User talk:Slomox/Archiv/2010

Active discussions
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.


Thank you, excellent work! Lexicon (talk) 00:52, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Please help replace this outdated license


Thank you for donating images to the Wikimedia Commons. You have uploaded some images in the past with the license {{PD}}. While this was a license acceptable in the early days of Wikimedia, since January 2006, this license has been deprecated and since October 2008 no new uploads with this license was allowed.

The license on older images should be replaced with a better and more specific license/permissions and you can help by checking the images and adding {{PD-self}} if you are the author or one of the other templates that you can see in the template on the image page.

Thank you for your help. If you need help feel free to ask at Commons talk:Licensing or contact User:Zscout370.

The images we would like you to check are:

BotMultichillT 21:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)


Hi Slomox, I tried to use this template at Template:Cc-by-sa-3.0/doc. Could you please add translatewiki as on of the i18n options? See Commons talk:Template i18n#Next step in translations. Multichill (talk) 22:12, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

You can use "mediawiki-msg" now. --Slomox (talk) 22:23, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Ok, thank you! Used that now. Maybe you could help to make Template:Cc-by-sa-3.0/doc look really good. I'm not really used to using TemplateBox. When it's very tidy I can use it to update the other /doc pages. Multichill (talk) 22:37, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Btw, is it really necessary that I have to save the redundant text "This file is licensed under the Creative Commons X license."more than 80 times, when translating the messages at [1]? Wouldn't it be better to make it modular so translators only need to translate the parts that change? cc-by-sa-1.0-nl, cc-by-sa-2.0-nl, cc-by-sa-2.5-nl, and cc-by-sa-3.0-nl are identical except for the numbers, it would be much easier if I only had to translate "Netherlands" once instead of the whole license text four times. --Slomox (talk) 17:09, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

{{NUMBEROFFILES}} lokalisieren

Auf der Hauptseite steht momentan: „Willkommen [...] einer Sammlung von 6,134,586 frei verwendbaren Mediendateien, [...]“, wobei die Zahl durch Kommas anstatt wie im Deutschen üblich durch Punkte abgetrennt wird. Soweit ich weiß, lässt sich das mit {{Formatnum}} korrigieren, ich hab es in meinen Tests auf Special:ExpandTemplates jedoch nicht korrekt hingekriegt. Könntest du dir das als Ersteller dieser Vorlage mal angucken? Danke, --The Evil IP address (talk) 11:50, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Zuerst müssen die Kommas mit Revers-Formatnum ({{formatnum:...|R}}) entfernt werden. Danach kann man {{Formatnum}} anwenden. Ich hab's auf der Hauptseite geändert. --Slomox (talk) 12:55, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Ah ok, danke. Das Revers-Formatnum war, was ich nicht gemacht hatte. --The Evil IP address (talk) 21:58, 16 February 2010 (UTC)


Could you please respond over there? Multichill (talk) 23:08, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


Hey Slomox, I know you were the one that last made any major change to {{Documentation}} (before the imports obviously). Right now it's really messed up. The history was merged with en.wp's and meta's versions a couple times because people erroneously imported all templates when trying to import a specific template. With all the importing and deleting and restoring, we lost our version somehow and for some reason certain edits aren't shown at all in the history. For example, if you look at the history and find the second occurrence of my name (newest edit) and click (prev) it will say there's "171 intermediate revisions not shown"[2]! If you check my last edit, you get something even weirder since every edit is in there twice. I restored every edit hoping to find our version. I found this, which is the last time it looked the same as ours however that's before the autotranslation (and I'm sure other edits you made). Going forward in the history, you'll see where you did the autotranslation but the template no longer looks right (the gray color/dotted border are gone). I'm hoping you can figure it out since you know your own code better than me and maybe redo any changes that were lost (if you can remember). Rocket000 (talk) 03:28, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

The dotted border misses cause it is includeonly. The newest version in the template's version history which fits in size (about 180 bytes) is this. I'm not perfectly sure whether it's the right version, but it's the best I can come up with. --Slomox (talk) 18:44, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


Hi Slomox, ist es möglich bei der Vorlage bei dem "Quick adding" auf User:CommonsDelinker/commands eine edit summary hinzuzufügen? Also z.B. ganz einfach Replace foo.jpg with foo2.jpg? --Martin H. (talk) 15:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Der Code für das "Quick adding" steht unter MediaWiki:CommonsDelinker.js. Du müsstest dich also am besten an User:Kwj2772 wenden, der das Skript betreut. --Slomox (talk) 19:45, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Danke für die Info. --Martin H. (talk) 19:48, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Noch ne kleine Ergänzung (nachdem ich mir die Funktionsweise etwas genauer angeguckt hab): Der "Replace foo.jpg with"-Teil dürfte kein Problem sein. Aber der neue Dateiname wird ja erst später per Hand eingetragen. Es ist vermutlich nicht ganz trivial den neuen Dateinamen aus dem Text rauszuziehen und in die Zusammenfassungszeile einzutragen. Ich nehme an, daran wird es scheitern. --Slomox (talk) 19:53, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

RTL css


I see that you wrote RTL.css and RTL.js here. Can you please try to update them for the up and coming Usability deployment, a.k.a. Beta or Vector?

In particular, see the problems that i described at Commons:Village pump#Directionality of Hebrew upload forms.

Thanks in advance. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 13:09, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I tried to correct it. Please review it. --Slomox (talk) 18:09, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
It seems that Special:Upload&uselang=he is better now, but Special:Upload&uselang=heownwork and other upload forms are still broken.
It also seems that it changed the whole orientation of the screen. It is mostly good, for example the sidebar is now on the right and it is aligned correctly. But the display of the tabs above the page - edit, read, orphans, gallery etc. - is somewhat broken. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:29, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh, and now i also see that the text flow on regular pages - for example this user talk page - is also RTL. It is good for pages like Commons:מזנון, but not so good for pages that are mainly LTR.
I don't have a clever solution to this and since RTL pages are usually explicitly marked here, it is probably not needed. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:32, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
Content pages should be back to LTR. --Slomox (talk) 18:55, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
Are the tabs above the page still messed up if you clear the cache? They appear to be correct to me. I they are still broken after clearing the cache please tell me what exactly is wrong. --Slomox (talk) 18:57, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
And the problem with 'heownwork' should be fixed too. I added "importScript('MediaWiki:Rtl.js');" to MediaWiki:Common.js/heownwork. --Slomox (talk) 19:19, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
The upload forms look well now. Thanks.
See below for the problem with the tabs. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 19:38, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

The problem with tabs

With Vector skin in he.wp and ar.wp the top elements, from left to right are:

search button | go button | search box | dropdown arrow | watchlist star | history | add topic | edit | read | (space) | talk | user page

Now in Commons with the Vector skin the order is:

read | edit | watchlist star | dropdown | search button | go button | search box | (space) | user | talk

Furthermore, right after i enter a page, i see the tabs for add topic, history, gallery, orphans and move, and after a couple of seconds they slide and disappear under the dropdown arrow. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 19:35, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I looked into it and I don't think this can be fixed without massive hacks. If you look into the source code you will see that the order of 'p-cactions' and 'p-search' is different on ar.wp or he.wp and Commons. That's necessary cause elements cannot be floated to positions before previous elements. I know no solution for that.
The sliding tabs is actually a feature of the vector skin. That will happen with any language setting. --Slomox (talk) 21:30, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I've made the original MediaWiki:Rtl.js (you can see it here: MediaWiki talk:Monobook.js/he#Workaround to change direction of pages for monobook). For cause vector to work properly in rtl languages we should create speacial css for it, let's call it MediaWiki:Vector.css/rtl. please add the following css to it:
div.vectorTabs ul li{

and add this css using MediaWiki:Rtl.js. Please also add this to the rtl.js:
to disable the collapsibletabs which doesn't work properly in Hebrew/Arabic.
By the way, please set the direction of the editform to rtl in MediaWiki:Rtl.css: form#editform { direction:rtl;}
Thanks, ערן (talk) 16:20, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
The last changes in the rtl.css cause many special pages to look badly in Hebrew: the content in commons is ltr, but for special pages it should be rtl. Special pages include the edit form, upload form, history page, move page etc. The main problem is in
#content{ direction: ltr; }
which doesn't look for the namespace. you should use the same trick as in column-content to check for the right namespace. I alredy fixed some of the problems in the previous versions of rtl.css. ערן (talk) 16:54, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
After relooking: #column-content doesn't exist anymore (at least in vector) so it should be replaced to #content in MediaWiki:Rtl.js. ערן (talk) 16:57, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
The Evil IP address has done the fix for vector.
Now the only thing to fix is the special pages which doesn't appear properly in RTL. This should be fixed using MediaWiki:Rtl.css by changing "column-content" to "content" and removing the content {direction:ltr;} which will override column-content (it becomes after the definition for content in speacial NS). Thanks ערן (talk) 15:20, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Gee.. Write me the correct code, even on my talk page, and I'd replace the fault code, wherever you ask. --Yuval Y § Chat § 15:26, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

See me request in MediaWiki talk:Rtl.css#Fix for vector. ערן (talk) 16:14, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Dear Slomox, I found your userpage through google. Unfortunately, nobody could help me at commons forum neither meta. How can I stop the tab/button animation without going back to monobook? --Sargoth (talk) 12:58, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
Try adding
wgVectorEnabledModules.collapsibletabs = false;
to your personal vector.js. That will stop the animation (the tabs will always be visible). --Slomox (talk) 16:28, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
I  You! --Sargoth (talk) 21:14, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Nur wenn du Zeit hast

Hallo Slomox!

Seit dieser Commons-Designänderung funktioniert ein Teil meines Monobooks nicht mehr (mittlerweile auch nach User:High Contrast/vector.js verschoben - brachte aber nichts). Der Fehler betrifft hauptsächlich das Bearbeiten von Diskussionsseiten. Die Fehlermeldung lautet: ReferenceError: ta is not defined (234). Weißt du auf die Schnelle was da los ist? Ich möchte nicht deine Zeit in Anspruch nehmen. Ich würde es verstehen, wenn du dich dessen nicht annehmen willst. Ich habe schon Zeit darauf verschwendet, konnte aber den Fehler nicht finden. Grüße, High Contrast (talk) 19:20, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Am ReferenceError kann's eigentlich nicht liegen. Der dürfte jedenfalls auch schon unter Monobook vorgelegen haben. Ist aber auch kein kritischer Fehler. Das Problem ist vermutlich eher eine Element-ID, auf die zugegriffen wird und die sich unter Vector geändert hat. Aber um sagen zu können, welche ID das ist, müsstest du noch mal genauer sagen, woran es genau hapert. --Slomox (talk) 22:09, 18 April 2010 (UTC)


Hi Slomox,

Looks like they got a formatted version to work. Even better than the initial version. BTW there is still a question open here, I would be glad if you would look into it. This way we could then move ahead with this. -- User:Docu at 04:32, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response. BTW a painting is just dated, would the template still work somehow or should this then go into "Template:Painting-markings"? -- User:Docu at 09:44, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Would still work. {{signed|dated=1900}}: Date: 1900
--Slomox (talk) 15:39, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
{{signed|dated=1900|unsigned=1}} seems to fail. -- User:Docu at 15:45, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
That's why I wrote {{signed|dated=1900}} ;-) If a date is written on the painting then that's some kind of signature. "unsigned=1" is for paintings with no text on it at all. --Slomox (talk) 22:12, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
lol. I tried something like {{signed|bottom|right}} too ;) -- User:Docu at 22:17, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for everything that you did on Commons and the support that you gave me! --The Evil IP address (talk) 17:59, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

content warnings

I see you have deleted Template:Unreferenced as "deprecated". Can you please leave behind some sort of pointer to what should be used instead for content warnings? This is necessary for images that are undisputedly free, but which purport to summarize objective information that is not, in fact, attributed to any credible source. Example, File:R1A map.jpg. It would be helpful for Wikipedians if commons used template names more or less compatible with what we're used to over at Wikipedia, viz. things like

, Template:Cn etc.

Thanks. --Dbachmann (talk) 08:01, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

The template was a redirect to {{No source since}}, which marks files for deletion. That's quite different from en.wp's Template:Unreferenced. I don't know whether there is any template that correspondends to en.wp's Template:Unreferenced. --Slomox (talk) 20:01, 12 May 2010 (UTC)


Dear Slomox, While working on the nl-translation of this template I found that a few countries were missing from the en-version. I have added these as comments, based on the info from Would you maybe have a source for the proper english adjectives for these countries? I hope you do, since you wrote the main part of this template. Thanks in advance for your response.   NormanB (talk) 22:15, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I got the list of English adjectives from en:List of adjectival and demonymic forms of place names (at least I think so, in any case it was a list on English Wikipedia). The missing territories miss cause they are no real countries. I guess you took your list from the list of territories with TLDs. I don't think they should be added to the template. --Slomox (talk) 23:31, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Dear Slomox. Thanks for the link. It was very helpful. I found a lot of the missing info. Regarding the source for the missing countries, I used [this], which to my knowlegde only contains official countries. Thanks again for your help. Kind regards   NormanB (talk) 22:56, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
According to en:List of sovereign states there are 193 fully recognized countries and 10 partly recognized countries. Your list contains 246 entries. Bouvet Island has not even inhabitants. And the Åland Islands although enjoying some autonomy are an integral part of Finland. --Slomox (talk) 23:51, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Dear Slomox. If the template were called SovereignStateAdjective I might agree with you, but it is called CountryAdjective. A Country is not necessarily a sovereign state and en:Lists of countries and territories indicates ISO3166 as an official list of countries when the term country is not used is the sense of sovereign state. So purely based on these criteria I feel that having an ISO3166 code should be enough to qualify for being incorporated into this template.
Moreover, the template is not an article on the subject of sovereign states or countries, in which case exact inclusion criteria might be needed. It is an aid in finding the adjective that corresponds to a certain countryname. So the larger the list, the better it can do it's work. The ISO3166-code paramater safeguards that it is not used for things that have nothing to do with countries. That is enough for me. I hope for you too :-) Kind regards   NormanB (talk) 22:09, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Well, I am the creator of the template and my intention when creating the template was clearly to include sovereign states and nothing else. The main purpose of the template is to be a helper tool in basic localization templates like {{NationAndOccupation}} to localize short strings like "French painter" or "Édouard Manet was a French painter" etc. (Automatic localization for anything more complex than that would fail.) They are used on person-related galleries/creator templates. Bouvet for example has no inhabitants so it can't be used in this context.
Perhaps you could present some example cases where you would like to use the non-sovereign state adjectives? --Slomox (talk) 09:21, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Dear Slomox. I understand that you intended the template for a specific purpose. But it's potential is bigger than that. You called it CountryAdjective and set an ISO3166-code as the main parameter and that creates the option for other uses. You and I may not know which, but other users might. If I have not convinced you yet that having the non-sovereign states in doesn't hurt, I'm probably not going to, so I rest my case. If you feel they should be removed, then so be it. Kind regards,   NormanB (talk) 23:09, 17 June 2010 (UTC)


Hi Slomox, auch nochmal eine Anfrage wenn du Zeit und/oder Lust hast. Für ein Wiki, dass so stark auf Vorlagen basiert wie dieses erachte ich Special:WantedTemplates als essentielle Arbeitsseite. Sie ist aber komplett zugeballert mit den Potd Vorlagen, die neuen "thumbtime" vorlagen mal aussen vor gelassen, die habe ich mir noch nicht angeschaut. Kann man das entfernen? Soweit ich es überbliche ist die Ursache vielleicht Template:Potd/Month. Kann man da mit ifexists etc arbeiten? Rote links sind ja schön und gut, aber nicht wenn es um eine Bildbeschreibung des Bild des Tages von vor 5 Jahren geht. Hast du irgendeine Idee? --Martin H. (talk) 03:03, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Ifexist würde das Problem lösen, aber da ifexist zu den expensive parser functions gehört, sind maximal 500 ifexist pro Seite erlaubt. Das gäbe also Probleme.
Eine andere Lösung wüsste ich nicht. --Slomox (talk) 11:57, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Hm. Ich hab gerade ein kurzes Javascript geschrieben, das alle Motd- und Potd-Vorlagen in der Liste versteckt, so dass man nur die normalen Vorlagen sieht. Aber innerhalb der ersten 5000 Einträge (mehr werden nicht gespeichert) gibt es überhaupt nur sieben Vorlagen, die nicht zu Motd und Potd gehören. Der Ansatz ist also auch nicht besonders hilfreich ;-) --Slomox (talk) 12:50, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Lol und schade :) Weiß nicht, ob es in dein Fachgebiet fällt, aber wäre vielleicht eine Softwareseitige Lösung denkbar, dass die Spezialseite dahingehend konfiguriert wird, benannte Vorlagen zu ignorieren - eine art blacklist? --Martin H. (talk) 02:26, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Technisch möglich wäre so eine Blacklist ganz bestimmt. Aber bei der Implementierung so einer Lösung kann ich nicht wirklich helfen. Du kannst versuchen entweder bei Bugzilla oder auf der Mailingliste wikitech-l anzufragen, ob dir dort jemand helfen kann. Wenn du ganz viel Glück hast, dann klappt das und jemand findet die Idee so gut, dass er das ganze programmiert. Wahrscheinlicher ist aber, dass du nur zu hören kriegst: Nette Idee, mach mal... --Slomox (talk) 13:32, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Vielleicht wäre statt einem technischen Ansatz ein inhaltlicher zielführender: Warum muss eine Seite wie etwa Commons:Potd/2006-12 (fr), die ja ausweislich des fr Französisch sein soll, überhaupt die Bildbeschreibung in mehreren Dutzend Sprachen anzeigen? Würde man es auf Französisch beschränken, dann könnte man problemlos mit ifexist arbeiten und die durchschnittliche Zahl der Einbindungen der Vorlagen würde deutlich fallen. --Slomox (talk) 13:59, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Macht Sinn, der Unterschied zwischen Commons:Potd/2006-12 (fr) und Commons:Potd/2006-12 (en) ist unbedeutend, zumal die Auflistung durch die vielen Rotlinks eh sch..bescheiden aussieht. Jede Monatsübersicht besteht aus {{Potd/Months|lang=fr}}, dem Kalender, und {{Potd/Month|year=2006|month=12|lang=fr}}, dem Inhalt. Beim Inhalt bestimmt der lang-Parameter die Bildunterschrift und den link Changer l’image und das Autres langues des aufklapbaren Bereichs. Lösung wäre: Die gesamte Auflistung der Sprachen weglassen und das Bild mit franz. Bildunterschrift zu zentrieren, als Ersatz einen /lang header schreiben der ganz oben auf die Seite kommt und den Wechsel zwischen verschiedenen Sprachversionen der Monatsübersicht erlaubt. Oder man arbeitet mit einer Abfrage wie sie in Template:Potd/2006-12-01 verwendet wird über Template:Potd filename helper und ein {{Special:PrefixIndex/...}} was zugegeben ziemlich rafiniert ist. Danke auf jeden Fall für deinen Anmerkungen. --Martin H. (talk) 18:09, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


Hi Slomox, do you think you could finish these messages? You're very active here getting things translated to Plattdüütsch, would be nice to have these complete too. Multichill (talk) 09:05, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Is there any tool to do this with less redundancy? Where I can translate the bits like the country names etc. and it'll be composed to full messages automatically? Cause I don't like the massive redundancy. It's number of countries × number of license versions × license rights versions and with about 200 countries, 5 (1.0, 2.0, 2.1, 2.5, 3.0 atm) versions and 3 (by, by-sa, sa) rights versions it's potentially 3000 messages. If it's composable it's just 200 + 5 + 3 = 208. Won't work for every language but it certainly works for nds (and most other languages). --Slomox (talk) 16:40, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
With the list of countries + some clever copy and pasting it takes about an hour to translate all messages. We don't do "Lego" sentences because these might work in English, but maybe won't work in some eastern languages. Multichill (talk) 16:55, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
But the future will bring new messages (new versions of CC or new country versions) and additional hours of work. If it doesn't work for some eastern languages, okay, let those eastern language users translate all the single messages. Lego sentences work in Low Saxon, so if you have a tool to compose them and fill in the messages, I'll do it. But I won't invest one hour of work in something that redundant. --Slomox (talk) 17:22, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Regex for standardizing dates

Do you have a good thorough (but safe) regular expression for matching all or most of the many variations of date forms (as used in the {{Information}} date field)? I'm looking to covert these to the standard YYYY-MM-DD format as a side task for whenever my bot edits a file page. If so, please respond here. Even just a list of the various forms would be helpful. I'm thinking about starting a page of handy localization and maintenance regexes for bot operators to share (something like this or this). Most bots that perform miscellaneous tasks can easy do these fairly trivial tasks at the same time (e.g. categorization bots). Also, it's ok to change {{Date|2009|1|9}} to 2009-01-09 in {{Information}} since it's built in, right? Rocket000 (talk) 00:45, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's ok to change {{Date|2009|1|9}} to 2009-01-09.
I don't have a single regex for date conversion. When I operated Slobot to do this (I didn't find time to run it in a long time) I had a long list of different regexes which I ran one after another. I'll look them up. --Slomox (talk) 14:24, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for using an image properly

You are the first user I have come across that is using the anti-flags in a well meaning way, describing your opinion rather than an outright "anti-this" declaration. I have removed the images from other user pages as hate speech. - Floydian (talk) 20:22, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

The following statement is so outrageous that 99of9, Multichill, TheDJ and Floydian advise you not to look at it or at the version history of this page.


First of all, you didn't remove anti-flags, you only removed references to one single anti-flag.
Second, User:Aboalbiss gave information about his reasoning and you still removed it.
Third, your edit comment Remove use of image as hate speech/propaganda/anti-semetism is total rubbish. I cite en.wp on Hate speech: Hate speech is, outside the law, any communication which disparages a person or a group on the basis of some characteristic such as race or sexual orientation. The anti-flag is not directed at a person or a group of persons. And it also is not disparaging. The anti-flag calls for the abolishment of an institution (the state of Israel). Therefore the anti-flag is by definition not hate speech but a political statement. I cite en.wp on Propaganda: Propaganda is a form of communication that is aimed at influencing the attitude of a community toward some cause or position. This certainly is true. But propaganda is not illegal. On User:Floydian you say This user supports the legalization of cannabis. This is propaganda too. It's communication aimed at gaining support for a political cause. If I say Firefox is better than IE this is a form of propaganda. The allegation of antisemitism is wrong. Antisemitism is aimed against Jews. But the anti-flag is aimed against the state of Israel. That's a big difference. Most people who express harsh views on Israel are not against the existence of Jews but against the fact that the founders of the state of Israel (who happen to be Jews) have conquered the country by force and driven out much of the native population. Although certainly not shared by everybody, that's a valid view. All the reasons you gave in your edit comment are therefore faulty and you are single-handedly heating up a conflict that was already settled in the past. --Slomox (talk) 22:15, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
I will continue to remove them. The other flags are superimposed, so yes only the israel flag was removed. Point me to the others and I will remove them as well. You can throw technical definitions at me all you want, this is hatred, pure and simple. It is Muslims hating on Israel because it is an institution that can be focused on. If they dislike it, they can explain that as such, that's not my issue.
Many comments at the delete discussion, including from those against its deletion, is that its current use on many user pages is inappropriate. These are clearly islamic users who are inciting hatred, and I don't care if I have to be handed a ban on commons, using them on user pages is hate speech, and technically illegal in many jurisdictions, even on the internet. Can you prove that the half dozen clearly islamic users that are using it aren't using it in hate speech. Does this mean I can slather my page with the Mohammad cartoon and put a big chunk of text saying "No morons"? Religion is an institution after all. - Floydian (talk) 01:56, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Take your political or moral agenda elsewhere. Let people express themselves how they want. Ignore it if you don't like it. Stop using the site (or the Internet itself) if you can't handle opposing views. I don't want you banned as you can contribute positively, but if you're going to go to war on this issue, I have no problem blocking you. (As I remember, you, previously known as aka TheXen, started editing here specifically to get File:No Israel.svg deleted.) Rocket000 (talk) 02:36, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Well, actually I'm here because I've uploaded hundreds of images for Wikipedia. I will take that as a "yes, you can do that if you want to", in response to my question. - Floydian (talk) 14:41, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Also, you WILL have to block me if he continues to introduce his little image regarding me above. I will happily remove it over and over and over again until I am banned or he gives up on it. - Floydian (talk) 14:44, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Please do not mistake an attack on your personal opinion for an personal attack. Please also abstain from further removals of my speech. --Slomox (talk) 15:26, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
No, and I'm removing the picture, not the speech. An attack on my opinion is still an attack. - Floydian (talk) 19:27, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
You are not very good at reflection, are you? Your new userpage design is not quite in line with the positions you previously claimed to hold. While until now I thought you were truly fighting against hate speech and were just misled about the extent of hate speech, I now rather think that you have an agenda against Islam. Either that or you really failed at "turning the cannon around and making your opponent realize that he is mistaken". If I assume all my good faith your statement is acceptable free speech. It depends on how entangled your different sub-statements are interpreted. Calling a man who had intercourse with a 9yo girl a rapist is certainly free speech. If the second sentence Abuse towards women and girls just follows suit is only loosely connected to the first part of the first sentence than this is free speech too. And if the statement No morons! is directed at rapists it's still an insult but would also account as free speech (in my opinion).
Well, but if I _do not_ assume good faith, it could be also interpreted in that way that the second sentence is closely connected to the first sentence and is meant generally speaking these people who follow a rapist all become rapists themselves, then it's an insult to Muslims. And if No morons! is not directed at the rapists, but against the followers, than this too is an insult to Muslims too. And Muslims are a group of people (see above). --Slomox (talk) 21:02, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
No, Islam is an institution, just like Israel. They are both morons. - Floydian (talk) 15:42, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Islam is not an institution, institutions according to en.wp are [..] structures and mechanisms of social order and cooperation governing the behavior of a set of individuals within a given human collectivity. The important part is governing. Parts of Islam are organized in institutions, but it is not one itself. But even if Islam is not an institution, you are still right, that Islam is comparable to an institution in this context. However, you didn't direct your criticism against Islam as an entity, but against the people who follow it. Islam cannot be a "moron", only people can be "morons". Islam cannot be a rapist, only people can be rapists.
Just to be clear, I don't want to remove the statement on your userpage. It's an offensive statement and not a very clever statement, but I'd consider it free speech. My main point is, that the statement shows, that the reasons you pretended to have for the removal are not the true reasons. You argued with hate speech, but you yourself use profanity against the same things. I consider "No to X" a less hateful statement than "X is a moron". So there is a hidden agenda behind your pretended reasons. I just don't know what it is. --Slomox (talk) 16:56, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm just a very big believer in equality. That equality could be hate-ridden, or it could be very friendly. It all depends on the attitudes of the people I'm dealing with. Yes, I believe the followers of an institution (and yes, Islam very much governs its people) that make a rapist into a martyr are stupid, just as the followers of the state of Israel are. I'm not calling out any specific people, I'm just generalizing. Keep in mind that it was Britain and the League of Nations that made Israel the country and told Palestine "too bad", not the jews (Although there was certainly a zionist batallion that aided the brits in expulsions, this is hardly constituent of their entire government or focus, and it's surely not a plight that should be directed towards the innocent citizens that are only living and following the law by joining the army. - Floydian (talk) 17:29, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Keep in mind that it was Britain and the League of Nations that made Israel the country and told Palestine "too bad", not the jews: Britain had a League of Nations mandate for Palestine and allowed Zionist immigration. But the British never consented with the assumption of power of the Zionist movement. Some Zionists carried out terrorist acts against the British administration and Great Britain handed back their LoN mandate because they saw themselves unable to maintain peace in Palestine. The newly found United Nations planned a two-state solution, the Zionists agreed but the Palestine Arabs rejected the plan (cause they still considered all of Palestine as their native land). Civil war broke out and the Zionists were victorious and they were able to put themselves in a position even stronger than planned by the UN two-state plan. So the British enabled the development, but it was not their plan and it was against their will and interests.
If you ask me about my opinion on the conflict between the state of Israel and the Palestinians, I certainly would not support the abolishment of Israel and/or the expulsion of the Zionist immigrants/descendants of Zionist immigrants. Most of them are native inhabitants now ('native' in the sense of 'born in a place') and expelling them would be injustice in the same way the expulsion of the Palestinians was injustice. But who am I to deny other people to have another opinion? Who am I to tell people who have lived in poor conditions in refugee camps since decades that the homes they were born in, their parents and grandparents were born in, that the places their families and friends lived in, that these places now are possessed by foreigners and that they'll never see these places again? Who am I to critize them for not accepting this injustice? I love my home and I certainly would never forgive anybody who'd expel me from my home and sent me to a total foreign place. I cannot expect from anybody to forgive such injustice. Too much time has passed. It's impossible to recover the injustice without creating new injustice. But we should at least allow the victims to express their anger. Just as we should never forget the wrongs that were done to the Jews that lead them to Palestine, we should also never forget about the wrongs that were done by the Jews in Palestine. We need people who speak up and remember us about the injustice that happened. --Slomox (talk) 18:50, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Both sides have committed countless acts of terrorism. Also, I think you'll find that conquering the native population, then giving them substandard (or no) living conditions, is a common trait in the history of half the world's nations. - Floydian (talk) 12:47, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
More than half of them. To varying degrees. And that's why I condemn more than half of them. To varying degrees.
By the way: Stop vandalizing my comments. If you do it one more time, I'll escalate this into blocks. --Slomox (talk) 17:49, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
This is your first warning for making personal attacks against other editors. It is not appropriate. Stop doing it. TheDJ (talk) 18:44, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from making personal attacks. TheDJ (talk) 18:44, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

No problem with that. Never done it. --Slomox (talk) 19:35, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
I want to thank you for standing up here for freedom of speech and impartiality among nations. I realize that Floydian chose you to start this argument. Even though you had no personal affiliation with his opponents, you went back and undid his changes, leaving people to express their opinions freely.
Had you not done this - had someone from a Muslim background logged in to Wikimedia to be told that Muhammad images are important for the scope of our project, but his simple statement of opposition to Israel will get censored off his own user page - well, obviously the damage to the reputation of Wikimedia projects could have been severe.
I should have expected more from Floydian. With his comments about Islam, he should know that the people who post beautiful photographs of the Yemeni countryside may not enjoy every last protection demanded by civil libertarians, and for them to participate in a site like ours that freely reproduces various problematic materials might not be entirely prudent. Those stupid little anti-Israeli flags may annoy Floydian, but I wonder if they might help some people sleep better at night. Wnt (talk) 07:25, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Edit warring

FYI Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Blocks_&_protections#Block_of_Slomox. --99of9 (talk) 02:38, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Number of template translations per language

Some stats might be interesting. I was bored. :) Rocket000 (talk) 03:26, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks ;-) That's some interesting data!
It says that POTD is included. Is there any way to tell the number of POTDs? Some time ago Multichill made a similar list: Commons:Template i18n/Interface language statistics. I wonder to what degree the numbers are comparable. Anyway, I should do more nds to improve it's "rank" ;-) --Slomox (talk) 10:49, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Not sure what Multichill's stats pertain to, but the numbers seem quite low if it's all templates (like only 154 for en). I see about getting some numbers for the POTD descriptions. Rocket000 (talk) 17:13, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Is it safe... convert dates like this: 13/07/08? The regex I would use (with normal month/day checks): (1[3-9]|2[0-9]|3[01])/(0[1-9]|1[0-2])/(0[0-9]) -> 20$3-$2-$1. Or am I wrong to assume the year is last and "20" (not "19" or even "00") should proceed it? Rocket000 (talk) 04:36, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I have always excluded the date schemes \d\d/\d\d/\d\d when running Slobot. I'd say dates with numbers above 13 should be safe, but on the other hand it could mean "8th July 1913". Doesn't sound likely, but I have seen weirder stuff. We can exclude the possiblity that it means "13 th July 8 CE" or "8th July 13 CE", I have never heard of anything that can be pinpointed to a single day in the first century and could be here on Commons. Luckily middle endian is not relevant if we already know that the day is in the first place.
I'd suggest that you do a test run. If there's WWI, Roaring 20s, Great Depression etc. stuff in the list, stop the bot. If not, go ahead.
Btw, above you asked for my #Regex for standardizing dates and I said that I will look them up. I looked for them but was unable to locate them (after two system losses inbetween they seem to be buried in my heap of "old stuff" and backups. They must be somewhere, but my tendency to use non-very-descriptive filenames stopped me from finding them). --Slomox (talk) 11:19, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Okay, thanks. I'll do a manual test run first. If you ever find those regex or want to help make new ones, there's now this page, which already has some of the easy ones. Rocket000 (talk) 17:13, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
I'll do that if I find them. I made some comments on the talk page with suggestions for improvement of the regexes. --Slomox (talk) 17:57, 2 September 2010 (UTC)


Can you change this file about 'Japaansch Meer'?

I want to write both 'East sea' and 'Sea of japan'.

Can you help me?

Thank you. --Idh0854 (talk) 02:01, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

The term "Oostsee" or "Oostern See" does not exist in Low Saxon (at least not referring to the Asian sea). --Slomox (talk) 09:08, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

POTD languages

Hi Slomox,

I reverted your changes [3] to the POTD language template, because I could not find a way to display all languages. See Commons:Picture of the day/Today (all languages), where I tried to unset the language parameter. Since the dailyimage-l mailing list requires all languages, I have reverted the change. Can you see if you can find a way to make all language display work?

Regards, -- Bryan (talk to me) 12:58, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

It will work, if you use {{Potd/Month|lang=}} with the parameter explicitly set to the empty string. At the moment it won't work with the parameter left out, somewhere some intermediate template puts an unwanted default. But I'll fix that too when I have found the right template. --Slomox (talk) 14:15, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
It should work both ways now. --Slomox (talk) 14:29, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks ! -- Bryan (talk to me) 17:46, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Question: How can I restore the old situation at the POTD-month pages? I use the language list quite often for translating the captions to Dutch, but the English captions are often not as good as other languages (mostly the German, French, Italian and Russian ones). E.g. at Commons:Potd/2010-10 (nl) now only the English one is available, but not the others. Is it possible to get this to work; Dutch one below the images, all languages to the right side of each image? Perhaps it is already possible, but I don't know how to do it in the source. --Hardscarf (talk) 11:01, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

The templates work the same way as before when you don't fix the language. The source code of Commons:Potd/2010-10 (nl) contains a "|lang=nl" parameter. If you remove it, it'll show all languages. Removing the parameter is not useful if the name of the page contains the language, but I have created a version with unfixed language at Commons:Potd/2010-10. --Slomox (talk) 13:34, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
If I remove the '|lang=nl'-parameter it will indeed show all the languages but below the image it shows the English caption and not the Dutch one. Is there any way this can be done?: A link to the Dutch caption below the images and links to all other languages next to it, like it was before the changes or is this now no longer possible? --Hardscarf (talk) 14:10, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
but below the image it shows the English caption and not the Dutch one: That's because there either is no Dutch translation or your interface language is not set to Dutch. If you set your interface language to Dutch it will work that way. --Slomox (talk) 17:12, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Ah it is now obliged to change the interface language to Dutch to get to see the caps on Dutch. Ok, thanks for the help. It works fine now. --Hardscarf (talk) 18:16, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

artwork namespace

I'm very interersted in the idea of experimenting with an "artwork" namespace. As I see it, it would be something similar to {{Self-portrait with Felt Hat (1888)}}, except that we should'nt need to write those "ifs" in each template. Was that what you had in mind too ? Personnally I have no clue on how to do it.
Perhaps the infobox could be be divided into one part containing infos about the artwork and containing infos about the author and license (because as you pointed out only author and license can really change from one file to the next). However I think it is important to keep it flexible, so that we can also add other infos adapted to each fileelds (for instance, it is important that we are able to add "detail" in the title field.--Zolo (talk) 07:51, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Yep, I guess the final template that occurs in the file description pages will be something like
{{Self-portrait with Felt Hat (1888)
|permission= [license]
|photographer= [person who took the image]
|detail= {{detail|12|25|55|65}}
The parameter "permission" is only needed for 3D artworks. The license of 2D artworks should go directly to the artwork template.
The parameter "detail" should contain the exact position of the detail in the full painting (my example with four coordinates [in percentage] is for 2D artworks, 3D artworks need a three-dimensional vector and a distance [at least artworks that have something like a "front"]). --Slomox (talk) 10:28, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
I created {{Venus de Milo}} to do some testing.
Venus de Milo
Unknown artist
Venus de Milo
Date circa between 130 and 100 BC
Medium on marble
Dimensions Height: 2 m (79.5 in)
dimensions QS:P2048,2.02U11573
institution QS:P195,Q19675
Accession number
Ma 399 (LL 299)
Object history Found in Melos in 1820
Credit line Gift of the Marquis de Rivière to Louis XVIII of France, 1821
Notes Template:DetailPic
Source/Photographer photographed by User:SomeGuy
(Reusing this file)



This work is in the public domain in its country of origin and other countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 70 years or fewer.

  You must also include a United States public domain tag to indicate why this work is in the public domain in the United States. Note that a few countries have copyright terms longer than 70 years: Mexico has 100 years, Jamaica has 95 years, Colombia has 80 years, and Guatemala and Samoa have 75 years. This image may not be in the public domain in these countries, which moreover do not implement the rule of the shorter term. Côte d'Ivoire has a general copyright term of 99 years and Honduras has 75 years, but they do implement the rule of the shorter term. Copyright may extend on works created by French who died for France in World War II (more information), Russians who served in the Eastern Front of World War II (known as the Great Patriotic War in Russia) and posthumously rehabilitated victims of Soviet repressions (more information).




This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 1.0 Generic license.
You are free:
  • to share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work
  • to remix – to adapt the work
Under the following conditions:
  • attribution – You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
  • share alike – If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you must distribute the resulting work under the same license as the original.

Other versions

--Slomox (talk) 11:55, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
It seems fine, but I am not sure that "detail" should only appear in the notes.
Passing by, somes notes on side issues:
  • To me, it is better to have Anonymous (Greece)
    Unknown author
    rather than "unknown" in the artist field. In this case, it is not extremely useful because it is obvously a Greek sculpture, but for less recognizable artworks a something about the origin can be a (cheap) substitute to the author's name.
  • You can write {{technique|marble}}, no need to make marble appear as a second parameter (which discplays an incogruous "on")
  • Apparently {{Size}} should be changed a little bit. The input seems sensible here, but not the output. I think it would be better to have: "height: 2.02 m" rather than just "2.02 m". That would be especially true for cases like File:Water newton cantharus.jpg, whose dimensions are : "Height: 125 mm (4.9 in) Diameter: 110 mm (4.3 in)". With the current templates, we can have: "125 mm (4.92 in); Diameter: 110 mm (4.33 in)
    dimensions QS:P2386,110U174789
    " but there is nothing to tell that the first figure is the height, so it is not very clear. To me, the simplest soulution would be that {{size|cm|XX}} gives XX cm and {{size|cm|height=XX}} gives height= XX cm.

Have you thought some more about the template ? To me there are three main questions:

  • Where should things like "detail:..." "left panel", "before restoration" go ?

Putting them in the title as I did in "Self-Portrait with felt hat" was probably not a good idea. But I don't think they should go in the notes either (notes are at the bottom of the page and as of now they mostly contain things about inscriptions, so it would be a bit confusing). Maybe we could have one (or two) fields below "description" to handle that ?

  • Can the template be standardized in such a way that we don't need to write things like "|notes={{{detail|}}}" each time. It may be very simple to do but I don't know how.
  • Could one default image be selected to represent the artwork in categories ? I can think of many examples where it would be really interesting.--Zolo (talk) 20:54, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Could one default image be selected to represent the artwork in categories ? You could put "|default=XXX" and have something like "{{#ifeq: File:{{{default|}}} | {{FULLPAGENAME}} | [[Category:{{{category|}}}]] }}"
Can the template be standardized in such a way that we don't need to write things like "|notes={{{detail|}}}" each time: No, that's impossible. The parameter must be written down or it won't exist in the called template.
Where should things like "detail:..." "left panel", "before restoration" go ? For detal I'd say the "notes" parameter. I don't know about the other two. What exactly do you want to do with them? What does "left panel" mean and in what context stands "before restoration"? --Slomox (talk) 22:29, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Left panel means the left part divided into several parts (eg a triptych). For instance, it should be written on files like this one, so that we don't mistake it for the full artwork. It's basically something like detail, but it is often clearer to have "left panel" or "central panel". "After restoration" is useful for works like the one on the photo that were visibly transformed by restoration works. I am not in favour of putting them in the notes, because notes are not very visible, but it would probably be okay if there was not already signatures and inscriptions there. So if you want to support my suggestion to create an "inscriptions" parameter in template:artwork, you are most welcome ;).--Zolo (talk) 07:35, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

New test

  • I have tried a new version, doing a new version of "artwork" that seems to me to fit better in this context: I have renamde description inot "artwork description" and added an "image description". I also put an "ifimage" for permission and source, so that the template can be used elewhere without displaying "source missing". But I am not sure that it is sound.
  • Could one default image be selected to represent the artwork in categories ? You could put "|default=XXX" and have something like "{{#ifeq: File:{{{default|}}} | {{FULLPAGENAME}} | [[Category:{{{category|}}}]] }}". I don't manage to do it, would you give it a try ?--Zolo (talk) 09:03, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

My tests: user:Zolo/test, user:Zolo/test/en and user:Zolo/test/layout for the main template. Template:Royal Gold Cup for an implementation. File:British Museum Royal Gold Cup.jpg for an implementation of {{Royal Gold Cup}}.

    • No sorry, I have finally understood how it works.--Zolo (talk) 12:36, 25 September 2010 (UTC)


Slomox, {{Book}} template when used (for example: File:Wolf Unterricht im Klavierspielen Theil 1.pdf seems to have an extra new line after every field name (Source, Author, etc.). I can not figure out where is it coming from. Can you help with it? --Jarekt (talk) 16:48, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

That's the normal behaviour. {{Artwork}}, {{Information}} do the same. The reason is that the field headings on the left are enclosed in <td> tags but the fields on the right are enclosed in <p> tags. <p> tags have additional spacing (margin or padding) and take up the space of two lines while the field headings have no spacing and thus follow directly after the cell's upper border. --Slomox (talk) 20:01, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
If you want to change it: put the "vertical-align: middle;" CSS statement. --Slomox (talk) 20:03, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I will experiment with this some more. --Jarekt (talk) 00:32, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

"Other wikis"

Hi Slomox, and tnx for your message on my cy talk page. I've been considering the situation. I'm really concerned about a bad reaction because of what happened. Concerned not just for "my" Wiki but for "my" Commons as well and the way it is sometimes perceived on various Wikipedia editions ("Commons? All they do is delete stuff!"). Perhaps it might be best for us to have an informal discussion here first?

The situation is that Welsh Wikipedia was in a real mess five years ago. Few articles, mostly short and badly written, few users, and an absolutely minimal user interface, including lack of licensing options. Things have improved greatly but we still face problems because of lack of time and resources (few small wikis can afford to translate the mass of documentation on en and have to be selective). We now have most licensing options in place, including Fair Use, but have a large backlog of files to clear up. Most of these clearly state the source and status (usually own work, copied from en were Fair Use is claimed, or claiming Fair Use of logo etc) but the licensing options were simply not in place at the time. I've been aware of this. For some time now I've been replacing images with the same ones now available here, e.g. Geograph images, and am transferring most of my own PD files as well (slow process as they are mainly scans of books and old documents and need descriptive text so people know what they are). I've been thinking of initiating a project to clear up the backlog for some time, but always seem to have something else to do with my time. Then along comes RHaworth...

The problem is that it requires a Welsh-speaker to understand what is claimed for the files. And when I say "claimed" I don't doubt that they are almost all genuine as I will recognise most of the contributors and so anything that is dubious will stand out a mile. So, given what has happened, how do we go about this with sensitivity? There would have been no problem before - I've already deleted many Geograph files etc over the last few months - but now I am worried. Our team is a small one which works well together and I want to keep it that way - even losing a single regular editor is a big blow for us.

You can reply here, as this page will be on my watchlist, or at my talk page here on Commons. Thank you again for offering your help. Regards, Anatiomaros (talk) 21:32, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Fantastic! Just seen this. I'm in the middle of doing something now but I'll start deleting them soon. Diolch yn fawr (Thank you). Anatiomaros (talk) 21:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Edit conflict with your last edits
I was just going to post something on Y Caffi. Before I saw your message here I already composed a list of exact duplicates on cy.wp and stored it as a subpage of my userpage (cy:Defnyddiwr:Slomox/duplicates). These can be safely deleted (although they should be checked for Welsh translations that are missing on Commons).
With admin rights on cy.wp I could help deleting the duplicates and transferring information to Commons. But I guess that's not a good idea from a trust point of view ;-)
I assume that your community is not willing to give up all the non-free files (although it's certainly worth a discussion), so you'll need an Exemption Doctrine Policy. That should be discussed.
I cannot really tell what's the best way to do it. It's your community you know best what they will accept and what not. --Slomox (talk) 22:07, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
The list contains all 210 exact duplicates (same md5 hash). It does not include thumbnailed duplicates (of which there are many more). I'll look into methods of identifying more of them. --Slomox (talk) 22:10, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks again, Slomox. Sorry to be so long replying but real life sometimes takes priority over wikipedia work and I've been too busy to do much. I started working on your list yesterday but it will take time. Some images with different name are used in quite a few articles so I'll leave them till last.
Btw, I saw Sionnach's post @Village Pump and took a look at the situation on gd. He makes some good points and also asks an important question. One of his points is how difficult and daunting it can be to try and translate a long document full of technical terms. This is true even if you are perfectly fluent in both languages, as I am in Welsh and English. This is one reason why we haven't got around to implementing a formal Exemption Doctrine Policy yet, but we have discussed it in the past and the result was allowal of limited Free Use (e.g. logos). Sionnach also asks "I would really like to know if it is a "must" that all picture have to be uploaded to Commons and if all duplicates "must" be deleted or if these are just a suggestion for maintainance purpose.[?]". Personally, as my deletion record shows, I am all in favour of having PD images obtained from online sources such as Geograph on Commons alone rather than having dozens perhaps of copies of the same file on local projects. It makes sense. However, I really don't know the precise answer to Sionnach's question. I would say that it is desirable that free use images are placed on Commons but the fact is we can not dictate to people in this matter - at least I've never read any policy statement or guideline which implies that, which would in any case have to be a decision of WF not Commons or any other project. Do you know of anything? One reason I am asking is that it is likely that this will be asked at cy as well. Although I am totally committed to Commons there is no way that I am going to start "ordering" people to transfer images or files created by themselves to Commons (or anywhere else). That should be their choice. All I could say is "Please consider placing this on Commons". Anatiomaros (talk) 22:23, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
It's not a must to move freely licensed files to Commons and nobody can order anybody to do so. However there's no way to prevent other users from transferring freely licensed files from the local project to Commons. --Slomox (talk) 22:57, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

File:1993 06 theatre donald duck.jpg

Hallo, ich glaube, das ist meine eigene Entscheidung. Andere User benutzen auch eigene Templates. --R. Engelhardt (talk) 20:04, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Es ist nicht deine Entscheidung. Es gibt grundsätzlich keine "Eigentumsrechte" an eigenen Uploads. Es gibt eine allgemeine Vorlage {{Own}} und diese ist zu verwenden. Und es ist seit Jahren auf Commons allgemeiner Konsens, dass Flaggen nicht geeignet sind, um Sprachen zu kennzeichnen. --Slomox (talk) 20:14, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

  Hello, Slomox/Archiv. You have new messages at Martin_H.'s talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | suomi | français | galego | हिन्दी | hrvatski | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | português | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenščina | svenska | Tagalog | Türkçe | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--KALARICKAN | My Interactions 15:43, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

One more doubt

If the user link any image file to the category of ML.Wiki user pictures... Whether that gallery will automatically sort it according to the uploaded date and time...If yes its Okay, If no, what i need to do...???--KALARICKAN | My Interactions 07:49, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

You can have the category sorted by date by writing [[Category:NAMEOFCATEGORY|2010-10-19]] (2010-10-19 stands for the current date of upload in YYYY-MM-DD format). If you think that's too long to type then a second possibility is to use a substituted template. You just type {{subst:NAMEOFTEMPLATE}} and this will automatically be replaced with the string above. --Slomox (talk) 10:44, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
If i create that category [[Category:NAMEOFCATEGORY|2010-10-19]], Is i need to change the date everytime, like once in a month need to be updated.....I am thinking for a permanent solution...that
  1. Once a category is established (On sorting by uploads date) then leave it
  2. All the Ml.Wiki uploaders will link his/her uploaded files to that category...
then the bot will do the job...maintenance free..--KALARICKAN | My Interactions 14:28, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure I understand you right. With [[Category:NAMEOFCATEGORY|2010-10-19]] the category is named NAMEOFCATEGORY and "2010-10-19" is the sortkey that influences the position of the file on the category page. E.g. if I put [[Category:User en|Zlomox]] on my userpage, the userpage will appear in the category User en, but it will not appear under "S" in the category, but under "Z".
You cannot sort a category by date without setting a sortkey. --Slomox (talk) 17:01, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Now its clear..., Is there any permission required to make a category on commons--KALARICKAN | My Interactions 04:14, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
No. --Slomox (talk) 14:36, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Zbigniew Wasiel.jpg

This image was used only at Wikis where the articles which it'd ilustrated were deleted. I admit that I overlooked one wiki (nds), where I replaced this image by another one, better in quality and so on. Masur (talk) 06:54, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Still, as long as Wasiel has articles on some Wikipedias, you cannot delete images of him. --Slomox (talk) 12:04, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

need help on template

Hello Slomox, anything new about "data".

I tried to take inspiration from what you have done at {{LangSwitch}} for the translation part of {{Inscription}} but did not manage quite well. I wanted to bypass the need to use langSwitch inside the template, which looks quite awkward. The basic idea is that {{inscription|Good morning|lang=en|de=Guten Morgen}} should appear as "good morning" to English users and "Good morning"[Guten Morgen] for German users. It works but two upgrades would be needed:

  • It can be interesting to have the possibility to add something inside the brackets for English users as well, to explain an old expression for instance (in this case we would have an "en=XX"). Yet I cannot put >{{#ifeq: {{int:lang}} | {{{lang|}}} | {{#if: {{{ {{int:lang}} }}} | <nowiki>[{{{ en }}}] }} </nowiki> because {{{ {{int:lang}} }}} gives "{{{ lang) }}} by default rather than nothing.
  • it would be better if Low Saxons could get a fallback on the German translation rather than no translation at all.

Do you know if there is a way to do that or if I should write each language one by one ?

By the way I have expanded {{Size}} some time ago nds translation would be needed.--Zolo (talk) 21:30, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I updated Template:Size/nds.
I have not yet fully looked into the actual code of your template, so sorry if this answer does not address the real problem, but have you tried {{{{{int:lang}}|}}} instead of {{{ {{int:lang}} }}}? It should be empty that way. --Slomox (talk) 01:12, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Okay, thanks I should have thought of it myself. Actually there were still some things that did not work quite well, so I copied most of langSwitch. There may be some useless parts but it works!--Zolo (talk) 07:20, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Slomox/Archiv/2010".