Open main menu

Wikimedia Commons β

User talk:Pigsonthewing

BotEdit

Hello, your bot has been blocked in accordance with the Commons:Bot policy in reference to "All bots running on Wikimedia Commons must have advance permission to do so. Permission is needed whether or not the bot requires a bot flag." Even if you are not requesting a bot flag, you must get advanced permission to run the account. ~riley (talk) 23:03, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@~riley: The account has never, and is not intended to be, run as a bot on this project. The block is therefore without foundation. Please be sure to mention that in your unblock notice. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:06, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
You are running an account with the word "bot" in it and tripping rate limits. I have already blocked it and I will be happy to unblock it if you operate it in accordance with the Commons bot policy as I have linked above. Why you thought this was a good idea, I have no idea. ~riley (talk) 23:12, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
@~riley: It only tripped a rate limit because it was not auto-patrolled (as my main account is). As stated above, The account has never, and is not intended to be, run as a bot on this project, and has never been used contrary to the bot policy. There is no prohibition in the bot policy on non-bot accounts using that string in their name; on users having a secondary non-bot account, nor on users using non-bot accounts with tools like Flickr2Commons. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:15, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
COM:UPOLICY and en:WP:UPOLICY both state accounts with the name "bot" fall under inappropriate usernames. You are more than welcome to create a normal secondary account like everyone else. ~riley (talk) 23:19, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
~riley and @Pigsonthewing:, I like to point out my alternate account Artix Kreiger 2. I don't know & have the programmjng knowledge for operation of a bot and I use it for tasks outside of bot tasks as they require it to be operated in very very specific tasks. However, I use it for mass repetitive edits such as cat-a-lot, flickr2commons, as well as general cleanupu of my uploads. Most of my manual edits come from my main account. Artix Kreiger (talk) 12:22, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
Artix Kreiger Yes, thank you for demonstrating an acceptable alternative account for semi-automated to automated edits. This is what I mean by a "normal secondary account". ~riley (talk) 19:04, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Audio & WikidataEdit

Moved from Template talk:Wikidata Infobox#Audio

Hi. Mike has suggested my talking to you, as you've worked with audio files. I have been concerned with how accessible our resources are, particularly after having run two programs on producing audio files ideally helpful for people with partial and high visual impairment. Audio files that these programs have produced can be found at Wikipédia Falada on Wikipedia in Portuguese. After an initial workshop with people with visual impairment, at an NGO called Laramara, I have preliminarily found out that: (1) audio files are indeed helpful for people with visual impairment, especially because (2) automated softwares bug on reading Wikipedia (particularly when images or symbols are present, i.e., entries on mathematics) and (3) image captions are not sufficient for a clear understanding. I have also found out that: (4) if it was the case that automated softwares did a good job automated reading would be preferred to human-read content, as humans tend to be too "theatrical" when producing this kind of content; and (5) though audio resources are good they are mostly un-accessible on our projects, as people with visual impairment are unable to get to the play button, particularly on infoboxes. On a specific early finding, I have been told that (6) Wikidata is "completely un-acessible" for people with visual impairment, but I am not sure this assessment is not to some extent also associated to the fact that Wikidata editing can be hard to newbies in general, though it is probably the case that Wikidata editing can be particularly hard on people with visual impairment. I have become especially interest in accessibility on Wikipedia as because of new laws that were passed recently in Brazil I have had more students with disabilities, especially with high visual impairment, and I have been wondering what they can get from Wikipedia education programs and what we can get from their experience to improve the projects. Sorry for deviating, Mike Peel :) . --Joalpe (talk) 12:17, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

@Joalpe: d:Wikidata:Accessibility is available. On Wikipedia, see en:Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility (which has a Portuguese equivalent at pt:Wikipédia:Acessibilidade); and en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Accessibility. My friend User:Graham87 may also wish to comment. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:02, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the note, Andy. @Joalpe: Yes, the play button is hard to get to for screen reader users like me. I just download the file and play it in a media player, but I realise that might not always be possible for other users. Maths symbols can be read out using screen readers with MathML; JAWS reads them natively while NVDA can do so with Math Player. As for Wikidata, I don't have any problems editing it, but I find it's sometimes not intuitive what to do when I'm stuck (which is true for all users). Graham87 (talk) 13:51, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Old namesEdit

As far as I know, we don't want separate categories that are just different names for the same thing. E.g., Category:Bombay just redirects to Category:Mumbai. Commons:Categories says "In practice, it implies that you'll associate a single subject with a given category." That's why I redirected Category:Birmingham Nature Centre to Category:Birmingham Wildlife Conservation Park, it's just an old name for the same thing. I know ships are an exception for some reason. --ghouston (talk) 23:28, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Pigsonthewing".