Open main menu
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Odysseus1479!



I just wanted to say that I think this map is beautiful! I had a look at doing it, but it was just going to take me too long. I'm now glad I didn't, as I think yours is better than I could have produced :o) Serenthia 13:34, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing imagesEdit

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | ಕನ್ನಡ | ತುಳು | +/−

Hello, Odysseus1479!

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 12:16, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Autopatrol givenEdit

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically sighted. This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to help users watching Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, you can now share images from Flickr using the UploadWizard, batch-upload up to 500 files with UploadWizard instead of 50 and upload freely licensed audio files in the MP3 format. Thank you. INeverCry 01:19, 25 November 2013 (UTC)


--117Avenue (talk) 05:10, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

العربية | Català | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form) | Eesti | English | Español | Français | Galego | Magyar | Italiano | Nederlands | Polski | Română | Svenska | ไทย | Українська | +/−

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2013! Please help with this survey.

Dear Odysseus1479,
Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2013, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again a few minutes of your time.

Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 365,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 50 countries around the world, becoming the largest photography competition to have ever taken place.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet).

If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help.

To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey in your own language, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2013.

Kind regards,

the Wiki Loves Monuments team

العربية | Català | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | Eesti | Français | Magyar | Nederlands | Polski | Svenska | ไทย | +/−

Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey!

Dear Odysseus1479,

Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey. Your answers will help us improve the organization of future photo contests!

In case you haven't filled in the questionnaire yet, you can still do so during the next 7 days.

And by the way: the winning pictures of this year's international contest have been announced. Enjoy!

Kind regards,

the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Lincoln's InnEdit

Hi there! I see you overturned my changes to some files, referring to the descriptions. These description are not entirely clear to me, but seem to say that the file has to do with the coats of arms in the glass and not with the fact that they were in the London building. If that is the case, maybe it would be better to create a seperate category "Coats of arms of....", don't you think? --Judithcomm (talk) 07:32, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes … and yes, if the category is intended for (or contains media mainly concerning) the building itself, rather than the eponymous legal institution. I wonder whether it would be better to make such a category for all the Inns of Court together, or a separate cat for each of the four.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 07:50, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Personally I am not very fond of categories that contain only one item. So one category for all coats of arms would be nice.--Judithcomm (talk) 10:06, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Well, there were at least two images for each of the three Inns concerned—and there was already a drawing of the Gray’s Inn gryphon, not proper to the place—so I created both the parent and a set of subcats, for consistency’s sake. (JFTR I don’t have a problem with one-file categories myself, especially where the filename doesn’t refer to the topic.) I have also copied (not moved) images of these arms from the buildings & grounds into the respective cats.
BTW, if you know something about the site or the related organizations, do Staple and Barnards Inns belong in Inns of Court?—Odysseus1479 (talk) 03:37, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
I don't any have more knowledge than you about this, probably less. There's a historical connection there for both according to Wikipedia:, --Judithcomm (talk) 09:52, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Alberta Highway 1A northwest of Castle Junction.jpgEdit

Nice work. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 23:09, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm not invaderEdit

I'm User:Doncsecz, and this is my request in the meta wiki: here. 17:49, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Doncsecz! Sorry, I think there was a linguistic problem: although “to usurp” is usually a negative action, as the word is ordinarily used, in the Wikimedia projects it is just jargon for taking over an abandoned account so as to edit under that name. (I can’t think of anything else I wrote that may have given the idea that I thought you were an “invader”.) I certainly did not intend to imply that you did anything wrong, or that you would be unwelcome here. Please accept my apologies for my part in any miscommunication that has occurred, and I sincerely hope you get your account sorted out.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 00:23, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello Odysseus1479, I am writing on behalf of Doncsecz who asked me to help him get his account back. As an administrator on huwiki I can assure you the user behind the IP is the same person as user:Doncsecz on Commons and also on huwiki. I tried contacting the SUL stewards but I was directed back to Commons bureaucrats who would look after Commons local accounts. Do you see any solution to his problem? Though Doncsecz actually logged in his account about a month ago, he told me that for some reason he had had to change his password on Commons which he unfortunately forgot. Is usurping the account a viable solution? It would only be a technical usurpation not a real one. Csigabi (talk) 10:50, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I know little about the usurpation process; I only suggested it because I’d heard of it being done (on enWP) with unused or long-abandoned accounts (created by a different person) and thought its scope might be broad enough to accommodate a situation like this. That was just speculation, and from what you say it seems that I was wrong in thinking it could be handled through SUL. The next step might be to post at COM:BN explaining the situation; maybe someone there can help. It may be possible for Doncsecz to authenticate through OTRS or the “committed identity” system, if your vouching for him is thought to be insufficient. I’m just an ordinary user (and not particularly well informed about procedures) so I’m afraid I can’t do much more, other than to wish you luck.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 04:28, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Re:Categories and movingEdit

Hello, I'm pretty sure that any logged in user can move categories. If I look at a category, I have a "move" tab at the top which functions just like the move tab on Wikipedia. Green Giant (talk) 04:15, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks; I’d seen that link, but assumed it was just to a request form like the one i get from the similar menu item on File pages. But on Category pages it does seem to be ‘the real deal‘.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 05:18, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank youEdit

I just noticed your note, & wanted to say thank you for your concern about the restoration of my talk page, its ok, I will add myself a section about my girl on the page, and she will live forever in my heart. She was a sweetheart like no other. Again thanks for your concern, it has been a really hard week for me.--WPPilot (talk) 12:36, 8 January 2015 (UTC)


How do you know when to use them? Or does it matter, since sometimes they're used and sometimes not? Is there an explanation somewhere? Thanks, and sorry for all those empty cats! EChastain (talk) 01:26, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

First of all, if you would almost always look up the topic under something other than the start of the category name, it should have a {{DEFAULTSORT:}} entry; this is typical for (modern) people, whose cats are forename(s)-first but should be indexed by surname. In effect this is equivalent to adding “|Surname, Forename” to every parent cat. Such cats as City of X, Mount Y, and River Z can also be handled this way.
Conversely, if the category name starts with what you’d look for in any index, it shouldn’t ever need sort keys. (I‘ve seen it done, putting Xville into Towns in Yland by writing “[[Category:Towns in Yland|Xville]]”, but I don‘t see the point.)
Otherwise, it depends on the context: how the parent category is organized. A typical case for a key is where the first part of the name is common to most or all the entries in that cat. For example, Flag of Xville is fine under “Flag” in the Xville category, but in Flags of towns in Yland you’d look for it under “Xville”.
Then there’s ‘special’ sorting for meta, index, or intersection categories. Where a cat contains both specific topics and groups, the latter are often sorted with a leading space or other punctuation (rather inconsistently chosen in general, although there appear to be a few fairly widely followed conventions in certain subject areas), to separate them from the rest. For example People of Xville might contain a lot of individual cats sorted by surname, while cats like People of Xville by occupation and Nineteenth-century Xvillians will appear at the beginning so they don’t get lost among the Ps and Ns. In the Xville category you might see cats like Black and white photographs of Xville so treated—photo categories are often sorted under * (asterisk).
Note that some of this also applies to files. If I find an uncategorized photo of Mary Smith from Xville, I might put it in [[Category:People of Xville|Smith, Mary]], making it easier to find when someone gets around to creating a cat for her.
Does any of that make sense? There’s plenty of inconsistency around here, to say the least, but one does what one can … See COM:Categories#Creating a new category: not much there but it‘s policy.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 02:51, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
To tell you the truth, no. You lost me at DEFAULTSORT. I've never seen that here. I've seen it on en:wiki. Wait! I seen it in the edit window. So how would I apply that. How would it help me to find how UK names its different parts or in the "in" vs. "of" problem? (The latter seems not to be standardised.) Anyway, I appreciate any help. Since I've been here I've only received one message warning me about "over-categorization" and a few images questions until recently, so your categorisation posts are most welcome. EChastain (talk) 03:30, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Neither DEFAULTSORT nor an individual key is displayed; they‘re only visible while editing, part of the machinery as it were.
Feel free to ask questions about any part of the above, and I’ll try and take it step by step. Might some examples ‘from the wild’ help to illustrate what‘s done in practice? Note that sort-keys concern only where items are displayed on category and gallery pages, not why they belong there in the first place.
Regarding the UK, I haven’t done a lot ‘there’, especially outside the Scottish Highlands, but I usually manage to find my way around. I have seen editors complaining what a mess it is, but I doubt it’s much worse than anywhere else. ;) (The vast number of un- or poorly-categorized Geograph images is an exacerbating factor, though.) As for “in“ and “of“, there‘s a lot of inconsistency in practice, but in theory “in“ should refer to mere location and “of“ to deeper connections, possibly involving origin, possession, or control. There’s a considerable grey area of overlap, though, which is part of the problem. The distinction doesn’t usually matter much IMO, but sometimes there’s a need for both.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 04:34, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Someone provided me with this Venn diagram of the British Isles that's helpful to me.[1] He said categories that use the word "Britain" are wrong. (I didn't know that, though maybe you do.) EChastain (talk) 16:14, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
I don’t know if or where it may have been discussed here, but it‘s very ambiguous, so I can see why it would be deemed unsuitable for categorization. In common usage “Britain“ can mean any of: the British Isles, the UK, the island of Great Britain, or the historical Kingdom of Great Britain (1707–1800).—Odysseus1479 (talk) 22:06, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

some more questionsEdit

Where is the place to ask this:

  • File:Homesteader NE 1866.png is dated 1866 in the file name, but the description says:
  • Description: "The Covered Wagon of the Great Western Migration. 1886 in Loup Valley, Nebr." A family poses with the wagon in which they live and travel daily during their pursuit of a homestead.
  • Date: 1886
  • Source: NARA - ARC Identifier 518267

Does it seem more likely that the uploader used the wrong date in naming the file, or that the uploader made a mistake in the description? If the former, is it possible to rename the file? Is there a place to ask questions such as this? Thanks, EChastain (talk) 16:07, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

That’s a bit of a puzzle. When I see a factual discrepancy in a file that comes from an online collection, I go to the source site to see where it may have originated. In this case the description has 1866 in three places (including the date); only the original caption has 1886 (as quoted above). It seems likely that the curators corrected the date based on the age of other images in the same collection, or some other external evidence—but there’s also a chance it was a typo that got propagated into several parts of the record. Personally, I’d be hesitant to override anything in the source without strong evidence; here I might change the Date field to something like “1866 (per National Archives; originally captioned 1886)” to point out the discrepancy without trying to settle it. I might also leave a note on the file’s Talk page. (Now I see someone has changed the original caption, which I will revert as soon as I‘ve finished this posting, because it’s quoted text we shouldn’t mess with.) It doesn’t appear that the uploader introduced the discrepancy, anyway.
In cases where a file needs renaming (and I’m not sure this is one), for those of us who aren’t admins or file movers, there’s a “Move“ item in the “More” menu near the top right of the screen. That takes you to a form where you choose the appropriate criterion (factual inaccuracy is #3) and give your rationale. The file will be tagged for attention by a user with the necessary privileges—usually pretty promptly IME.
I don’t know any good places for research questions on this site, but there may be a American-history WikiProject with an active noticeboard. There certainly are such on enWP, also the Reference Desk there. I usually see what I can turn up elsewhere online, searching both text and with TinEye: PD photos sometimes turn up on pages with (apparently) informed commentary from which one can glean a crucial fact or two.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 21:37, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
P.S. I’ve added to the description, but I left the categories alone. Something else occurred to me, if you want to pursue this question further. There’s a contact email on the source collection’s page: maybe someone there can trace the discrepancy in their documentation.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 21:56, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the file upload informationEdit

3rdWorldkid (talk) 11:54, 14 March 2015 (UTC) Thank you for your practical and helpful answer to my question at the Village Pump.

Not at all, @3rdWorldkid: feel free to drop me a line if you need help with anything else.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 20:10, 14 March 2015 (UTC)



I don't have any objections. I didn't do anything on this file, except processing a duplicate :) Pleclown (talk) 06:27, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Patroller!Edit

Hi Odysseus1479,

You now have the Patroller right and may call yourself a patroller! Please take a moment to read the updated Commons:Patrol to learn how Patrolling works and how we use it to fight vandalism.

As you know already, the patrolling functionality is enabled for all edits, not just for new-page creations. This enables us to keep track of, for example, edits made by anonymous users here on Commons.

We could use your help at the Counter Vandalism Unit. For example by patrolling an Anonymous-edits checklist and checking a day-part.

If you have any questions please leave a message on the CVU talkpage or ask for help on IRC in #wikimedia-commons.

English | മലയാളം | ಕನ್ನಡ | ತುಳು | +/−

If a revert needs explanation do not use the revert link. -- Rillke(q?) 20:18, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Btw, are you a chemist/ work or study in this field? Just curious. -- Rillke(q?) 20:21, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the confidence you show in granting this user right; I’m not sure how much I’ll use it, as what little counter-vandalism I‘ve done has been in response to what appeared on my watchlist, but sometime when I’m in a proactive mood I may well have a go at some recent changes. I assume there are backlogs there, like everywhere else … At any rate, even when I‘m in reactive mode the rollback right will come in handy; I have it on enWP so have a fair idea how it should be used.
My abortive university career included three years in an Honours Chemistry programme (ca. 1980). Having learned at least enough to know what a chemical structure should look like, and having since taken up the graphic-arts trade (starting with setting type, but the separate pre-press crafts have all been merged in this digital era) I’ve been able to handle some image requests in that area.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 20:57, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
One day, I want to see Wikimedia Commons supporting chemical file formats. Would you mind giving your opinion on ? It was a project from last year and I'd like to know what you think is most essential for bringing this feature to Wikipedia and Commons. Just create a dummy account with a dummy user name and a dummy password. Reload the account creation form in case the question is too stupid. -- Rillke(q?) 21:33, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, @Rillke, I don’t know enough about the possible uses to make very sensible recommendations about priorities. Not being familiar with the applications in the field I don‘t even recognize most of the data formats—I‘ve only played with Avogadro and Qutemol a bit. I do think it‘s an excellent idea and a worthwhile project, though. I‘ll have to use a newer browser to try out the tools in order to comment on the UI. While online SVG-mode editing would also be cool (on its own as well—which reminds me I haven’t yet tried the script you mentioned recently on the graphics board), offhand I think the rendering options, with the core editing functionality and ease of use, should be higher priorities so as to keep the focus narrow at first. That said, there may be advantages to simultaneous development of some components, but you’d have a much better idea than I what those might be. I’ve done a little Python programming (mostly astronomical & calendrical stuff) but am nowhere near “thinking in“ it, as the book title says; the only language I know well is PostScript.
BTW there have been quite a few red exclamation marks appearing on my watchlist, so it seems I can do a bit of patrolling without straying from my usual haunts; I can certainly make clearing those part of my routine, whether or not I feel like going out on the prowl.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 01:02, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Category:Jocksthorn FarmEdit

Since you didn't leave an edit summary, I can't understand why you moved this and other categories out of Category:Kilmaurs, especially since I'm still in the middle of working on it. It was my intention to explain that Category:Lands of Tour and Kirkland is a parallel category relating principally to Category:History of East Ayrshire. Was there a cogent reason for the moves? Chees. Rodhullandemu (talk) 21:38, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

@Rodhullandemu: sorry to interrupt a work in progress. I thought they were overcategorized, the Lands cat being already under Kilmaurs. We don’t seem to recognize in policy what enWP calls “non-diffusing” categories, so I tend to apply COM:OVERCAT pretty strictly.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 21:56, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Overcat is OK for a two-dimensional graph structure but I think that sometimes it's necessary to be flexible when considering a third dimension (such as "history"). My concern was that someone looking for, e.g Kilmaurs Castle would expect to find it under Kilmaurs and not have to rummage through obscure subcats to find it. Rodhullandemu (talk) 22:01, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Understood; I wish the category system allowed for more ‘built-in’ dimensions, something like the system of relationships in Wikidata, rather than relying entirely on the semantics of their names to distinguish ‘orthogonal’ trees. But that doesn’t seem likely to happen soon, and a system developed with the WPs in mind might not work out so well here …
One possibility in this case, @Rodhullandemu, would be to not put the Lands under Kilmaurs, but to link the cats with see-also templates instead.
Otherwise, it might help to indicate its “parallel” or non-diffusing status by giving it a sort-key starting with a space or punctuation character, as is often done with intersection cats that are less obvious or ‘natural’ to the topic than those in the alphabetic section. Ideally, though, IMO it should go under History of Kilmaurs instead, which would weaken the impression of overcategorization by a generation’s distance while simultaneously providing a rationale (and a bridge to History of East Ayrshire, from which it would then be removed as a direct child). Categories with only one entry are generally deprecated by some, but in a situation like this I think the explanatory & navigational benefits of the additional layer would outweigh the untidiness.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 00:00, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

flickr washingEdit

Hello, my native wikipedia is subject to flickr washing by this source . You can see, originaly sources' license is not the same as of claimed on the flickr page. I'm tagging the photos for speedy deletion however I'd like to add it to commons blacklist too , but I couldn't. Any suggestions? thanks HakanIST (talk) 08:31, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @HakanIST: I have added it to the blacklist. Thank you for letting us know. Green Giant (talk) 08:58, 18 September 2015 (UTC)


Hello, this image is a blatant copyright infringement, I tried to tag it for speedy deletion with Template:Db-f9 , but the uploader has removed it, just so you knowHakanIST (talk) 10:01, 19 September 2015 (UTC)


Globetrotter19 (talk) 16:14, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Blacklisted Flickr userEdit

Hello, this flickr account appears to be blacklisted at Commons:Questionable_Flickr_images , but apparently still can be sourced for uploads, please check, thanks HakanIST (talk) 19:01, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

@HakanIST: Sorry, I’m not in a position to do anything about this; I’m not a reviewer nor am I involved in Flickr downloads. Try posting on the QFI Talk page, or maybe the Village Pump or another noticeboard … or ask an admin for directions; I really have no idea.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 09:09, 27 October 2015 (UTC)



Thanks for your intervention on the deletion request of the above file. I'm a relatively infrequent contributor to Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons, so I wasn't sure how to respond. I'm concerned about the user submitting the deletion request (Tulsi Bhagat), because if you look at the link he references (, it is not a Wikipedia/Wikimedia link and when I clicked on it, I got a warning message that it was a risky site. I'm concerned that he is challenging a large number of images to get people to click on that link, which then might install a virus on someone's computer. I'm not sure how to handle this situation, so any advice you can give would be appreciated. —Djvarley (talk)

@Djvarley: As I mentioned at the AN, I don’t think the site is malicious, just, shall we say, fly-by-night: hosting an improperly attributed Wikipedia mirror and not keeping their security certification up to date. I’m inclined to believe the nominator has been sincerely misled by the spurious copyright notice there.
I notice that you put “own work‘ on the files without indicating your source; I presume you worked from the common base map, which should be linked and its author attributed. Please update the descriptions accordingly, then briefly explain the provenance of the images on the DR pages, and they should be fine.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 09:20, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

SVG version of Wikipedia puzzle piece trophiesEdit

I don't like those color shades you used in gold and bronze ones. I think gold one doesn't look like gold at all and bronze one looks more gold, than bronze :/ Could you recolor these two? I suggest these things in a Google search for an inspiration of a gold shade and these things in a Google search for an inspiration of a bronze shade. Is it possible to recolor them to be closer to these colors? Overall I must thank you for your previous work. --Dvorapa (talk) 16:45, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Deletion Nomination HelpEdit

Hello Odysseus1479! Back in 2015, I discussed with you an image I wanted deleted at the following URL: The image has since been scrubbed from all known websites at my request, including the host website (which was the original authority that took the picture). I have searched the image, and no other pages show up except for Wikimedia; Wikimedia is the last website I know that still hosts the image when the name "Tiffani Ali" is searched. The picture has caused me significant distress, as I'm still hoping to get it removed after two years. Could I please request that the image be deleted, or in the very least, have my name removed from the "Comment section" under file history, and "Image Data" under Metadata? Like before, my hope is that the image will not appear when the name "Tiffani Ali" is searched. I am reaching out to you, despite there being a nomination request already open (at the following URL:, in hopes that you could help me in resolving this issue. Any help would leave me very grateful. Kajetanolo (talk) 04:22, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Commons Meetup in Montréal in AugustEdit

Hello Odysseus1479,

I would like to invite you to the Commons Categorizer Meetup 2017 in Montréal in August (the exact date is not fixed yet and will be determined by the Wikimania programme committee). If you want, you can add your name to the list of interested users and propose discussion topics.


--MB-one (talk) 10:25, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank youEdit

I know I sent a "thank you" via the system, but I want to follow that up with a real one. Never hesitate to straighten out stuff for customer service on my talk page!! I am utterly grateful you did that!! Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:04, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

@Ellin Beltz: no problem; since your page has a pretty high turnover and there had already been another comment added, I thought the subsequent threads might have gotten neglected or become harder to dig out of the history.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 01:00, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Deletion requestEdit

In which other sister projects has my image been involved in?--Sweetcorn (talk) 09:23, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

@Sweetcorn: according to the file description page, the image is used to illustrate the Dolo River articles on the English, Italian, and Emilian-Romagnol Wikipedias.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 02:59, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Request for deletionEdit

Please refer to following comment by you for my deletion request-

It appears that was already tried (see File:कामनन्दकीयः_नीतिसारः.pdf) but the suggested name is already taken by another file. @अनुनाद सिंह: please verify that your file doesn’t duplicate the existing one, then make a new request proposing a slightly different name.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 21:09, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

I want File:कामनन्दकीयः_नीतिसारः.pdf to rename as File:कामन्दकीयः_नीतिसारः.pdf which are different in spelling (NOT the same). BUT the problem is that I have also REDIRECTED File:कामन्दकीयः_नीतिसारः.pdf to File:कामनन्दकीयः_नीतिसारः.pdf , which means you have to delete this redirection first and then rename File:कामनन्दकीयः_नीतिसारः.pdf as File:कामन्दकीयः_नीतिसारः.pdf -- अनुनाद सिंह (talk) 06:19, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, @अनुनाद सिंह, I am not an administrator, so I can’t be of any practical assistance. I suggest you first tag the redirect for speedy deletion with {{SD|G7}} (unless someone else has edited it in the meantime). Once the redirect is gone then your rename request should be able to proceed.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 07:04, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

My answer to the question "is this really a lost case"?Edit

Dear Odysseus1479,

I thank you that you took the time to come to my help answering me at the help page yesterday. The country is France. The newspaper and the flyer were published in France 1963. I repeat, the newspaper does not excist anymore just like the publishing house. In the meantime the contact with whom I was exchanging emails about this matter, sent me today one more email saying:

The fact that we do not know who the heirs are is completely different to not having heirs. I cannot help you on that with a ticket, because I have no proof that the legal owner of the right gave thier approval for the publication. If other users have a solution, it will be for the best.

Do you think someone could help me and upload the photo directly to ENWP under those circumstances? I am afraid I would mess it up, my heart is on that photo because it is so unique, showing a future author signing her first international bestseller. An author who received from the French president the National Order of Merit one of the highest orders in France. Here is the link to the website to take the photo and I would love to add it on the article: Catherine (1963 novel) Thank you very much for helping me with this matter. Have a nice day Laramie1960 (talk) 17:57, 6 December 2017 (UTC)


Hi, Odysseus. Do you want to be an administrator? If you agree, then I create a request for that. Taivo (talk) 09:37, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@Taivo: this comes as quite a surprise, as I’ve never thought of myself as admin material. I’ll admit to having envied the ability to see deleted content on occasion—usually just to satisfy idle curiosity—but otherwise the idea has scarcely crossed my mind. However, I’ve been seriously considering the proposition over the last day or so, and have concluded that I’m not ready to stand as a candidate, despite being most flattered by the suggestion.
Let me try and explain, without going on at too great length … First, in terms of personality, while I’m comfortable enough offering opinions and suggestions here & there, actually making decisions is harder for me, especially in the face of disagreement; my instinctive response to a confrontation is to withdraw and find something else to do. As an admin I wouldn’t have the (very convenient) excuse of “I can’t do anything about it anyway” to fall back on! OTOH I don’t think this defect is insurmountable: the more confident I am that my thinking conforms to policy & consensus, the less I’m affected by emotions—be they others‘ expressions of anger or my own fear of causing upset and desire to avoid conflict—and such confidence can grow with experience. Second, more pragmatically, I’m not sure my track-record to date will withstand critical scrutiny: my contributions have been quite intermittent, albeit mostly of decent quality (if I do say so myself), and driven much more by personal interest or whimsy than any thought of what’s most needed for the general good. Many areas of the project, with the relevant policies, still remain quite unfamiliar to me.
All that said, you‘ve sparked my interest, so I‘m proposing the following programme for the next few months:
– I was already considering applying for the file-mover right, which I now intend to do sooner rather than later.
– I will try to participate more in DRs &c., and pay more attention to policy-related discussions and other areas outside my immediate interests.
– Hitherto my patrolling activity has been mostly restricted to what appears on my watchlist or what I’ve happened upon while categorizing &c.; I’ll make more effort to patrol RCs in general, so as to acquire a better sense of patterns of vandalism & the like.
– Having rarely visited COM:RfA, I‘ll review some past requests (successful & unsuccessful) and possibly vote on any new ones that come up; I‘ll also devote some time to studying the admin policy & help pages.
– With a better-rounded résumé and a more-sustained record of contributions, I would be most honoured to accept a nomination from you, perhaps by early summer.
How does that sound? Thank you very much for thinking of me; I hope you aren’t disappointed by my misgivings. I would be most grateful for any further suggestions you may have toward increasing my chances of passing.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 23:10, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


But why did you undo also ArchverBot's edit? --jdx Re: 09:01, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

@Jdx: because there were a few threads that had already started as of the old revision but were still active (or recently so) as of today. The more recent posts having disappeared, the bot thought those discussions were stale and removed them. I left the partial versions in the archive; I intend to check and remove them once the entire threads get archived in due time. (I’ve already removed the duplicates of truly old threads.)—Odysseus1479 (talk) 09:13, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Filemover!Edit


Hi Odysseus1479, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

  • Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{Rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
  • Please do not tag redirects as {{Speedy}}. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references.
  • Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

Deutsch | English | 한국어 | മലയാളം | Русский | Українська | 中文(臺灣) | +/−

-- ~riley (talk) 23:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

@~riley: thank you very much. I’m not sure I understand the Delinker business yet, but if it’s still unclear when the occasion arises, before doing anything rash with files that are in use I’ll be sure to ask for help.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 23:14, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
I don't think that part really applies anymore? It does it automatically as far as I know. ~riley (talk) 23:38, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

@~riley: I‘ve dipped into Media renaming requests needing target; before I do too much damage, could you please check the three moves I made? Do you think the names are specific enough? (The requests seem to have been done en masse; I don’t know what‘s expected in such cases. I also removed a couple of requests where the names seemed reasonably descriptive or specific.) There were already chains of redirects from previous moves, which the script seemed to take care of, but I‘d like to be sure that worked. And one question: if I were to miss a sister-site link before I rename a file, is there any way to find it after the fact? It seems redirects don‘t have a “Global file usage” section.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 05:16, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Look good to me; most of what a user recommends is trustworthy. I try to make it specific while removing meaningless numbers. File:Nojhan - Saint-Aignan baie 16 - IMG 3398.jpg could be File:Nojhan - Saint-Aignan baie 16 - 1865.jpg; try to utilize dates or things from the description to replace meaningless numbers such as IMG xxxx. Your account, when moving the file, will attempt to replace the usage of the file using your account and when it cannot, it will utilize CommonsDelinker. You don't have to worry about global file usage. ~riley (talk) 05:27, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
@~riley: thanks. The problem with files in this cat is that there‘s no user recommendation. I was trying to be conservative, without imposing my personal preference, which would be something like Saint-Aignan baie 16 - Nojhan, while the uploader chose to put the Flickr account name first.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 05:43, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Yes, that is what I figured. Use the category description to your benefit and try to remove meaningless things such as IMG xxx and Flickr xx. :) ~riley (talk) 05:47, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

File:Basketball courts.svgEdit

Hey, how's it going?

Contacting you because you were the last one to update the above diagram, back in 2010. In the years since (where has the time gone?!?), it's become outdated, most notably in that NCAA men's and women's rules now use identically sized courts now. I'm wondering, if you have the time, if could update it. My svg-fu is particularly weak, else I would do it myself. Oknazevad (talk) 19:53, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

@Oknazevad: sure, as long as you’re not in a rush—I’m a terrible procrastinator. Do you have links to the current rules prescribing court dimensions? I had subsequently made a set of key diagrams, which might need updating as well: File:Basketball keys.svg. I think I have the original court drawing in a backup somewhere, although it’ll have to be converted from an obsolete format; the computer I used (a Mac G5) died of hard-drive failure a couple of years ago, and I haven‘t got around to resurrecting it.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 22:05, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
The current NCAA court diagram is here. The NBA one is here, but I don't think that has changed at all. The WNBA one is here, and the FIBA one is here. Hopefully those are useful. Oknazevad (talk) 17:19, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

About copyright violationEdit

Hello, Odysseus1479! What can I do about that? This user revert all the speedy deletions and my note in their talkpage. Thank you. --Phailoteam (talk) 14:15, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

@Phailoteam: as I understand the procedures, speedy-deletion requests should be contested by converting them to a regular DR, not by simply removing the template. (Deleting user-talk messages is discouraged, but this isn’t so important—and at least you know the note was seen.) So I think the next step will be to start a mass deletion request to get other users involved. Have a look at the instructions on that page, and let me know if you need help starting the request. I’ve only looked at a couple of the files, but from what I’ve seen the artwork seems to have been executed by users, rather than simply copying existing images—so the question is over the copyright on the underlying designs. Many of them are probably not eligible for protection in the USA (simple geometry, text, & conventional symbols) so it’s their status in Greece that will be most relevant. I’m afraid I don’t know anything about Greek law beyond what we have at COM:CRT#Greece, so I have no idea how the discussion will turn out, but it’s worth having anyway.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 19:03, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global surveyEdit

WMF Surveys, 18:22, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia surveyEdit

WMF Surveys, 01:20, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia surveyEdit

WMF Surveys, 00:30, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

uploads. importantEdit

needing guidance. --Rassa777 (talk) 00:48, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

@Rassa777: what exactly do you need help with? As I said on the Help Desk, you must provide a precise source and evidence of a free licence in order for your uploads to be kept on this site. Search engines like Bing and Google are not valid sources, because they are not the publishers of the content that appears in their results; what’s needed is a link to the actual page where the original image appears or is listed. You should also start with the assumption that anything you see online is protected by copyright, until you find a statement or other evidence that it is in the public domain or available under a free licence, which must be included on the file page here. See COM:LIC for the kinds of licence that are acceptable. Feel free to ask any specific questions, and I’ll try and answer (or at least direct you to the best place to ask, if I don’t know myself).—Odysseus1479 (talk) 20:13, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Corcern thingEdit

What license is permitted for Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic photos that are from flickr?

@HutheMeow: sorry, that is not considered a free licence here, so we are not allowed to upload such photos. Acceptable licences must allow commercial use, and must also allow alteration & combination with other works.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 15:54, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks OTRSEdit

I want to thank you again for the tip on the COM:OTRS. Prof.D.H.R. (talk) 18:08, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Help: Deletion nominations without readingEdit

User:FunkMonk has been banning images legally posted by the User: Yewtharaptor, legally owned by his autor, Lucas Attwell

The links to DeviantArt on "Source"

Yewtharaptor (talk) 14:52, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

License on DeviantArt?Edit

Hello about Drzewica Re01-02, Emausaurus, Ohmdenosaurus and the New Saltriovenator. The license statement has to be modified on DeviantArt no? Something like this?

If is That, it will be tomorrow (For me)

Yewtharaptor (talk) 1:50, 25 December 2018 (UTC)


Licenses are now reworked. Now on commercial and derivative use.

Yewtharaptor (talk) 1:50, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@Yewtharaptor: I notice you posted updates on the Talk pages of a couple of those DRs. Please post on the Project pages, or your messages may be overlooked. Anyway, all the above are now showing acceptable licences except the first one (Ohmdenosaurus), which still has the NC-ND. As FunkMonk suggested, things will go much smoother if you make sure that permission statements are in place at the source before uploading and that the template on each file page matches the original licence exactly (including the version number where applicable).—Odysseus1479 (talk) 19:15, 26 December 2018 (UTC) P.S. In addition to the files at DR, please change the licence template on the Saltriovenator file page, likewise any others you may have uploaded that aren’t the same as the licence shown at the source.—19:44, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

OHS watermark on File:Swan Island in 1920.jpgEdit

I have a question about the higher res version of File:Swan Island in 1920.jpg that you uploaded from the Oregon Historical Society. I'm assuming you grabbed the image from this page, where the image has a faint watermark. I'm not seeing the watermark on the default view of the file you uploaded, but when I previewed the image as a thumbnail on Wikipedia, the watermark was clearly visible. Are you seeing the same thing as I am? I put the image in thumbnail view on my Commons user page for reference. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 01:35, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

@Lord Bolingbroke: sorry, I didn’t notice the watermark at the time—if I had, I probably wouldn’t have replaced it because the resolution of the larger image is not great either … I’ll let you decide which is the lesser of two evils: feel free to revert if you prefer the smaller, unmarked one. As for your not seeing it on the file description page, I guess your browser is showing you an earlier version from its cache, so if you purge it the current version should appear.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 01:50, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
Yep, after I purged my cache I saw the watermark on the file description image. I've restored the original version for now, which I agree is not ideal. I might be able to get a higher res version from the original picture at the OHS library? I'll try to take a look within the next week and see if they have it available for scanning. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 16:39, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
@Lord Bolingbroke: fine, and the higher the resolution of any clean version you can find, the better. (Ideally in a lossless format like PNG or TIFF, too.)—Odysseus1479 (talk) 20:30, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Les Arts arabesEdit

Hi, Could you please tell me how did you find the URL to get this high resolution image? I could make a script to get the whole book. Thanks, Yann (talk) 01:16, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

@Yann: replying by email.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 06:42, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Odysseus1479".