User talk:Multichill/Archives/2021/April

Adding structured data after a pattypan upload?

Dear Multichill,

Thank you for adding structured data after i did a Pattypan upload. As a supposedly grown-up person, i should clear up my own mess, but how? Do you have suggestions how i could easily add structured data to these uploads? (At present Pattypan apparently has not integrated the automatic addition of structured data to its upload.) Thanks, it's spring!, Hansmuller (talk) 08:33, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Please delete this pic

Hello, I'm the photographer and the model of this picture (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MadMouse.tif) and I do not give my permission to use it. It has been stolen an it has copyright as you can see on my website: https://www.lidiavives.com/pop/mad-mouse Could you please delete it? Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Il Barberini (talk • contribs) 13:41, 1 December 2020‎ (UTC)

The lady who is in the picture has received a divorce notice because of the picture. Kindly delete it. Naidulok (talk) 08:51, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

vls.wiki

Hi! If you know any users on vls.wiki perhaps you could have a look at vls:Wikipedia:Café#Files_on_vls.wiki and poke them? :-) --MGA73 (talk) 17:49, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Devil's Lake SP Lynx Mound P7180248.jpg

This file may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Devil's Lake SP Lynx Mound P7180248.jpg, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work. While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

 

Discostu (talk) 14:26, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Devil's Lake SP Lynx Mound P7180248.jpg

File:Devil's Lake SP Lynx Mound P7180248.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Discostu (talk) 18:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Devil's Lake SP Lynx Mound P7180248.jpg

Please follow Commons rules and convert quick deletion requests you disagree with into regular deletion requests instead of reverting. - - Discostu (talk) 19:02, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Discostu: really? You're tagging an upload of more than 10 years ago for speedy-deletion and you come complaining here about rules? It's clearly stated that the photo is from 1919 and that the photo is from the USA. Multichill (talk) 19:07, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

GeographBot: too much metadata!

This is in a sense the reverse of the above: File:Telephone box, Atworth - geograph.org.uk - 1879920.jpg has ended up with two copies of all the structured data, which causes entertaining breakage of {{Geograph from structured data}}. --bjh21 (talk) 09:56, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Bjh21: this actually crossed my mind when implementing the other fix, but forgot about it again. Shouldn't be too hard to fix. I'll have a look. I just have to check if it already has structured data and if the structured data already has source of file (P7482) (so [1] this won't disrupt it) and if that's not the case, add it.

On second thought, this is harder. It looks like an upstream bug in Pywikibot/MediaWiki API. The API request failed, the bot waited 5 seconds and tried again. Because both edits are done by the same user, no edit conflict is thrown by the API. I recall having a bug open for this in Phabricator somewhere. Should be extremely rare. Did you see many cases? I only found one other case (File:St Peters Way - geograph.org.uk - 288877.jpg), see Query

Might be better to not solve this in the bot, but just deploy a duplicate statement removal bot like we have on Wikidata. Multichill (talk) 16:43, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

I was looking for files in Category:Images from Geograph Britain and Ireland with odd sort keys, and that was the only one I noticed. That wouldn't catch anything that doesn't use {{Geograph from structured data}}, though, which is why I didn't spot the other one you found. --bjh21 (talk) 17:04, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hulp gevraagd

Dag Multichill. Ik poog deze foto van de juiste beschrijving te voorzien echter er blijft een fout instaan. Kun je me helpen? Mvg Sonty (talk) 10:36, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Sonty567: Iemand was mij al voor. Multichill (talk) 16:56, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata infobox in individual painting category

Hi! Why did you add a Wikidata infobox to a category that has no Wikidata connection? Yes, probably it should have one, but as it stands, the result is only an error message. If it had a Wikidata connection, Pi bot would add the infobox (also recording the Qid in the edit summary so that eventual vandalism on Wikidata is easier to track). —Tacsipacsi (talk) 13:13, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Tacsipacsi: because it can probably and should be linked to Wikidata, see Commons:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Individual painting categories and Commons:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Individual painting categories/To link. Multichill (talk) 14:00, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, probably it should be linked, but the order was wrong: first link it to Wikidata, then add the infobox, if you managed to find/create the item (or just let Pi bot do the rest). I’m glad you added this particular link, but it was just an example, I’m pretty sure there are still tons of pages that display the error message after your bot edits. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 20:03, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Tacsipacsi: No, this is exactly the right order. I used User:Multichill/Kladblok as a starting point with a lot of filtering and manual approval to only catch what looked like individual paintings. This populates Commons:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Individual painting categories/To link. Next step is to process that page.

Category:Uses of Wikidata Infobox with no item already contained over 60.000+ subcategories before I even started so I'm not really worried about temporary increasing that a bit. Multichill (talk) 21:02, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

This particular category was broken for more than 18 hours; even if you meant it to be temporary, it didn’t look so. I mean 18 hours if it doesn’t get stuck in the caches, and practice shows that often it does. If you did the other way round, it wouldn’t have had an opportunity to get stuck in the caches. And even if you consider temporary breakage not to be an issue, I still don’t understand why is this the right order, what drawbacks would have adding the sitelinks first had. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 22:01, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Big thanks!

Your bot is fantastic! It added very valuable structured data here for example: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Reise_des_Kunden_Costumer_Journey_Map_with_Touchpoints_by_M_Heintz_DigitEcon.jpg&diff=503762232&oldid=403894538 — Preceding unsigned comment added by So9q (talk • contribs) 12:04, 21 April 2021‎ (UTC)

Happy to see my work is appreciated. Multichill (talk) 16:13, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Oil on canvas

Hi Multichill. I wonder why your bot is doing edits like this. Either it should remove the Swedish translation or do nothing. Since Module:I18n/oil on canvas has both the langages, the templates {{En}} and {{Sv}} becomes redundant. I don't know how many cases this has happened in. But maybe there's other cases with similar translated modules. – GeMet [talk] 01:05, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Because I was replacing the Swedish "Olja på duk" with {{Oil on canvas}}. You incorrectly wrapped {{Oil on canvas}} in {{En}}. So I guess it depends on how many files you did that? I only found 6 cases. Multichill (talk) 20:13, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Interview for Commons APIs

Hi Multichill! My name is Seve and I am the Product Manager for the Platform engineering team at WMF. I am currently taking an audit of our different APIs to better understand how they are being used and the challenges and issues that these interfaces currently present. I wanted to ask if you're available for an interview to specifically shed light on the API(s) around Wikimedia Commons. I am happy to set up a time that works with your schedule.

Looking forward to chatting! SK SKim (WMF) (talk) 16:27, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

@SKim (WMF): sure Monday/Tuesday around 20:00 CEST is usually a good option. Please send an email to decide on date and time. Multichill (talk) 16:44, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Creator template or what to do?

Hi! Some local archives in Denmark would like to share photos with Wiki. An example File:Genforeningen 1920 Chr X på hest med en pige.jpg. What is the best way to set it up? A creator template is not correct I guess because it is not the archive that is the photographer. Any tips? --MGA73 (talk) 18:44, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

@MGA73: let's throw in Commons:Guide to batch uploading and Commons:Guide to content partnerships which might provide some useful information (and I always wonder if people bother to read it).

When uploading historic photographs, {{Photograph}} is probably more suitable. I would just list the archive as the source. Also an institution template is useful. I updated the image with these changes.

Are we talking about a lot of images? If yes, a source template would be useful to add a tracker category.

Your example upload does have issues. The source doesn't provide an author and it's from 1920, but does say it's in the public domain. Why exactly? And why was {{Cc-zero}} added? That seems incorrect. Multichill (talk) 16:29, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Yes I know the upload is not good. Someone started a project and did not check things first. I was not told about it untill a few days ago. So I do not know how many images we are talking about. I would say that it depends on if they can explain why the photos are PD and if the persons in the photo are notable.

We have {{PD-Denmark50}} that would be usefull in some cases. The archives sometimes get the photos donated by the photographers or their hiers. We can either reject them or trust that they know what they are doing. Personally I would like to have them give detalis if they have them. There is no reason to guess if they can tell where they got the image from. --MGA73 (talk) 16:40, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Odd template choice

While artwork features prominently in File:Centralia, WA - main post office interior 06.jpg and File:Centralia, WA - main post office interior 03.jpg, it doesn't seem to be so prominent that it is appropriate to replace {{Information}} with {{Artwork}}. Who is making the decision on when to do this? I see that the actual change was made by your bot, with no indication of human agency. - Jmabel ! talk 22:40, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Joe, every once in a while I add some more images to Category:Paintings without Wikidata item to more images used on Wikidata and more files here linked to Wikidata. This is part of Commons:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Improving metadata to link to Wikidata. I usually skim the list to filter out some of the edge cases. I try to be careful and I found well over 200.000 painting images this way without too many issues. I did run into other photos from this set, but I didn't run into these two. Switched them to {{Art photo}} now and created Industries of Lewis County (Q106626718) and Main Post Office (Q106626724) to link everything together. You might like to expand these items or you might like to work on User:Multichill/Same image without Wikidata/Wikidata creator, institution and inventory number match which grew with a lot of National Gallery of Art based on my recent edits. Multichill (talk) 16:10, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, this is a much better way to do this. - Jmabel ! talk 02:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello

How can we upload screen shots to commons. Which license should we use? TogoYogi (talk) 03:16, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Probably not suitable for Commons, see Commons:Screenshots. Multichill (talk) 08:50, 30 April 2021 (UTC)