Commons:Village pump/Archive/2022/12

Ornitologists

Hello, do we have a contributor on board with knowledge of ornithology or even better, an Ornithologist? Thanks. Lotje (talk) 10:32, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

• @Lotje: Unless there is a reason this is specific to Commons, you might ask at en:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Birds. - Jmabel ! talk 16:16, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

  @Jmabel: , there was actually a specific reason: File:The birds of Africa, comprising all the species which occur in the Ethiopian region (1896) (14753266334).jpg but MarcoSwart at Wiktionary was able to trac it back, so I added the category herE. Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 16:43, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

WD mismatch

At Category:Co-orbital objects, the WD item on the left of the page does not match the WD item transcluded through the Infobox Wikidata template. No idea why. Kwamikagami (talk) 07:27, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

• That is really weird. - Jmabel ! talk 16:21, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

@Kwamikagami: I think this is just the infobox trying to track down the main Wikidata item for the topic. Category:Co-orbital objects (Q15216182) has its Commons sitelink and its Commons category (P373) pointing at Category:Co-orbital objects, but its category's main topic (P301) is co-orbital satellite (Q1707270). The main topic is generally where the useful information in Wikidata will be, so the infobox points to that rather than to the category. --bjh21 (talk) 18:04, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Okay, didn't know if this was something that should be "fixed". If you're happy with it, I'll leave it alone. Kwamikagami (talk) 18:09, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Warren Commission

Hi, Could someone confirm that Category:US National Archives series: Numbered Exhibits is OK as subcategory of Category:Warren Commission. If yes, then all files which are in both categories can be removed from Category:Warren Commission. Thanks, Yann (talk) 20:58, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Also what's the point to have Category:US National Archives series: Numbered Exhibits, 11/30/1963 - 9/24/1964 (hidden category) in addition to Category:US National Archives series: Numbered Exhibits, with some images of the same item in one and some in the other? That's very confusing. Yann (talk) 15:05, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Posible duplicate

File:218 137-8 DB City-Bahn Lackierung - DB Museum Koblenz 13.06.15 (18651127679).jpg and File:218 137-8 (Flickr 18651127679).jpg are the same but one has been 'optimized'.Smiley.toerist (talk) 13:13, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done. --A.Savin 20:22, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

banner showing link to vote in last year's Picture of the Year

When reading a page on the English Wikipedia (in fact my own user talk page), I am seeing a banner at the top, with a slideshow of various photos and a link to "help choose the best image of the year". The only trouble is, it is for 2021. I guess that the relevant input that produces this is somewhere on Commons, so am reporting it here in case someone knows how this can be updated. (Note that this banner appears above the page title, so it is clearly not part of how the talk page's own wiki content is being rendered.) Dani di Neudo (talk) 16:01, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

• Isn't that exactly correct? Aren't we currently determining the best picture of the previous year, not the current year? - Jmabel ! talk 16:17, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

  @Jmabel: Yes, that is exactly correct. We can't judge what happened in 2022 until it's over and all the votes for all the FP nominations for all the uploads for 2022 have been tallied. The nominating, voting, and tallying for FPs takes months.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 18:48, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks for clarification. For some reason, also the link wasn't giving me the opportunity to vote, so I assumed that it was last year's competition. Tried it now (on a different computer) and it was fine. --Dani di Neudo (talk) 05:06, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Mark for manual license review?

1. File A is from Flickr with license review passed.
2. File B is a derivative work of File A, but it is lacking proper reference to the original File on Flickr
3. I add that information and mark File B for {{Flickrreview}}
4. The bot detects that as of now the File on Flickr is all rights reserved and marks file as a non-pass (which I reverted for now)

•  Question Is there a way to request a human license reviewer to have a look at this (other than posting here)?
•  Question What happens if I as a non-license reviewer just copy the successful review from File A to File B? (i.e.: do we have any mechanism in place that prevents non-license reviewers from just putting a reviewed by bot template on a file description page?)

Thanks, El Grafo (talk) 09:07, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

• @El Grafo: No idea on your first question, but on your second is there any reason {{LicenseReview}} wouldn't work? - Jmabel ! talk 16:26, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

  @Jmabel I don't know, I assumed the bot would jump in and reject it again since there doesn't seem to be a parameter in the template to stop it. --El Grafo (talk) 08:34, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

• Question for the community in general: any problem with someone just marking File B as a derivative work of the already-approved File A, and leaving out file review entirely for File B? - Jmabel ! talk 16:28, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

  I think that's a perfectly reasonable approach. The point of licence review is to have a second, trusted person record that the file really is available at the source under the licence specified, because we can't trust that the source will keep it available. Where the source is Commons itself, this isn't really useful, because any admin thinking about deleting the derived file can look at the history of the purported source file to determine whether the derived on is correctly licensed. --bjh21 (talk) 17:44, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

copypaste the original review template. you're not forging it so it's ok.--RZuo (talk) 20:01, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Categories of Intangible Cultural Heritage

I have started work to import all items in UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage Lists (Q4435332) and we are working to make a global effort to bring all items in the national inventory of intangible cultural heritage (Q113040113) to Wikidata. When the data is added, it can be used to power contests about these traditions. The activities are related to the 20th anniversary of Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage (Q5166256).

The data and the structures are entangled on all Wikimedia projects. The UNESCO lists, their subsets nationally and the national inventories are mixed up with list articles and other arbitrary items. I have started working on arranging the structures on Wikidata in the WikiProject Intangible Cultural Heritage (Q112898263), but I notice that also Wikimedia Commons categories will need rearranging. I created a quick class draft, and I would be willing to correct the references created during the Wikidata cleaning process to corrected Wikimedia Commons categories. I would need to rename and create categories. What are your concerns about this? – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 08:53, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

• It is very hard to answer this with no clue what we are moving away from and therefore what current information might be lost. Can you give at least some examples of what you propose to get rid of? Adding new categories like this is certainly fine, but the question is what existing categories would be removed. - Jmabel ! talk 16:52, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks for the response! I will try to briefly note some problems:

  The name of Category:Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity and the subclasses might be misleading, as it refers to intangible heritage elements inscribed in the UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage Lists (Q4435332). The categories include heritage elements that are subsets of elements on the lists, but also elements in the national inventories as well as other intangible heritage items.

  We are working on a global effort on Wikidata to create items for all national inventory of intangible cultural heritage (Q113040113) and import the elements on those lists. The fused content of the Commons categories and misleading naming make it hard to match equivalent Commons categories to the Wikidata items, and to create guidelines to follow. I would like to accommodate for a substantial amount of new, accurate information. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 08:12, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

  The Category:Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity mentioned in the introductory passage is not related to the national inventory of intangible cultural heritage (Q113040113). It is the precursor of the UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage Lists (Q4435332). – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 08:32, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

  I have created a hierarchy at Category:Intangible cultural heritage to display how national inventories fit in. The subcategory Category:Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity remains as is, but needs more work with renaming, moving content related only to the national inventories or other lists or no inventories at all, and renaming categories accordingly. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 11:02, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

sorry i'm a bit lost. what's the different between Category:Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity in Finland and Category:Intangible cultural heritage in Finland? also there should be a consistent cat tree (using the same preposition), unlike finland using "in" while others use "of".--RZuo (talk) 07:33, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

This is the point I am making: Not all intangible heritage is Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity that is listed in the UNESCO lists. Some are official national inventories, and some are intangible cultural heritage without an official status (notice caps in the other and lowercase initials in the other). I think we should consider that as well. The name does not reflect to all these use cases.

I made a draft/proposal of changing the naming scheme from "of" to "in" to communicate that this is some of the intangible heritage in the country, not all. But as I think more closely about this, the UNESCO inscribed elements are finite, and therefore the name of the category that ONLY includes UNESCO inscribed elements could have it written with "of".

Previously it may not have been necessary to make the distinction, as there has been so little information to make base it on. But with this upcoming effort, I think it is only fair that the category structure can be made to follow the actual structure of the elements. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 11:33, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

revision merging railroad maps from different years into one file

At Help Desk a user wants to merge the files for the Vienna light railway system from different years (with different lines in the different years) into a single file (as the earlier version will still be in the file history). Them gives the file File:NYC subway-4D.svg as example. It is an featured picture and picture of the day, it is used in multiple wikipedias in multiple articles and it has over time been changed to include new stations and changed lines. The rationale is, that all the articles should include the current railmap by changing the existing file. It is really meant to work this way? --C.Suthorn (talk) 17:46, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

i think we should come up with a guideline (named like com:updatable images). does one already exist?

basically, i think there are two ways to handle continuous updates to a file, very often a map, logo, flag...

1. an official version should be updated to the latest version and bear the official name, e.g. File:Flag of New Zealand.svg
2. (significant) historical or alternative versions should have separate files, e.g. File:Flag of the United States (1912-1959, 3-2 aspect ratio).svg.

a map obviously can be designed in many different ways unlike logos/flags, so technically there is no official version, but ofc there should be a version constantly updated that will be utilised by other wikis to show the latest reality.

significant alternative versions, such as flags in different aspect ratios or colour schemes, should get separate files, just as different/historical graphic designs of the same thing should get separate files.--RZuo (talk) 07:33, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

POTY mistake

Well I unknowingly voted for a picture and I don’t know what to do, since I’m not registered before 2021. It is at this post where I voted. Jellyfish picture —-SikiWtideI (talk) 02:32, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

@SikiWtideI: you can unvote by clicking the button. if you're concerned about your eligibility to vote, you dont need to worry, because that's determined by software. even if you're ineligible, organisers of the vote will take care of that. you dont need to do anything.--RZuo (talk) 07:33, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Voting on the Wikimedia Sound Logo is about to begin

Dearest Commons community members,

In a few hours, you'll be cordially invited to vote on your favourite sound logo finalists. With 3,234 submissions from 2,094 people, we were positively encouraged by the participation and hope that the voting will be equally engaged. This is the fun part now and we are grateful to all participants that got us to this point. We are particularly grateful for the screening team of volunteers and the selection committee that helped frame and guide this phase of the project. We are so close to the identifying the Sound of All Human Knowledge. Voting begins on 6 December and ends on 19 December, 2022. MPourzaki (WMF) (talk) 19:33, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Arabic headwear

Seen in Saudi Arabia

How do we classify this style of headwear? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:51, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Probably Category:Keffiyeh. --A.Savin 20:25, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

More specifically, it appears to be an agal. De728631 (talk) 19:43, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

How to warn about previous hoaxes

A few years back, we had a series of photoshopped images uploaded by different accounts/socks, in which different people were shown as standing next to a now-deceased poet. (See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ferlinghetti at Caffe Trieste.jpg and links therein.) Category:Lawrence Ferlinghetti exists, and although I haven't seen any similar images recently, I'm wondering if there is a good way to leave a note that lets other editors know about previous problems. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:46, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

I can't really think of any useful way to do that. - Jmabel ! talk 04:18, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

As someone who has found hoaxes/manipulations/forgeries myself; I find the approach of "Commons will refuse to learn lessons" not okay. I think we should NOT begin to clamp down on new submissions (most uploads aren't hoaxes), but a training/guide that is linked somewhere in the Help-Section for those who find problematic files, would be great. Such a dedicated page would explain how to detect hoaxes and image manipulations, and discuss previous cases. Just from the top of my head: 1 and 2 hoaxes involving map forgery. (On the other hand, let's not get over-excited and exp­ect deception and hoaxes everywhere.) --Enyavar (talk) 12:09, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

I agree that it's a bad idea to expect deception everywhere, except in the part that says "own work". ;-)

I had thought about leaving a note at Category talk:Lawrence Ferlinghetti with links to the deletion requests. It might make it find-able for someone who's searching for it, but not bother anyone who is just browsing categories. I'm not sure if it's worth it, though. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:30, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

There is a {{Hoax}} template with which you could tag relevant images. --HyperGaruda (talk) 18:46, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

operation of space bar in POTY voting

I visited the POTY voting page using Chrome on Linux. After casting one of my votes, I then pressed the space bar in order to scroll down, as is normal in Chrome. However, it had the unexpected effect of removing the vote just cast. Fortunately there was then a message stating that the vote was being removed, which alerted me to it, so I cast the vote again. This time I clicked away afterwards (i.e. clicked a blank part of the page), and then when I used the space bar to scroll down, it worked properly without the problem recurring. Maybe the design of Chrome is such that there is nothing that can be done about the unintentional removal of votes (for example, if all that the server sees is that the form has been resubmitted, and there is no way for the server or any Javascript function to tell whether a space bar press or a mouse click caused this). However, if possible, it would be good to change this behaviour so that to remove a vote you have to use a mouse click, especially because the length of the page is such that most people will need to scroll down to see them all. Thanks. Dani di Neudo (talk) 05:26, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

@Dani di Neudo: Hi, and welcome. Any time you just used a checkbox in a browser, pressing the spacebar will change the status of that checkbox because the focus is still on that checkbox. Instead, please try: tapping the pagedown button (you may have to repeat, tab, or click whitespace for this to be effective); clicking whitespace or unclickable text outside the checkbox to change the focus, then tapping the spacebar; or scrolling down your mousewheel (if you have one). Similarly, using arrow keys when you just clicked a radio button may change which radio button is selected (depending on the layout of the radio button array).   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 12:11, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, as mentioned, on my second attempt I clicked on whitespace before using the spacebar. I was just wondering if there was a way to make the default behaviour more intuitive. Maybe not? Dani di Neudo (talk) 13:39, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

@Dani di Neudo: You could ask the Google Chrome and Mediawiki developers for settings to do that, but your chances are slim. JavaScript to capture the use of the space bar and not let it click might work, if you run JavaScript and can program that.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 14:30, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Okay, not to worry, thanks. I just reported it in case there was anything simple. Dani di Neudo (talk) 22:21, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Wich paddlesteamer?

On the 14th july 1999 I sailed from Évian to Lausanne (D 19:00 A Lausanne 19:35) I took the pictures from File:Paddle steamer Lake Geneva 1999 1.jpg to File:Paddle steamer Lake Geneva 1999 5.jpg If I compare with other pictures it is most likely Category:Helvétie (ship, 1926) or Category:Simplon (ship, 1920). Both boats hve split lower windows and a pilot cabine with slichtly sloping windows. However in the picture File:Paddle steamer Lake Geneva 1999 3.jpg there is the engine date of 1915, before either 1920 or 1926. Maybe it is a reused engine. Smiley.toerist (talk) 19:16, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

I don't think it is Helvétie. As one can see in File:L'Helvetie.jpg, that ship has triple windows as opposed to the one in your image. Moreover, Helvétie doesn't seem to have a bell installed in the bow section. Simplon, however, does have a bell whose rim matches exactly the pattern that can be seen on the left edge of your photo. De728631 (talk) 19:40, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Flickr2commons

I just loaded File:Portrush railway station - An Elizabethan railway station.jpg, a Robert French image from the NLI [1] with no copyright restrictions which usually is sufficient everything to be sorted out okay under the hood. This time I've just noticed its been flagged for deletion due to invalid licence (which undefined is). I can probably fix this manually in a little while. It could be this is a one-off blip or it is possible something has begun not to work with the process, which is the reason I'm posting here. Thankyou. -- Deirge Ó Dhaoinebeaga_(a)^talk 11:54, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Same for me: early this morning I uploaded one photo from Flickr, no problem. Two hours later I uploaded another three, all with licence cc-by-2.0: at this moment (5 hours later) there still is no (automatical) review. So, there might be something wrong, or a very long list with uploads? JopkeB (talk) 14:50, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

@Deirge Ó Dhaoinebeaga: Hi, and welcome. We now have 1,096 files in Category:Flickr review needed. The bot FlickreviewR 2 usually reviews them, and is currently working on the backlog, but had a nearly 5-hour outage earlier (from 07:38 to 12:31 (UTC)). I reviewed the file for you anyway.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 16:14, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

See also User talk:Zhuyifei1999#Backlog.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 16:27, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

UploadWizard writing "undefined" instead of "Flickr-no known copyright restrictions"

i just tested Special:UploadWizard using for example File:NMRC-Asia.jpg. instead of writing {{Flickr-no known copyright restrictions}}{{flickrreview}}, it wrote "undefined".--RZuo (talk) 17:35, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Obviously, it should not be doing that.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 18:01, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Thats what had happened to me with Portrush railway station this morning but I fixed the license myself by comparing with another example. See Special:Diff/713144043. Also probably not relevant for the Flickr2Commons import is that a similar image pre-exists here, namely File:Portrush Rly Station, 1890s.jpg, which appears as if its a cropped lower res. image wich on close examination was probably but not certainly a different copy of the same original. I mention this in the outside chance it was relevant to the barf. -- Deirge Ó Dhaoinebeaga_(a)^talk 19:52, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Vote for your favourite Wikimedia sound logo

Voting in the Wikimedia sound logo contest has started. From December 6 to 19, 2022, please play a part and help chose the sound that will identify Wikimedia content on audio devices. Learn more on Diff.

The sound logo team is grateful to everyone who participated in this global contest. We received 3,235 submissions from 2,094 participants in 135 countries. We are incredibly grateful to the team of volunteer screeners and the selection committee who, among others, helped bring us to where we are today. It is now up to Wikimedia to choose the Sound Of All Human Knowledge.

Best wishes. MPourzaki (WMF) (talk) 20:53, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Featured photo in 2023

This file named File:Makkasan Interchange at night by Mark Fischer.jpg it took place 11 February 2023. 2001:44C8:422B:98D0:BC73:F86C:7B24:6DE0 00:59, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

No, 2023 is in the future.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 03:12, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Reminder to provide feedback on the Movement Charter content

Hi all,

We are in the middle of the community consultation period on the three draft sections of the Movement Charter: Preamble, Values & Principles, and Roles & Responsibilities (statement of intent). The community consultation period will last until December 18, 2022. The Movement Charter Drafting Committee (MCDC) encourages everyone who is interested in the governance of the Wikimedia movement to share their thoughts and opinions on the draft content of the Charter.

How do you share your feedback?

Interested people can share their feedback via different channels provided below:

• Fill out a survey (optional and anonymous, accessible in different languages)
• Share your thoughts and feedback on the Meta Talk pages:
  • Preamble
  • Values & Principles
  • Roles & Responsibilities (statement of intent)
• Share your thoughts and feedback on the MS Forum:
  • Preamble
  • Values & Principles
  • Roles & Responsibilities (statement of intent)  
• Send an email to: movementcharterwikimediaorg if you have other feedback to the MCDC.  

If you want to help include your community in the consultation period, you are encouraged to become a Movement Charter Ambassador. Please find out more about it here.

Thank you for your participation!

On behalf of the Movement Charter Drafting Committee,

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 11:09, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

4nn1l2 banned by the Foundation

The administrator 4nn1l2 was banned today by the Foundation. This was one of the users who were particularly aggressive against me here, so I can not really complain, but I though the community should know. (I am unrelated to the block). Ymblanter (talk) 21:17, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

English Wikipedia's The Signpost has a story drafted about the 16 bans at en:Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Next_issue/News_and_notes. If anyone has Wikimedia Commons-context for the ban then please post to en:Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom. Right now, the general cause for the bans is not apparent, although in the case of this one user, there are on-wiki records of conflicts. Bluerasberry (talk) 16:19, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

I do not have any insider information, and whatever else I have to say would be qualified as "gravedancing", so I better won't.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:39, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Request for deletion of uploaded copyright work.

In this discussion (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Template:Resolution_restricted-by-sa#Template%3AResolution_restricted-by-sa) the license I used for many of my works was deprecated. I have only just become aware of this. My understanding is there is concern the images are not "free" even though that was the intention with the license. However, if there is such substantial risk that they are't free and I am not willing to amend or change the license, why are they still here on Wikimedia. I would suggest they be deleted and I would welcome that. Saffron Blaze (talk) 03:13, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

@Saffron Blaze: Please see Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Saffron Blaze.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 03:43, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

@Saffron Blaze: Why don't you want to change the license? Just curious. Nosferattus (talk) 04:45, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Category:Rising Sun Flag of Japan

For some reason, Category:Rising Sun Flag of Japan is its own parent. Nothing overt; maybe a problem with a template that causes category inclusion and shouldn't? - Jmabel ! talk 01:43, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

{{Japanese militarism symbol}} includes {{Teikoku symbol}} which includes {{Teikoku symbol/layout}} and sets Category:Rising Sun Flag of Japan. -- William Graham (talk) 01:58, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

I would think Template:Teikoku symbol/layout should not be setting any topical category. - Jmabel ! talk 06:27, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Participation of russia in Wiki Loves Monuments 2022

I can understand (barely) that russia was included in this year's WLM ... however, I can't understand how it can still be a part of Wiki LOVES Monuments while engaging in deliberate destruction of monuments (see: Ukrainian monuments, destroyed by russia)

I'd suggest that the russian participation in this year's Wiki Loves Monuments can consist only of photos of Ukrainian (and Syrian, and Chechen, and Moldovan, and Georgian, etc. etc. etc.) monuments russians destroyed.

All other entries by them should be absolutely ineligible, rejected with utter disgust, and russian participation in the WLM should be barred until further notice.

...

A decision to leave the genocide perpetrators and monument destroyers in this year's WLM after the russian invasion would be a conscious, political statement that amounts to genocide and destruction support - and it can't be made without consulting other participating countries (especially Ukraine), and other contributors to WLM. I as a contributor myself will absolutely reconsider having my entries displayed together with those from genocidal, monument-destroying russia.

--KAP Jasa (talk) 09:09, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Please don't bring political issues to this neutral platform. --HyperGaruda (talk) 09:18, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Being "neutral" is a political statement. And Wiki Loves Monuments is a public photo competition - not some cold, impartial description of facts (that requires neutrality). So it is absolutely necessary to discuss participation of destroyers of monuments in an event that celebrates the love of monuments. KAP Jasa (talk) 09:56, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

The Wikimedia Movement in Russia is part of the opposition against the government of Russia. Some activists from the Wikimedia Movement in Russia are even in prison. Why should we exclude the Russian opposition from our project because of the Russian government? We should support them and not punish them for the country the live in. GPSLeo (talk) 10:25, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

For clarity, the organizers of WLM Russia have no connection to the Russian government and even not with the national Wikimedia chapter. Ymblanter (talk) 10:49, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

 Comment I blocked KAP Jasa for harassment for 2 weeks, i.e. [2]. Yann (talk) 10:29, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

The contributions are based simply on geography. Not nationality, ethnicity or the sense of belonging of the contributor so your proposal has a major flaw, unless you want to proclaim Ukraine and Syria as part of Russia? Not to say that in some cases the occupying forces are the only ones who can take pictures of some destroyed monuments, I don't think that is who you want to participate either. A Russian photographer could travel the world and participate in as many regional contests as they pleased, surely we are not going to ask uploaders for their passport. Looks like the Russian contest hasn't picked any finalists for the international round before the deadline anyway so this issue has been solved even without your campaign. TFerenczy (talk) 10:38, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

No, the images were actually sent to the international jury. Ymblanter (talk) 10:50, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

What about monuments destroyed in Ukraine, Poland, Baltic countries by authorities and activists? Shouldn't same principle applied in these cases? --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:24, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

@EugeneZelenko: no, the "principle" should not be applied anywhere. What next? Coming after the U.S. for recent destruction of Confederate monuments? History happens. Sometimes we like it, sometimes we don't. Commons (and Wikipedia) are supposed to be primarily about documenting, not about taking sides. - Jmabel ! talk 18:03, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

This was exactly my point. Sorry, if I was not clear in expressing sarcasm. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 19:54, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

How to upload a video?

I have a video I recorded on my phone, but when I try to upload it I get the error message "There was an error in your submission. This wiki does not accept filenames that end in the extension ".MOV"." - and nothing more? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:45, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

That was the error message through the upload wizard, Trying Special:Upload, it just highlights "Permitted file types: tiff, tif, png, gif, jpg, jpeg, webp, xcf, mid, ogg, ogv, svg, djvu, stl, oga, flac, opus, wav, webm, mp3, midi, mpg, mpeg." in red, which is even less useful. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:47, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

@Mike Peel You may use Commons:video2commons url —MdsShakil (talk) 21:30, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

@MdsShakil: That isn't linked to from the upload pages? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:39, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

The upload pages assume you are using a supported file type. - Jmabel ! talk 02:33, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

@Mike Peel: Sorry, ".MOV" is not supported. Per COM:Video#Video formats, "Commons does not support the more commonly used patent encumbered video formats such as H.264 and H.265 that are used in MP4 and MOV files, since their use could require royalty payments."   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 03:09, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

@Jeff G., Jmabel, and MdsShakil: My point here is that we should provide some sort of guidance for people trying to upload .mov files - rather than just saying it's not accepted. I can figure it out - change the format to webm - but will others? And the file format is very common (the test file I was using was straight off an iPhone). The current error messages don't do anything to encourage people to upload videos. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 10:04, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

@Mike Peel: You could make a specific proposal at Commons:Village pump/Proposals. - Jmabel ! talk 17:18, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

You can also upload with Chunked upload. But you should firstly convert to webm format. -- Geagea (talk) 20:45, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Category keys

Not for the first time, I find images are being categorised with what are - it seem to to me - spurious sort keys.

For example, File:Amsterdam Airport Schiphol - 2019-10-24 - Andy Mabbett - 18.jpg was recenty changed from [[Category:2019 at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol]] to [[Category:2019 at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol|Transavia]]

I reverted the edit (not least on the grounds that it was marked as minor, when it is not), and have been reverted in turn by the same editor, User:Ardfern, whose edit summary claims: "It is indeed a minor edit and is standard format for aircraft at all airports"

Is this a "standard format for aircraft at all airports"? Where is it documented, and where was it discussed? If it is a "standard format", why do other images in Category:2019 at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, and other categories, not use it? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:33, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

• Hi, the 'spurious' sort key in category:2019 at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol allows photos in the 2019 Amsterdam Airport Schiphol category to be grouped by airline, rather than having a random jumble of photos in the category (as it is now). It is standard format as it has been in use for over 15 years by me and many others working in the aviation area. I don't know if it is documented anywhere, but then many formats that are standard as a result of usage over the years are in use all over Commons. As for the other images in the category they should indeed follow the same format, but just have not been processed yet. Ardfern (talk) 22:58, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
  • If you had looked further you would have seen that the years 2020, 2021 and 2022 are all handled in this way (as are hundreds of other airports). Sometimes (as in 2019) the files had not yet been processed (in this case as the category had been flooded with photos, as with 2018). Ardfern (talk) 00:54, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

    It does not really make for a strong case to claim something based on an unwritten tradition that only a handful of people know about. I would expect relevant guidelines in Commons:Categories, Commons:Category scheme aircraft (under development since 2015), Commons:WikiProject Aviation, or Category talk:Aircraft, but no.

    Besides, why sort based on airline? <sarcasm>Why not month/day or something else?</sarcasm> Not all airport-related images depict airplanes you know. --HyperGaruda (talk) 08:00, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

  • So, no prior discussion and no documentation, then? As for "a random jumble of photos", your edit means that sequentially-named flies alike File:Amsterdam Airport Schiphol - 2019-10-24 - Andy Mabbett - 01.jpg to File:Amsterdam Airport Schiphol - 2019-10-24 - Andy Mabbett - 28.jpg are not shown in order in the category, but appear instead to be randomly jumbled'. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:43, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
  • You also persist in marking this kind of non-minor edit as minor. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:54, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
    • My opinion on Category keys is they are a complete waste of time, if an editor wants to control how images are displayed they should use a gallery. It's pretty pointless in a category and not what categories are for. How ether it's mainly their time they are wasting. Oxyman (talk) 13:44, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

2015 in rail transport in Germany

In moving the files to lander categories, I come across File:Depot-Gleis 4 mit der RB-Linie 122 nach Oberammergau und stationärer Be- und Entsorgungsstation für die Züge.jpg with the German file description 'Copyright: DB AG', while having a descriptive title. Same problem with: File:Der SüWex in den Bergen.jpg, File:Die Software wird geprüft beim SüWex.jpg and File:ET 425 - einer der letzten Fahrten im Werdenfels März 2015.jpg.

I have two files without location information and identified station category: Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:08, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done

Regarding the "copyrighted" images: I think the uploader was just being (too) careful and only tries to say that the depicted subject belongs to someone/something else. File:ÖBB Elektrotechnischer Messwagen Bild 1.jpg is for example ascribed to a different company, but the camera model is still the same. Seems to me that the images themselves do belong to the uploader.

The two images to the right were taken at Frankfurt am Main's main railway station.

The coordinates were derived from the EXIF metadata, but it looks like the EXIF coordinates have a poor precision. I just replaced the ones stored in Wikicode with more plausible coordinates. --HyperGaruda (talk) 19:19, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

location? must be easily recognizable

Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:26, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

The Saturn building in the back of File:National Express Tz 361 (Unfallzug von Meerbusch) (2).jpg is the Hansahochhaus. The photographer was most likely looking northwest from approximately 50.94505°N,6.95682°E (the end of a platform of Breslauer Platz station in Cologne) to get this view. --HyperGaruda (talk) 12:42, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

The Category:September 2015 in rail transport in Thuringia is all about the Category:Meininger Dampfloktage 2015. In the files I only see two dates: 2 september and 5 september.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:59, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Hotlinking policy

Hi,

The hotlinking policy states as follows:

Hotlinking is allowed from Wikimedia servers, but not generally recommended: ...

If you do hotlink, then it is still necessary to follow the licensing conditions ...

Wikimedia generally does not allow 'hot spider' services, where each time someone performs a search on their site, the query is redirected to our site.

I would like to run a site that allows users to search Wikimedia Commons images. The indexing would be performed locally (on my servers), but displaying each results page would result in one query for each image thumbnail being made to Commons' servers, since I don't want to have to mirror the totality of 301 TB of images. No search queries would be forwarded or 302'd to Commons.

Assuming that I properly attribute images, link back to Commons properly, and so on, would this be a permissible use-case, or would it be "hot spidering"?

98.128.180.111 18:50, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Wow, that sentence is old. It was in the first version of Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia in 2007. Based on David Gerard's comments on the talk page at the time, this may have come from a VRT stock message or may have been something they used to send to email enquirers. That suggests it may come from the Wikimedia Foundation, but I'm not sure where you'd go to ask about that. --bjh21 (talk) 21:35, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

I think I asked the devs what was a good and bad idea? I'm diving back into ancient memories there. But we were fine with hotlinking, though with the obvious caveat that the image might go away at any point. The search service text, I don't remember - David Gerard (talk) 14:20, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Seems pretty what they were trying to avoid was people having external submissions into our runtime search engine. Then again, they didn't consider your approach. It could be a lot of hits on the server (though at least not a lot of computation). Any idea how many images you would bring up each time you generate a page? Any guesses of the volume of queries you expect to handle? And do you have a way to do this where you will fetch appropriately small thumbnails, rather than (for example) continually have your clients dynamically fetch larger images that will be thumbnailed client-side? - Jmabel ! talk 23:55, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Ghana

I am an infrequent user of common files, and today I came here looking for a file with a map of Ghana to use on the English Wikiquote, but all I can find is this: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ghana

Can anyone help please? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 20:20, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ottawahitech: On that page there's a link to Atlas of Ghana which has a number of maps; even more can be found in the category Category:Maps of Ghana and its subcategories. -M.nelson (talk) 20:31, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

@M.nelson: Thanks so much, found what I was looking for with your help.

General comment: I tried to see if this would work for other countries if I ever needed a map, so did a search on "Norway", and it appears that finding the word Atlas there is not quite as easy. Ottawahitech (talk) 04:58, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ottawahitech Galleries are very hit and miss (though the atlas ones might be better maintained than most). I expect you would have better luck with categories, like Category:Maps of Norway. Sometimes you just need to do things manually: you can open Atlas of Norway directly. Brianjd (talk) 05:52, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Patrolling workflow

Hi, I'm trying to spend some time on T120453 which hopefully reduces the work of patrollers on deleting copyright violations. Can you tell me more how admins/patrollers patrol new files for copyvio? For example, for what users do you check them (non-autopatrolled?), how does your workflow look like? I know the workflow for Wikipedia but not much for commons. Feel free to send me an email if you don't want to talk publicly. Thanks! Amir (talk) 06:49, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

ISA Workshop

Hello. The workshop on ISA Tool to discover, test and discuss the integration of semi-automated suggestions by Google Cloud Vision… will start in 20 mn (Monday 12th at 16h UTC+1).
All details here : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:ISA_Tool/Image_to_Concept#ISA_Workshop_-_Dec_12th

Anthere (talk) 14:41, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Seizure risks

I have created the category Seizure risk-related deletion requests. One such DR, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Color Flash.gif, is currently open; there, a user has suggested rules for seizure risk material. That discussion needs more comments from other users, and we need to move towards a guideline or policy on such material. Brianjd (talk) 05:47, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I recommend making all (in-scope) files with flashing fast enough to trigger seizures videos (so they do not automatically play) and placing “(SEIZURE RISK)” in the title; there should also be a warning template similar to the ones for things like Nazi and communist symbols. Dronebogus (talk) 01:21, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Seizures are not merely uncomfortable; they are a serious medical issue that can require hospital treatment. Given the comments at the DR, I wonder if anyone except Dronebogus understands that. Brianjd (talk) 07:21, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

NOTCENSORED is such a powerful and respected policy that it can easily become dogmatic and put WMC above any kind of social responsibility. I agree we don’t have to be the morality police but that’s because porn and Nazi symbols won’t send you to the hospital. Dronebogus (talk) 12:37, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Dronebogus Porn and Nazi symbols won’t harm your computer either. But PDF files and images with very high resolutions might, and we already include warnings on those, along with tools for users to view those files safely; I haven’t seen anyone claim that is censorship and I can’t see why this is any different. Brianjd (talk) 14:12, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Agree fully. Dronebogus (talk) 01:56, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Flickr Foundation launched

SmugMug, owners of Flickr, have launched the Flickr Foundation, "an independent, community-focused organization. We’re committed to stewarding this cultural treasure [Flickr Commons] for future generations, and fostering a visual commons we can all enjoy." Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:48, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

This is really encouraging and I'm surprised that I didn't get an email from them about it. Thanks! —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:26, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Koavf: I just got one an hour ago, they are probably rolling out the emails over some time. - Jmabel ! talk 23:17, 13 December 2022 (UTC)