Open main menu

User talk:Rillke/LicenseReview.js

< User talk:Rillke
License review (list of reviewers)



Lemill Web Albums


Other reviews


To install, put the following line into your common.js:


Is this documented? And should it perhaps be a gadget, or at least linked from some relevant help pages? Rd232 (talk) 19:57, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

It is far from being ready. See User:ZooFari/licensereviewer.js -- RE rillke questions? 20:05, 9 November 2011 (UTC)


Flickr Blacklist checkEdit

Does it work upon reviewing? Blocked Flickr user was not detected here --Denniss (talk) 01:15, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry. It needs the Id for the check. But in the very near future, I'll include information from Flinfo (automatically fetched on demand, optional to opt-in). In most cases User:FlickreviewR adds the Id before a human attempts to review. I don't know why it hasn't done here. -- RE rillke questions? 10:01, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Flickrreview didn't have a chance cause I catched the file on upload via latest files. It would be ideal if the script could check both author ID and name to catch the blacklisted ones. --Denniss (talk) 13:24, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Of course. This would require loading the huge page each time, or I store the blacklisted ids and aliases in your browser, which would mean loading jStore before checking... But I think, I'll do the latter one since jStore is something that could be useful elsewhere as well. I will also try to use flinfo's API to get the required information so reviewing will become much more convenient. -- RE rillke questions? 14:37, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Vector users with modern browsers will find the links in the advanced edit-tab nowEdit

I think since it's basically editing, this is justified. If you encounter problems or you find it annoying, let me know, please. Thank you. -- RE rillke questions? 17:16, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

GFDL migration reviewEdit

Would it be possible to add an option for GFDL license migration? It'll make life easier if you could change it with two or so clicks instead of editing pages all the time. --Denniss (talk) 12:06, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Tomorrow, I look into this. -- Rillke(q?) 18:36, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Also this task took much longer than intended to complete. If you encounter problems, let me know and purge your browser's cache. Thank you. -- Rillke(q?) 13:35, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
Two auto-error-reports from me, couldn't detect GFDL-Self and Self|GFDL --Denniss (talk) 01:38, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks one issue fixed. The next issue (double migration) will be fixed tomorrow. -- Rillke(q?) 20:53, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
1) Thanks for your work. 2) Please have a look at this diff - is the additional placement intended? --Denniss (talk) 02:14, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
No it wasn't. I didn't recognize that there is a third alias while swiftly looking at the template code at Template:License migration and it was not documented. Will be fixed. -- Rillke(q?) 13:48, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
New problem - does not or not always detect custom templates for migration, GFDL-GMT is such a case. GFDL-user-de is another one with problems (error message) and in one case it chose Bild-GFDL from the upload history because it didn't catch GFDL-user-de. --Denniss (talk) 17:49, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Sounds like a serious bug. The original upload log should not be touched. Never ever. Going to look into this… -- Rillke(q?) 21:26, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Wrong choice of words from my side, was not the original upload log but the upload history shown in transferred files. --Denniss (talk) 22:32, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
I hope the last changes fixed some bugs and did not introduce new ones. Today I've no more time to test. -- Rillke(q?) 22:05, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
PS. Supporting special user templates doesn't sound like a good idea; they should not create licenses with migration params or migration should be done directly at the templates or a date should be passed to the template so it can guess whether to review or whatever. -- Rillke(q?) 22:07, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
One more GFDL template to add: GFDL-1.3. Some user templates could get their migration on the template side, especially if created 2010 or later while others like GFDL-GMT can't. --Denniss (talk) 22:32, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
  Done for GFDL-1.3 -- Rillke(q?) 22:50, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Please also add GFDL-ja - file for testing. --Denniss (talk) 17:11, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
{{GFDL-ja}} is leaking Help:Machine-readable data. StockPhoto will also not find it until it is updated. Shouldn't we redirect this template to {{GFDL}}? GFDL also has a ja translation. -- Rillke(q?) 18:15, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
No redirect please, affected by the disclaimer issue. --Denniss (talk) 18:32, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Another edit requestEdit

  1. At File:Danah boyd (2).jpg is no box to confirm/deny the license next to the license tag, just the two ones at the top.
  2. At File:War booty Ki-45.jpg it's the same although cause by a different template.

If you have some spare time you may want to add support for them. --Denniss (talk) 00:23, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done. What a confusing template system. -- Rillke(q?) 17:42, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. --Denniss (talk) 20:58, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Rillke(q?) 17:42, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Script zerschießt DesignEdit

Hallo Rillke,

falls das Script noch (für vector) gewartet wird: bei mir zerschießt das Script das Design (ohne andere Scripte, habs mit Firefox und Chrome getestet) Das ganze sieht dann so aus:

Viele Grüße, CennoxX (talk) 12:32, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Mit Englischer UI sieht es ganz normal aus… mal nachsehen. -- Rillke(q?) 13:30, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Mit debug=true sieht es nun auch in der Englischen UI so aus. -- Rillke(q?) 13:53, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

  Fixed Danke für den Hinweis. Offenbar gab es da Änderungen in MediaWiki. -- Rillke(q?) 13:53, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Rillke(q?) 13:53, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Bug and feature requestEdit

First the feature request: please add cc-by-2.1-jp (EDIT:+ cc-by-sa-2.1-jp) for the "Change License" selector button (Licensereview Photozou). Second the bug: On File:834923.jpg the script did not detect the source link because the image has no infobox (not the bug) so the source link to be added to the review template contained just the http prefix. Despite clicking cancel this invalid review was saved anyway (that's the Bug) with "License Review passed" edit comment. --Denniss (talk) 15:29, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Done and fixed. If something remains, please tell me right away. This script truly needs a major revamping. -- Rillke(q?) 22:53, 5 August 2013 (UTC)


Can you please add support for {{NROER}} template as well? Please review the template too if possible. --Sreejith K (talk) 14:27, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

  Done (3 files?) Please purge your browser’s cache. (You only need to do it once.)

Internet Explorer: press Ctrl+F5, Firefox: hold down  Shift while clicking Reload (or press Ctrl+F5 or Ctrl+ Shift+R), Opera/Konqueror: press F5, Safari: hold down  Shift+alt while clicking Reload, Chrome: hold down  Shift while clicking Reload
Note: in MacOS  Cmd for Ctrl

  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Rillke(q?) 15:17, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

"license -" bei {{LicenseReview}}, Erkennung von {{licensereview}} & Kategorien bei PhotozouEdit

Hallo Rillke,

Viele Grüße, --CennoxX (talk) 20:45, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Katrin Albsteiger Porträt.jpgEdit

For some unknown reason I can't review this image and others from the CDU/CSU site. It loads, let me change the source link and looks like saving something but it didn't change anything. Using FF 17.09 ESR on Win7 x64 with Monobook. --Denniss (talk) 20:08, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

It simply didn't like CDU. No, seriously, it was just a template redirect that was not recognized. Perhaps I should make the script query all template redirects and store them in local storage. -- Rillke(q?) 21:21, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Rillke(q?) 15:43, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Seleccion galega feminina Campioa futbol praia 2014.jpgEdit

For some unknown reson I can't change the license from cc-by-sa-4.0 to the required 3.0 version despite having it as option in "change license". --Denniss (talk) 19:38, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Should work for cc-by-sa 4 now. -- Rillke(q?) 23:21, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Rillke(q?) 15:43, 16 September 2015 (UTC)


A talk page notification was added without a newline, resulting in broken syntax. Looks like a bug. --Stefan4 (talk) 02:05, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

@Stefan4: Thanks for the report -- always interesting to see how template changes affect the whole system. Anyway, a new line should now be preceded to the template. Go to the raw script page and hard-refresh it to get rid of the old version in your browser's cache. -- Rillke(q?) 03:36, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Rillke(q?) 15:43, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Fehler bei Flickrreview FunktionEdit

Fehlermeldung für Zeile 716/717: $.escapeRE is not a function. FF 31.8.0 ESR, Win7x64 --Denniss (talk) 08:17, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Danke fürs Berichten und   Fixed :) -- Rillke(q?) 10:27, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Funktioniert, Danke. Scheinen ja einige Gadgets von betroffen zu sein. Hat da mal wieder jemand an der MW-Software gespielt? --Denniss (talk) 12:46, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Es gibt immer man Neuerungen und wenn man dann nicht aufpasst, schlägt der Fehlerteufel zu. Problem war, dass viele Gadgets etwas benutzt haben, ohne dessen Abhängigkeit anzugeben. War in der Vergangenheit auch kein Problem, denn MediaWiki selbst hatte es benutzt und geladen. Nun wurde diese Funktion in MediaWiki als veraltet markiert und MediaWiki hat es nicht mehr geladen. Und bumps, schon ging die Pfeife los … -- Rillke(q?) 13:46, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Rillke(q?) 15:43, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

New button location: NEXT TO THE EDIT TABEdit

In case you use the Vector skin, the license + and license - links are now (again) in a drop-down that can be accessed next to the edit page tab. Thanks for using LicenseReview.js -- Rillke(q?) 15:47, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

PD MarkEdit

Hey Rillke! Would it be possible to add an option to "license -" that includes {{subst:Flickr-public domain mark/subst}} if the Flickr file is licensed under PD Mark, instead of whatever license the uploader put? It'd be much appreciated! Logan Talk Contributions 09:14, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks &   Done. Although license recognition is almost impossible at Commons as long as we haven't structured data. -- Rillke(q?) 11:15, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Feature request: possibility to insert free text as rationale when refuting a reviewEdit


Is there any possibility to include a free text field for a rationale when some image do not pass the review? No one of the options in the drop down menu is truly fitting in cases as e.g. this one (the problem was solved afterwards with more information from the uploader). There was a source, the licensing was technically OK, but there were doubts about its rightfulness. I'd like to have the possibility to write some explanatory text that is used in the subsequent actions and have a choice of them (speedy, DR, maybe posting on the uploader's talk page). Any way to implement this? Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 16:20, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

No Flickr review necessaryEdit

@Rillke, great tool—thanks for your work. I had been using User:ZooFari/licensereviewer.js and didn't know there was an update... It would be really great to have an option for when an article is tagged as needing a Flickr review but has a source totally unrelated to Flickr (i.e., it didn't need a Flickr review in the first place). Ideally there would be an option to (1) Remove the Flickr template with one click, no harm no foul, and (2) Remove the Flickr template with one click AND also tag for no source speedy. Thoughts? czar 20:27, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Turn off Flickr thanksEdit

What's the best way to turn off the Flickr suggested "thanks" text pop-up? Is there an option or would I need to fork the code? czar 16:26, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

I guess you could do window.LRThxPatterns = {flickr:''}; before loading the script. Could you try that? -- Rillke(q?) 16:33, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
It removes the thanks window but it doesn't auto-save the page (have to click "save" manually) czar 19:08, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
While the submit button is greyed out, it checks the flickr blacklists. A patch must consider this. -- Rillke(q?) 20:04, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
I wonder how many people use the "Thanks" text regularly. I imagine most license reviewers have it saved somewhere else if they use it. Might be better to just turn off that step? czar 21:05, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

{{Indian navy}}Edit

Please add support for reviewing this, per Category:Unreviewed photos from Thanks. Reventtalk 01:41, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

I again request to add this to script. As a reviewer, there are more 350 images from this cat, manual confirmation would be tedious. --Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · mail) 12:19, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

License changeEdit

Is there a way where you can change the license always, even where there is no review template? MCMLXXXIX 14:00, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Suggestion: Automatically archive in Wayback MachineEdit

It would be great if the last step (when the license review template is added after successful review) would include saving the source page in the internet Archive's Wayback Machine. This can be done by simply requesting the URL '' +the source link, e.g. Archiving may fail in some cases (in particular if the source site disallows it per robots.txt), but since this is not an essential step either, it's not necessary to implement error handling or other processing of the response. Regards, HaeB (talk) 06:01, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Rillke/LicenseReview.js".