versie van dit bestand uploaden" krijg ik foutmelding "Het bestand is groter dan de instelling van de server toestaat." Multichill weet raad? Anders in twee stukken hakken? (Directe upload vanaf die Beierse URL niet toegestaan uiteraard.) Dank en groeten, Hansmuller (talk) 14:51, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Hansmuller: Ik zou het onder een nieuwe naam doen. Is denk ik ook beter om gewoon twee versies te hebben. Dan zal je zien dat het waarschijnlijk wel werkt. Komt door chunked uploads. Multichill (talk) 14:54, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Structured dataEdit

Hi, I've been seeing your bot add structured data to files I uploaded. I've just added some structured data to this file (the author of the photograph) and I'm not sure if I did it correctly. Would you mind taking a look? Buiquangtu (talk) 22:23, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Buiquangtu: we usually use inception (P571) for the date. I've updated the file. Multichill (talk) 15:36, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks! Do you have anything for the place where the photo was taken? Buiquangtu (talk) 12:38, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

TijdvraagjeEdit

Hierboven onder de kop "Mogelijk copyright" stelde ik een vraag (dank voor het antwoord) waarop jij reageert met de time stamp: "15:12, 18 October 2020 (UTC)" (zoals die op mijn computer toont). Kijk ik in de geschiedenis van je bijdragen dan staat er echter "2020-10-18T17:12:27‎". De twee uur verschil zal iets met tijdzones te maken hebben, maar ligt dat nu aan jouw instellingen of aan de mijne? --VanBuren (talk) 11:01, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@VanBuren: tijdzones is altijd feest. Ik heb in mijn voorkeuren de tijdzone op "Europe/Amsterdam" staan dus voor mij veranderd het automatisch mee (zoals vannacht). Als ik onderteken dan is dat automatisch in UTC dus nu een uur ipv twee uur verschil, de historie zie je in de lokale tijd. Lokale tijd is nu 16:31 dus dat zal je ook in de historie zien als je in dezelfde tijdzone zit als ik. Multichill (talk) 15:31, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
Dank voor je uitleg. Ik zie, nu ik erop let, dat ik dezelfde tijdzone heb ingesteld, en dat nu ook in mijn voorkeuren hetzelfde verschil van een uur staat aangegeven. Ik ga er maar geen aandacht meer aan schenken. --VanBuren (talk) 16:52, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you Multichill (Structured data) great work *(how to thank a bot)*Edit

  The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For your tireless contributions ..Multichill.. Great job & cool bot !!

how many edits does this bot make a minute....???? just wondering...?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.155.14.60 (talk • contribs) 02:51, 23 October 2020‎ (UTC)

Thank you. You can see the edit speeds at http://commons.wikiscan.org/?menu=live&date=24&list=users&sort=edit&filter=all . Currently one bot is at around 400 edits/minute and the other around 250 edits/minute. That's about 1 million edits per day. Multichill (talk) 15:26, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
@Multichill: Perhaps also leave the link to the page where you have listed the progress of structured data :-) --MGA73 (talk) 15:45, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
Found it: User:Multichill/Structured data progress almost 50M now. --MGA73 (talk) 19:52, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Inception date loss of accuracy?Edit

For example, this file I uploaded: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Northstar_California_Prosser_2.jpg

Your bot copied the date, but lost the hour:minute:second, and just put in precision day. Is this intentional? If so, why? Leijurv (talk) 04:11, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@Leijurv: That's because of phab:T57755. I left a note, let's see if we can get that moving again. Multichill (talk) 09:36, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
Things were getting mixed up so made phab:T266407 instead. Multichill (talk) 15:22, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
@Multichill: Oh dear, does this mean your bot will need to "take a second pass" over every file uploaded ever? Perhaps best to wait until it can be done properly in one pass, I've gotten hundreds upon hundreds of watchlist emails 😹😹😹😹😹 Leijurv (talk) 18:41, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Could you please lend me your bot for....Edit

DatumweergaveEdit

Als je vindt dat ik je lastig val laat het aub weten, ik heb soms (zelden) vragen waarvan ik niet weet waar ik ze kan stellen. Het gaat o.a. om File:Wim Verbeke.jpg. Bij de omschrijving staat dat er een datum/date ingevuld moet worden. Ik zie verschillende invulling daarvan: datum van de weergave (bv voor een schilderij van eeuwen geleden), datum wanneer een foto is gemaakt, of datum van uploaden. Doet het er überhaupt toe? --VanBuren (talk) 10:33, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

copyrighted vs copyrighted, dedicated to...Edit

Hi, is it on purpose that the BOT added two value for copyright status (P6216)? Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:37, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Christian Ferrer: mistake in the code which I fixed, but for which I still need to do a bit of clean up. Thanks for pointing it out. Multichill (talk) 20:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)