Open main menu

Wikimedia Commons β

User talk:Russavia/Archive 13

< User talk:Russavia
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

RE: Email 2

Working on it. Since the original version of the video is now public, we should probably discuss any future concern publicly rather than through Email. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 20:31, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

No worries, I think the artist will appreciate the link to the video; it gives it better context too -- unfortunately I don't have time to go into the issue of licencing of the song in the video -- it sounds like an original track (Shazaam didn't return anything) -- so we have what we have and other stuff is on Vimeo. russavia (talk) 20:43, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Done. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 02:32, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Category:Files uploaded for Russavia (Aero Icarus)

Its populating... -- とある白い猫 ちぃ? 16:16, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I guess we can say that aviation subjects will be amongst the most comprehensively represented subjects on Commons before too long. russavia (talk) 17:13, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


Please give me a bot flag. Greeting! --Kolega2357 (talk) 00:49, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Can you please follow the rest of the process at Commons:Bots/Requests. You need to explain what it is the bot will do, you also need to add the request here, etc. The community can then look at it. Cheers, russavia (talk) 07:47, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

The Daily Dot

Request for de-adminship and de-bureaucratship

I think I've sorted out the basics to help with some uploads. Minor clarifications:

  • File names, I'm thinking of using <Aircraft field (reversed)> + "AN"+< unique database number>, giving results looking like "File:Airbus A319-111, EasyJet Airline AN2272320.jpg"
  • {{Custom license marker}}, I am not using this, it is an upload wizard bit of trickery.
  • I will create my own check category, let me know if you have something else ready to use.

Run into a problem with a 12px credit bar being added to all images. Due to my old OSX, I cannot easily batch crop. I may be able to solve this, or be forced to run from windows. It is a problem I've had before, so I would like to solve it, but things will be delayed here. All the rest now working and ready to go. -- (talk) 15:22, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Processed more than 400, and it is mostly working. Where odd characters are in the url, I'm not bothering. This has only happened once withäth-(Air/Learjet-31A/2160659/L and working around this seems too much effort compared to someone teasing these by hand at some future time. I raised the crop question on Commons:Bots/Work_requests, for the time being it's on the back burner and can wait until everything of interest is uploaded. -- (talk) 06:54, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

  • FYI, I ran a quick experiment of nudging the re-compression to 99 rather than 98, you can see at File:Airbus A319-111, Frontier Airlines AN1394171.jpg this results in the file being significantly larger than the original, even though it is smaller in resolution. This indicates to me that by choosing the '98', this seems to accurately reflect a standard compression level of the original, and I doubt that there would be any visible change that was detectable, even by use of tools, whereas re-compressing to a higher standard than the original may actually introduce artefacts due to a form of effectively attempting to write detail than was not there before. The guide for PIL notes that at 100 there is no compression, which would probably be equivalent to saving a bmp file or similar, though again I suspect this may lead to unexpected artefacts. If we really had to, I could fetch the original image out of the history and transform that again, so this is a reversible action if these choices turn out to not be the best. -- (talk) 23:09, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
  •    Done with 10,185 photos. The search shows the most recent uploads to, so re-running will quickly add any new photos that Konstantin releases, in fact when I re-ran another 15 had been added since I started.   -- (talk) 22:07, 26 June 2013 (UTC)


For you:-)

Hi! Tonight we celebrate a very old Slavic holiday "Wianki" (Wreaths).

It is a kind of Polish Valentine's Day. In my home town a variety of attractions are being organized during the coming days and nights (21st to 23rd of June). I thought it might be interesting for you to read about it, because you are interested in Russia and other Slavic countries. Unfortunately we don't have on Commons own pictures illustrating it, but I have found two links for you:

[1] and [2]. In the past in the summer time it was one of girls' favourite activity to make wreaths from wild flowers like white and red clovers, red poppies and cornflowers. I made flower wreaths during my holidays in the countryside or while sitting on the grass in a beautiful city park. Greetings. --Seleucidis (talk) 17:52, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Cheer up!

Please hold on. There are worse things happening in life. I hope for you it all will be all right. --Seleucidis (talk) 08:38, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

+1 Penyulap 10:52, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Penyulap for your support! I like your new version of Sexuality barnstar. It is cute:-) I must admit I had difficulty to recognise male and female, wondering about what these green leaves on the chest are:-) but my friend had no problem and immediately said: "Oh, a male and a female puppets". --Seleucidis (talk) 20:43, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Oh thank you, I think it's funny how adding leaves can create the impression of nudity, people would never have known the stars are anatomically correct or naked until after I covered them up.   Penyulap 09:35, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Jimmy Wales by Pricasso.jpg

File:Jimmy Wales by Pricasso.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!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

JKadavoor Jee 08:00, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

I actually think that the way the foundation has poorly written it's policy page means that it's a valid point to bring up for discussion. I don't think it would succeed, but I think it should be discussed none the less, if only to suggest a better outlining of the policy on the policy page (on the other site). Penyulap 10:43, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

I've made a proposal at Minority removal of welcome images. Penyulap 16:33, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Die Australië toch

I almost fainted today in the kitchen when I heard on the radio that a person from Western Australia was on the line and wanted to talk to the DJ. I immediately thought of you making a joke and my legs became soft as butter. (Un)fortunately it was not you, but a woman born in Holland, in the town Arnhem, years ago, who listens to a Dutch radio station every day to improve her Dutch language. What a relief! Anyway it was a very funny and nice situation and almost a coincidence. Who would think that there are people in WA listening to a Dutch radio station? How bizarre:-) Had to tell you about it, probably I will never forget it till the end of my days. She said it was 18 degrees and sunny (afternoon), although it is winter in Australia. We suppose to have summer, but it is only 14 degrees C, no sun, rain and clouds. Frankly, we are all jealous. I even think (love such a conspiracy theory) that you should remove the template "This wikipedian lives in Australia", because other wikipedians living in west and north Europe are jealous. And a jealous person is able to do nasty things, like ... Replace it with "This wikipedian lives in Iceland":-) Just kidding. But in fact I came to your page with a question. Here it comes. Do you have a standard letter to send, if you want to ask to donate pictures to Commons? It is not a Flicker account, but a firm. I need their pictures to illustrate an article and there is a chance that they will accept my/our request and donate some pictures. Anyway it improves their image on Wikipedia, so why not? If there is such a standard letter, please give me a link. BTW I adjusted your translation. --Seleucidis (talk) 16:59, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

You said at Fae's userdisk that you "search" a chapter that would pay the 15$ for full membership. I think that this is not needed because it is easy to remove the watermark/frames. -Example- If you show me where to find all KvW pics, I'll do this with them all (or with as much as i can, if they're too much...). -- Milad A380 (talk) 18:25, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Milad, the basic cropping has been sorted out now. You can see by checking photos (check needed) that 80% have already had the "credit bar" removed and we have a nice workflow to ensure these are systematically and accurately removed. The reason that Russavia is suggesting using membership access is that some of the accounts where Commons has secured permission for free reuse, have another type of watermark which is embedded across the image, rather than as a bar. These cannot be cropped out, but don't get added in the first place if you login as a member. We are working on it, and I'll probably have some time to look at this in more detail next week. In the meantime the uploads that do not require a login proceed to plan, in fact we are over 11,000 uploads now.   If you would like to help out, it is having more categories added that is most needed. -- (talk) 19:00, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
I know, and the Watermarks there, but it is also possible to remove these Watermarks (exept when they directically cover the plane). Are there in general pics with these Watermark on Commons? Normally the Spotters who use the watermark are the type of Spotters who do not release their pics under GDFL/CC. -- Milad A380 (talk) 19:25, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
Yes, there are going to be some of these soon, as Russavia has been nicely negotiating with the photographers to get the releases. We are in the process of discussing how to download the originals without the embedded watermarks. I suggest not worrying about the 'credit bar' on images, I am removing these using a semi-automated process, in fact the ones you are doing by hand are being flagged as errors. See Category photos (check needed), it's no big deal but if you hang on for a bit, any you want to use will be fixed soon. Thanks -- (talk) 22:54, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
Ok. A small question, after the credit bar is removed and the image has been categorized, should I remove the cat photos (check needed)? -- [[User:Milad A380|Milad <small>A380</small>]] [[User talk: Milad A380|<sup>talk?</sup>]] (talk) 10:02, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
I'd leave it for the moment. Russavia, do you intend to have a category for uploads from so these can be easily found again once the check category is removed? If so, I'd do better to be adding it on upload. -- (talk) 10:49, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
I don't think we need such a category; the few images (so far) I've been categorising, e.g., I've been removing that category as the source isn't so important, but the photographer, and such links are in the template anyways. Cheers Fae. russavia (talk) 16:43, 30 June 2013 (UTC)


I acknowledge that there are obviously some issues amongst some editors from the German Wikipedia community, however, a request for rights is not the right avenue to express those concerns; COM:RFC is, and I would encourage those editors with concerns to address those concerns at that venue. - who are you that you belive YOU can decide what other people have to think? I think, we can't go on with this and this also means not to vote for a candidate before clearing the problems! It's unbeleavable...! Marcus Cyron (talk) 20:24, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

{talkpage angel}Hi Marcus, even if all of the objections to there being too many checkusers were counted and added up with all other objections, there still weren't enough to make the proposal fail. A successful request needs 80%, and by any count it had that from the start. (inserted note, a raw numbers count reveals 79%). The direction to a RFC wasn't meant to be dismissive I think, it was just meant to point everyone in the right direction. If you want, I can start off a RfC about Checkusers on commons, or help construct one that has a decent chance of changing things, moving all parties towards common ground. Penyulap 20:44, 30 June 2013 (UTC)


Hi, You may want to leave a quick word at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Category:Avion isn't for airplanes to reassure people that you intend to continue your work with the categorization of the aircraft files that were recently uploaded by bot. Some people seem to worry about it. -- Asclepias (talk) 19:34, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

{talkpage angel} Hi Asclepias, it is a good idea, although Russavia has a good well-known reputation for cleaning up their work as they go, actually I think it has already been mentioned there. I'll add an extra note there if it helps save time. Penyulap 20:45, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Finnair DC-9-51; OH-LYY@ZRH, March 1983 (8169143576).jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Finnair DC-9-51; OH-LYY@ZRH, March 1983 (8169143576).jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Finnair DC-9-51; OH-LYY@ZRH, March 1983 (8169143576).jpg]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

From the source page in Flickr: "from my collection, not my own shot". Thus, the author is unknown. Apalsola tc 12:45, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

According to a Google search there are 393 such files. ––Apalsola tc 13:22, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for that, I'll delete these particular files in bulk. russavia (talk) 20:06, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

aren't there enough accidents ?

File:Singapore Airlines Airbus A340-500; 9V-SGE@LAX;08.10.2011 620dq (6298252597).jpg

I was wondering if these ones are any good ? I think they are the ones I spruced up to remove the billboard, but I never mentioned it at the time. For some reason the billboard always came up in my uploads list, even though it was removed, some glitch in the cache. Are there too many pictures of the aircraft on commons ? If the plane crashed, people would want a picture of it, but I don't know the chance of that happening, it varies quite a lot from place to place. Maybe there are a lot of that model at that angle ? Penyulap 18:07, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I moved those files into my "delete" category on 17 June. I wasn't aware of your removal of the copyrighted sign, but have now undeleted them. Cheers, russavia (talk) 18:12, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
just the current version of this one is good, the older one has a wingtip missing. Penyulap 21:11, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Stats for sexual file usage

I did some very rough stats at User:Bawolff/usage_stats_sexual_media How much these stats represent the total number of sexually explicit images is debatable, but they do give some interesting numbers. For example, things in a sex category are more likely to be used than something uploaded via mobile upload. Bawolff (talk) 22:04, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that, it's quite interesting to see some actual figures. So going by this, at a rough estimate, we have approximately 11,000 sexuality-related images on Commons -- including people involved in adult entertainment, pubic lice, and other such categories -- out of a total of 17,500,000 files, meaning that around 0.05% of all files on Commons are related to human sexuality. And a large percentage of those files are actually in use. Sincerely, I think we can safely ignore and scoff at reports saying that Commons is supersaturated with "porn" as patent nonsense. russavia (talk) 10:30, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Very roughly speaking, yes. I'm almost certain there are categories I missed (not to mention a bunch of false positives), but I think the data gives a good order of magnitude measurement. Bawolff (talk) 15:41, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Bawolff, a nice simple report. There are probably other ways of cutting the data, but this is a good piece of fact based evidence. We may want to reference your report on Commons:Nudity, or perhaps referenced within a Village Pump explanation, as a means of providing the facts for this frequently raised question. -- (talk) 10:49, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Asiana Airlines Boeing 777-200ER; HL7742@HKG;31.07.2011 614fz (6052589349).jpg

Hey Russavia. Quick question: Is this picture of the actual plane that crashed, or just of a plane of that specific model owned by that specific airline? If the former, how do we know? You're the expert when it comes to this stuff, of course, but I didn't see anything on the Flickr page that makes it immediately obvious that it's the same plane. Currently, en's main page says "Asiana Airlines Flight 214 (pictured)", so if that's not the case, we should clear that up ASAP. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 01:48, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

The title on flickr is where the information of the aircraft is from. Also the registration (HL7742) is visible near the rear exit door. Bidgee (talk) 06:39, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
It's the actual aircraft that crashed. The spotter community is quick with these things; especially with services such as being available, etc. If there's any doubt, here is the crashed aircraft with the registration clearly visible on the wing. russavia (talk) 09:44, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Ahh. Thanks. Was sure there was some meaning to all those extra letters and numbers, but didn't know how to decode them. And thanks for adding that description, for people like me who are clueless about this stuff.  — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 10:19, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Moscow collage.jpg

Hi Russavia! Above montage, created by you, suffered Commons:Deletion requests/File:Moscow State University, HDR.jpg (concerning the image in the middle, right corner), compromising the whole file. Can you fix the montage, substituting this image with another one? Gunnex (talk) 22:16, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you barnstar

For you:-)

Hello Russavia! Thank you for uploading this particular   picture. I used it to illustrate my new article. It fits very well and promote the article on the front page today:-) --Seleucidis (talk) 11:05, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Fantastic, thanks. I have dropped a note to the photographer here to let them know it is being used on Polish Wikipedia. Cheers, russavia (talk) 11:36, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
It is very kind of you. Thank you. The picture is great – the photographer made it at the right moment and caught the emotions: desire, love and admiration. --Seleucidis (talk) 15:18, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Bosque Morning (5401577702).jpg

Hi Russavia - what were the reasons for deleting this? It is CC-BY license, so OK for Commons, and a good pic worth keeping. Is there some other problem with it? - MPF (talk) 10:50, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

The initial reason for deletion was I didn't believe it would be in scope given it is a heavily modified image. I've undeleted it. Enjoy. russavia (talk) 11:43, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! The background trees are modified to 'emphasize' the mist, but (as far as I can see!) the birds aren't. - MPF (talk) 11:48, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Wow, that is a cool image. I sometimes wonder about modified images, and why people don't like them as featured content, I mean, the FI rules don't rule it out, and as for scope, how should we illustrate the articles about image modification :D Penyulap 12:17, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
@ Penyulap - good point, hadn't thought of that, too! Can you find a suitable category of modified images for it, please? - MPF (talk) 12:47, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
I popped it into Category:Computer generated images using hotcat, which made me feel cheap, like a gold-digging edit count chaser. Eww!! :) Penyulap 19:31, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
And I've added it to Category:Manipulated photographs; and I too used HotCat, because we need to justify our presence on this project somehow, and using HotCat is the best way to do so. russavia (talk) 22:22, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Bah ! too much conformity ! Destroy something ! here, this file needs all previous revisions deleted quick smart, chop chop !! It is mentioned here as well. I also have used it in my art in the last few days. Penyulap 22:50, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Where is the help page again, the one that tells you how to make admins do whatever you want. I know I saw it somewhere, but nobody does what I want them to, Fastily and INeverCry just seem to delete stuff faster if I say keep, and if I ask you to delete something I'm sure it'll be here till the end of time. Hhmph ! ....hmm {pause} hey, maybe I'm really really good at reverse psychology and I don't know it. Penyulap 23:57, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
why is this broken image still visible ? Penyulap 18:45, 13 July 2013 (UTC)


Hello. If the face is blurred, I will have no more objections to the image. However, it was deleted meanwhile (I do apologize, but I have not visited Commons for some time until now), but if you had downloaded it before, I have no objections to uploading it again (with blurred face). Thank you for your interest. Jan Kameníček (talk) 17:09, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jan, I will take care of this in the coming days, given that you don't object to your face being blurred, etc. If you don't wish for your name to be connected publicly with the file, then perhaps we can do it in such a way that you release the image into the public domain (via OTRS), and we upload it as an Anonymous, with a link to the OTRS ticket. I'll contact you later about that. Cheers, russavia (talk) 08:46, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

HDR images of the United States

Just wanted to let you know, since I've seen a number of your flickr transfers while sorting. I'm diffusing Category:Tone-mapped HDR images of the United States into state-by-state subcategories, since the main category had gotten up to around 200 files. Washington DC and New York City are getting their own subcategories, and probably Boston and some others eventually as well. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 15:05, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Great stuff, good to see that others are coming up with new categorisation schemes with these uploads -- mainly due to the uploads creating the numbers required. Thanks for all your help. Cheers, russavia (talk) 08:44, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolution:Images of identifiable persons


Перенос файлов со склада в нацвики

Уважаемый участник, после того, как Вы имели сомнения в копивио только файлов билетов Универсиады с рисунками, растиражированными госдирекцией по объектам и предметам всего города вплоть до заборов, а я уменьшил их разрешение при повторной загрузке, с неосторожной подачи очень знакомого Вам другого участника 1 2 3 по неоправданно прямолинейно-жесточайшему толкованию, не учитывая изложенные мной аргументы (4 обстоятельства и др.), вопреки викискладпрактике пока массово не удалять фото российских современных зданий и прочих уличных/публичных объектов/предметов, деструктивно для викичитателей, в порядке преследования лично меня, пока не удалены чужие теоретически artwork-файлы медали,монеты и теоретически FoP-файлы открытия, но массово удалены мои фотографии Универсиады и других зданий/объектов/предметов вплоть до абсурдно удалённых даже таких абсолютно невинных и с точки зрения FoP, и с точки зрения (С) моих фото как горящий огонь, поднятые флаги России и Универсиады и тп.
В результате чего, например, иллюстрирование в статье 2013 Summer Universiade и категории 2013 Summer Universiade, Kazan arena, Aquatics palace in Kazan и т.д. сейчас по большей части или вообще содержат второстепенные по значимости фото, и ценность кучи других статей в разных вики сразу чохом и трудновосстановимо однозначно упала из-за оскуднения иллюстрирования и неполного формирования представления у викичитателей только по текстовому описанию.
Как викижитель, который, как я вижу, имеет отношение к России и всё же разделяет созидательный примат ведения википедии как энциклопедии, судя по загрузке на склад файлов в т.ч. в 2013 Summer Universiade, и как викисклададмин, можете ли Вы, после моего обращения здесь или в заявках на восстановление или где-то ещё, какими-то механизмами массово восстановить всё на складе, чтобы сразу протрансфёрить, наоборот, с него на нацвики (как минимум на рувики/энвики). Kazaneer (talk) 09:31, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Russavia/Archive 13".