User talk:Multichill/Archives/2020/September

Just wanted to say hi

Hi there,

You do some interesting things. Thank you for all your efforts. I hope you are happy with what you are doing.

Have a nice weekend!

Quite happy yes. Thank you, Multichill (talk) 18:24, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!

Affected:

• File:Heiwa Kannon.JPG

Yours sincerely, Mrcl lxmna (talk) 01:56, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Suggestions for BotMultichill on Authorship and Metadata

Hi, Wouldn't it be wise to look at the exif data of photos when adding structured data of an image. When the user made the effort to add Authorship data in the exif this probably means it is his prefered way to be credited. Se this edit and the exif of the image. groetjes. Aloxe (talk) 06:43, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@Aloxe: currently exif is only used as a fallback if data is missing in the wikitext. If you want to have your name better visible, you should probably update the wikitext. You can ask someone with a robot to do that. Multichill (talk) 18:41, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Mrcl lxmna

Well Mrcl lxmna (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user is making mass nominations again (even after you asked them to cease) using a custom VFC script, which I raised at AN/U. Bidgee (talk) 16:40, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!

Affected:

• File:Knabbel en Babbel S5025901.JPG

Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 00:29, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Editing speed of BotMultichill

Hi Multichill, could you please limit somewhat the speed of your bot? Within a very short timeframe, my watchlist got flooded with edits by your bot (like this one). I do not like to mask out all bot edits on my files, hence I would be grateful if the amount of edits remains manageable. Thanks & kind regards, AFBorchert (talk) 21:55, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

And yet again more than 500 edits by your bot within less than an hour on just my files alone. This exceeds the maximum of the watchlist. --AFBorchert (talk) 05:17, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

You can turn off bots in your watch list? Isn't that handier? Rudolphous (talk) 05:26, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

AFBorchert, Supposedly adding $(document).ready($('.mw-special-Watchlist .mw-changeslist-line .mw-userlink[href="/wiki/User:BotMultichill"]').parent().parent().css("display", "none")); to your common.js should turn off any notifications from BotMultichill. There will be a lot of bot edits in the next couple years, as we are trying to add SDC to files. With 65M files it could take years even at high editing speeds. Lowering the speeds would make it into decades. --Jarekt (talk) 12:15, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Just tried it; yet as it seems, it hides not only BM's edits, but also all other user's edits done at the same time or earlier. --A.Savin 16:28, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@A.Savin: What if you click filters and chose "Humans (not bot)". --MGA73 (talk) 16:40, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I have no such filters, I only can disable displaying bot edits, minor edits, patrolled edits, own edits etc. --A.Savin 17:05, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

As mentioned by several people: You can filter out bot edits from your watchlist. That probably doesn't work if you use an ancient skin like Monobook. Either switch to a newer skin or wait for the bot to pass. Multichill (talk) 17:09, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

From what I understood, Jarekt meant a common.js line that hides only BotMultichill from the watchlist; I already stated why it doesn't work properly. --A.Savin 17:18, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I do not find it acceptable to exclude all bot edits from my watchlist. Sometimes we have problematic edits by bots – these would go unnoticed. This is a real problem right now for all users who have uploaded a significant number of files. --AFBorchert (talk) 22:17, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

And this goes on and on, many of my images have now been visited for the third time by your bot within less than a month (example: [1], [2], [3]). What comes in the next run? Location, lens, or anything else from the EXIF data? Flooded watchlists are a real problem for me. My watchlist with 500 entries ends right now at 2:10 today and we are still in the morning. When I extend this to 1000 entries, it goes back to 16:34 yesterday. This project should support human contributors, not work against them. --AFBorchert (talk) 09:44, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I think the edits are needed and I think reducing speed is a bad solution. Would it be possible to have the bot work on files based on uploader? That way a user will only have 1, 2 or 3 days of "watchlist madness" (depending on how many uploads the user have). Or will it make operating the bot more complicated? --MGA73 (talk) 12:31, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

If this is indeed considered as an important addition, it should at least be carefully planned to minimize the annoyance for contributors. Creating every other week another run through all photographs again is a bad idea. And the editing speed could be reduced per user affected without reducing the overall speed. This night the bot had a speed of up to 35 edits per minute just on photographs uploaded by me. --AFBorchert (talk) 14:29, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I generally try to do everything in one edit, but that might fail for various reasons (like custom user templates) and the bot ends up doing another edit.

The whole point of a bot flag is that the edit is done by a trusted account and you can easily filter out the clutter on your watchlist. It's all or nothing. Multichill (talk) 18:21, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

There are still mess-ups with bot accounts even if they are run by experienced users. Take, for example, this one. I would miss this (and many other problems) if I would hide bot edits. This is a project run by humans for humans and humans (including those running bots) make mistakes. This is no big deal as long as we humans are able to check all edits including those of bots and, if a problem is noticed, report it such that it gets fixed. This is no longer possible as the amount of edits of your bot in my watchlist (and that of users with many uploads) is a serious problem. --AFBorchert (talk) 19:41, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@AFBorchert: I understand your sentiment bots make errors as well, but with big projects like this it is needed, and something we need to sit out. How I deal with it if I have another flood is first put the filter 'human edits' on, deal with everything on there, then remove the filter again, and from the bot edits that pop up, randomly check a few, bit depending on the bot and the edits I see. If it is a bot transfering info to the wikibase part, I likely only check 1. After that I mark all edits as read (button above the filters). That is quite workable for me, and maybe for you as well? Akoopal (talk) 08:55, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

P275 license?

I just noticed that my photos appear in Category:Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported missing SDC copyright license. What does this mean? Am I doing something wrong or is it just some bureaucratic change made somewhere for no reason? Thanks, mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 05:22, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

@Mr.choppers: that's just a hidden tracker category for the addition of Structured data so that a robot can quickly add it.

Structured data opens up new possibilities like a a map of where you took photos or a timeline when you took photos. Multichill (talk) 10:09, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Ah, I was afraid it was some new requirement. Those are functions I always envisioned would be available. Now the CIA will be able to easily track my car photography adventures! Thank you, mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 14:22, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

They could always do that, but now us mere humans can do nice things with this data. Multichill (talk) 15:25, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

ReferenceError: mwCustomEditButtons is not defined in BotMultichillT ?

I'm seeing a large amount of errors in our production logs which seem like they might relate to this bot given the pages throwing errors and the bots edit activity. Does it use any injected scripts either via user gadgets or scripts that could be associated? Jdlrobson (talk) 23:34, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jdlrobson: it's a Python bot (Pywikibot) and no Javascript is used. Do you have a link to examples in Logstash (yes, I can access that)? Multichill (talk) 10:20, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm guessing it's another user with similiar visiting behaviour. Here's the logstash URI. Note this is just one of many but you should be able to filter to find the others. Jdlrobson (talk) 14:59, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jdlrobson: my bots are doing somewhere between 500.000-800.000 edits a day. That might show up on a couple of watchlists (see previous topics).

Looks like https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Watchlist?hidepreviousrevisions=1&translations=filter&hidecategorization=1&hideWikibase=1&limit=500&days=30&urlversion=2 is the url triggering it.

Poked around a bit mwCustomEditButtons seems to be a long deprecated javascript function, but plenty of people still use it. Might that be the cause of this? @Krinkle: can you have a look? Multichill (talk) 16:58, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

I've looked at the Logstash entry. I don't see any connection to BotMultichillT. The stack trace contains InsertButtonsToToolBar which is a local function name used in 13 user's personal scripts, but not by Multichill or BotMultichillT. --Krinkle 19:34, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Don't worry I believe I got to the bottom of this after a little more detective work. The errors were caused by a user reviewing changes by the bot which is what misled me to believe the user related. I believe (but cannot be 100% sure!) that this error has been fixed now. Thanks for investigations! Jdlrobson (talk) 21:45, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Verkeerd label

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Overzicht_van_de_hoek_van_de_vestinggracht,_gezien_vanaf_de_wal_-_%27s-Hertogenbosch_-_20420343_-_RCE.jpg&diff=355031680&oldid=328616880

Even ter info. Een kleine bevinding van mij. De bot legt hier een verkeerde relatie. Het is de tweede, die ik tegenkwam. Het betreft hier (d:Q18773740), en niet een kantoor van de Pnem Misschien kun je er iets mee. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ldhank (talk • contribs) 12:21, 11 September 2020‎ (UTC)

@Ldhank: even kijken. File:Overzicht van de hoek van de vestinggracht, gezien vanaf de wal - 's-Hertogenbosch - 20420343 - RCE.jpg komt van de RCE beeldbank en hier staat dat het om 522486 gaat. Is dat nummer correct of niet? Dat nummer staat namelijk op Q17599366 dus die wordt toegevoegd.

Als het nummer niet klopt dan voegt de robot natuurlijk het verkeerde item toe. Moet het trouwens niet Former Halls of Justice (Q17599270) zijn? Multichill (talk) 15:35, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Grappig, een foutje van de RCE beeldbank, ik zal daar een reactie achterlaten. Het gebouw rechts is inderdaad het voormalig gerechtshof. Ldhank (talk) 15:47, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ldhank: het zijn net mensen he? Ik moet zeggen dat ik weinig fouten ben tegengekomen op dit vlak, maar ik ben er dan ook niet actief naar op zoek geweest. Multichill (talk) 19:24, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Gereageerd, en een bedankje over de melding ontvangen. Wat ik nog kwijt wilde ik vroeg mij dus vorige week af, wat de trigger was dat veel foto's een label hebben. Het was dus het monumentnummer. Eerlijk gezegd ben ik wel verrast door dit soort mogelijkheden, die 'onder water' zitten, en die ongetwijfeld bij veel ervaren wiki gebruikers en vooral wikidata sceptici onbekend zijn. Ldhank (talk) 20:14, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Bot minor edits

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T265573

Can you mark such edits as minor? I have many pages in my watchlist and now my mailbox has hundreds of letters about changing of watched pages.--Anatoliy (talk) 23:11, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

These edits are quite big so would be a bit weird to mark them as minor. The edits are marked with a bot flag. Multichill (talk) 08:13, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ahonc: I checked the api. Edits can be marked as minor, but structured data edits don't have that option. I tried passing minor=1 to see what happens at File:Branč, hrad od juhu (7).jpg, but all I got was "WARNING: API warning (main): Unrecognized parameter: minor.". So even if I wanted to, I can't mark these edits as minor. Multichill (talk) 19:15, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Your bot is too fast

Hello! Is it possible to wait a few hours before adding Structured Data? I found the activity of your bot (Comment "Adding structured data: copyright, participant, source & camera") an hour after uploading. I need some time to add necessary informations, a hour is just to short. Me wish would be at least 4 up to 8 hours. The same for quality images. Thank you. --XRay ^talk 10:26, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

@XRay: I guess you're participating in {{Wiki Loves Monuments 2020}}? That's monitored by bots all the time and gets checked at least every 2 hours. This is intentional to quickly update this images. All the other license related tracker categories generally get checked twice a day. Multichill (talk) 15:37, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments, yes. And QI. It's not a problem, but for example my bot is fixing the geo location (rounding to 6 digits) and I've to remove the geo location with a lot of digits set by your bot first. --XRay ^talk 15:55, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

It would be if your checks the last edit date and wait at least 4 hours. --XRay ^talk 16:00, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Extra digits would be weird. I just grab the lat/lon from the template and use the api to get the Wikidata json. Do you have an example? Multichill (talk) 16:04, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, File:Ahrweiler, Ursulinenkloster -- 2020 -- 8561.jpg. Uploaded with {{Location|50.541195|7.0814383333333}}, transferred to SDC by your bot with 50°32'28.30200"N, 7°4'53.17799"E, updated by my bot to {{Location|50.541195|7.081438|region:DE-RP}}, manually removed at SDC, later updated by another step of my bot to 50°32'28.2"N, 7°4'53.2"E in SDC. --XRay ^talk 08:09, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Only decimal format is used, things like 50°32'28.30200"N, 7°4'53.17799"E are done by the user interface. So the bot is not setting a lot of digits, it's just copying whatever you set earlier. Multichill (talk) 19:23, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

I'd changed my bot. The bot updates the geo location if necessary. --XRay ^talk 09:06, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Consider "Taken in" and "Taken on" templates

Hi, I noticed that your bot does not add inception properties for files using date-related templates like {{Taken in}} and {{Taken on}}, which I systematically use, such as for files File:Ulrich Junghanns (2004).jpg or File:Harsha de Silva (2009).jpg. You might wish to adjust the processing by the bot to get more complete info. Laddo (talk) 01:45, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@Laddo: I'm currently only handling a limited number of date formats (not less specific than a day). I do handle {{Taken on}}, but the number of cases should probably be expanded. Looks like my bot did handle your second example.

You might want to participate in Commons talk:Structured data/Modeling/Date. Multichill (talk) 19:20, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

OK, sorry indeed I missed that {{Taken on}} was processed. Thanks for the info. Laddo (talk) 16:31, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Multichill, thanks for adding structured data to my files ! --Olga Ernst (talk) 09:11, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Olga Ernst: thanks for your message. Always nice to hear my work is appreciated. Multichill (talk) 18:22, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Very quick work Multichill, it would take me plenty of time !! Thanks again and regards --Olga Ernst (talk) 11:36, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

bot edit rate

Hello. Kindly lower your bot's edit rate. Editing 500 pages in 3/4 minutes is a little too fast. --Minorax^talk 09:20, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

No, it's just fine. This is intentional and actually request by the WMF team at Commons_talk:Structured_data#Structured_copyright_and_licensing_for_search_indexing. It's not causing any technical issues like increased replication lag. What makes you think this is too fast? Multichill (talk) 14:16, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Bot have a blip?

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T263298

Did the bot have a blip about 21:05 UTC? It appears to have duplicated its edits on three of my recent uploads File:Spittal spa well.jpg, File:Spittal promenade shelter.jpg & File:Spittal level crossing.jpg. Nthep (talk) 21:01, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nthep: thanks for pointing that out. That's not supposed to happen. I filed phab:T263298 for this and killed some of the bot instances to reduce the chance of this happening.. Multichill (talk) 21:34, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Template to trigger a new visit of BotMultichill

Is there a template your bot picks up on in case someone would like it to revisit a particular files, something similar to Template:GPS EXIF which allows me to ask for automated insertion of coordinates to the file page? I am asking since for new files your bot is much faster than DschwenBot resulting in missing coordinates in structured data stored for a file in a lot of cases. Perhaps your bot automatically considers all changes on file pages to have a look again, but I am not sure. Cheers --Marbot (talk) 08:40, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

@Marbot: right now the focus is to get the license information into structured data. I'm also catching easy cases of coordinates. A bit more cases have to be added before I can start considering emptying out Category:Pages with local camera coordinates and missing SDC coordinates. That's also the tracker category being added after the location template has been added so one of the robots will come back to add the coordinates to the structured data too. Multichill (talk) 08:48, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your reply! Perfect, so I do not have to worry about this by myself, i.e. do it manually. I just wanted to make sure that such cases can easily be tracked which is obviously true! Cool. --Marbot (talk) 08:53, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hello Bot Multichill - I just realized that you have been adding 'Structured Data' to my uploads. Thank you for doing this. I am grateful and realize it's a lot of work! --TwinofSedona (talk) 19:24, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Commons - Media Sarch, new feedback round

Greetings,

I'm following up on a message from earlier in the year about the prototype development for Special:MediaSearch. Based on community feedback, the Structured Data team has developed some new features for Special:MediaSearch and are seeking another round of comments and discussions about the tool. Commons:Structured_data/Media_search is updated with details about the new features plus some other development information, and feedback is welcome on Commons talk:Structured_data/Media_search. Media Search works in any language, so the team would especially appreciate input around support for languages other than English. I look forward to reading about what you think. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 20:05, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!

Affected:

• File:HyundaiDept01.jpg

And also:

• File:HyundaiDept02.jpg
• File:HyundaiDept03.jpg
• File:HyundaiDept06.jpg
• File:HyundaiDept07.jpg ƏXPLICIT 06:55, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Sore ears eyes and fingers

Hi Multichill. Over the last decade I've made more than 100,000 edits on Wikimedia (I know there are plenty who have made many many times more) Do I have to receive 100,000 emails from your bot? I have been receiving 100s a day for some days now and I'd very much like to avoid the distress it gives me but still keep in touch with events in Commons. How can I do that? Please, Eddaido (talk) 10:04, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

@Eddaido: Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-personal uncheck "Email me when a page or a file on my watchlist is changed". That should prevent the flooding. Multichill (talk) 15:34, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Oops

I know that. Then I hear nothing of any other events on Commons and that is the reason i tick 'Email me when a page or a file on my watchlist is changed'. Not so I can be told your bot has changed a file I changed previously.

I have just got up in the morning, in the last 7 hours I have received 97 emails originated by your actions. I'm sure I cannot be the only person upset by this. Surely one of the geeks can fix it. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 21:26, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

The day before that in the same period I received 387 emails because of your bot. It goes on, I amend a file, your bot picks it up. Revision history of "File:Queen Elizabeth II standing on platform of her railway carriage at Masterton. PHOTOGRAPHER J.F. Le Cren DATE 15 January 1954 (cropped).jpg" There are so many every time I sit down I go and delete 50 or 100 from my emails. Am I under some form of attack. What did I do? What are you doing, where can I read about why you are doing it! Eddaido (talk) 13:21, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@Eddaido: sorry, I thought I already pointed out Commons:Structured data. We're currently filling it so that's why you see so many edits. Multichill (talk) 19:27, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Email from Eddaido

Hello. Check your email—you've got mail! You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eddaido (talk • contribs) 10:26, 23 September 2020‎ (UTC)

@Eddaido: are you trying to harras me? That's not a very smart move. I'll leave an extra note at User talk:Eddaido to remind you of that. Multichill (talk) 15:33, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

@Eddaido: , I read your email and forgive me for intruding but I do like what MultichillI and others are doing by organizing the millions of images in Commons. Oh, you get emails? Everyone does. Everyone is getting them because they are currently filling in images so the images can be more useful to the world. It doesn't bother me - I understand the project. In the morning when I check my email, I search for emails from bots and delete them in one fell swoop. I copy -paste the name of the bot (it's not only this bot- other bots are categorizing images), I paste it into my email search. In one shot, I FIND the emails from the bot and in one shot, I mark all emails and in one shot, I delete them all! (Ok, so maybe 3 shots, find-mark-delete) That's it. It's not painful at all. It's quite easy. Take care.--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 11:38, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Arrogance

You have the gall to leave this message on my talk page:

"You send me an email that came across to me as harassment. You seem to be a bit frustrated with getting emails because of watchlist changes. You can solve that by updating your preferences. Sending me emails won't solve that. I will treat any future emails from you as harassment and I will act on them. Multichill (talk) 15:41, 23 September 2020 (UTC)"

This behaviour by you (and others) is all new. Why?

Take it to the highest authority right now (and prepare for a matching deluge from me). Eddaido (talk) 00:16, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

COM

AN/U

---

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. emails.

Eddaido (talk) 13:00, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

"Missing" categorieën

Hallo Multichill, als ik de upload-wizzard gebruik, komen mijn afbeeldingen ineens automatisch in twee door jou aangemaakte categorieën terecht die ik niet eerder gezien heb: Category:Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International missing SDC copyright license en Category:Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike missing SDC copyright status. Is het misschien een idee om een toelichting te plaatsen op de pagina's van deze beide categorieën? Nu weet de uploader alleen maar dat hij iets verkeerd heeft gedaan, zonder er verder iets aan te kunnen doen. Fransvannes (talk) 10:24, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Fransvannes: goed idee, ga je gang hoor. Robots zijn nu nog de achterstand aan het wegwerken, maar over het algemeen zal het binnen een dag worden aangevuld. Multichill (talk) 10:20, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Ik kan dat goede idee helaas niet zelf uitvoeren, want ik heb geen idee wat ermee bedoeld wordt. Fransvannes (talk) 11:37, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Structured Data for non-existing files?

Hi, as an example: File:Grafenstein Pfarrkirche und Schloss 05112011 022.jpg. IMHO it does not make sense to add structured data when the file is missing. Of course, the error is somewhere else, and the bot's action is a consecutive problem, but maybe you could avoid it? Even better, if your bot stumbles across such cases, it would be cool to get a central error notice for that situations. best --Herzi Pinki (talk) 17:23, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Herzi Pinki: it's quite hard for the bot to detect this and doesn't seem to happen that often. Didn't we used to have a report somewhere of file pages without an actual file? Multichill (talk) 10:09, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

hard stuff is the challenge we need. :-) There is Category:Pages_with_broken_file_links, but as far as I see, this only lists usages of file links without a media file behind, not the description pages of file pages missing media directly. Thus it really seems to be hard. Thanks for the answer, the responsible user also did not care, so let's live with the inconsistency. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 11:28, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

@Herzi Pinki: this could be done with a database query but I expect it to be extremely slow:

SELECT * FROM page LEFT JOIN image ON page_title=img_name WHERE page_namespace=6 AND page_is_redirect=0 AND img_sha1 IS NULL LIMIT 1;

After 1 minute and 33 seconds it returned File:(Isabel Torres) Concentración en Plaza de Color por la unidad de España. (32108159907) (cropped).jpg. That's not really an option

I compared the search index for two files: with image and without image.

I poked around a bit with file search options and made this search query. It could probably use a bit more filtering, but it isn't that long. Just do a dummy save on the false positives and I expect them to drop out. Most cases seem to be broken redirects. Multichill (talk) 11:58, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Please pass over Category:Seikei Zusetsu

Dear MultiChill,

Your dear bot BotMultiChillT has recently changed metadata and filenames in the above Category. However, Leiden University Library who uploaded these images is now on the verge of doling out more systematic filenames - by me, in the Naturalis style you know - and probably also wants another license than your CC-BY-SA-4.0. So could you please restrain your diligent and otherwise very useful bot and pass over this category? Thank you, groetjes, Hansmuller (talk) 12:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Hoi Hans, de robots komen vanzelf langs. Als er een nieuwe licentie wordt toegevoegd zoals bijvoorbeeld {{Cc-zero}} dan komt een van de robots vanzelf langs om dat ook toe te voegen. Multichill (talk) 10:04, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Template:Cc-by-sa-layout

Hello, I'd kindly suggest you to write an actual tutorial for that template, because it's not very understandable so. Too much information, and unrelated. -- SERGIO ^{(aka the Blackcat)} 22:08, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

@Blackcat: tutorial? No, you shouldn't ever be using that template. This is incorrect usage, only templates like {{Cc-by-sa-3.0-nl}} should use it. Multichill (talk) 10:02, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Perfect, thanks for the explanation! -- SERGIO ^{(aka the Blackcat)} 14:21, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
PS The problem is that there is not a CC-by-sa-4.0-it ....

@Blackcat: That's because the 4.0 version just has {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} and no country ports. 3.0 did have {{Cc-by-sa-3.0-it}}. Multichill (talk) 14:56, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Template:Cc-sa-1.0

Hello Multichill. Is there any further discussion regarding your edit on CC-SA-1.0. I only was able to find the short discussion on the Village Pump. I know that CC declares CC-SA-1.0 as "retired [...] legal tool", but it also says CC just "does not recommend" to apply it to works - not that it is not allowed.
I would agree that it's an old licence, and there are later versions of similar licences out there, but it is not a bad licence. I can't think of any case where using this licence caused any problems. In my opinion it is better to have an old but OK standard licence than some home brewed licence that was not written by experts but tries to do the same thing because you denied the usage of the first one.
I also want to point out that you can alter CC-licences. You are not allowed to use the name "Creative Commons" any longer, but you can change up the legal code. So if I change up a few words und use pretty much the same licence, I am allowed to do that and use it as home brew licence for new uploads.
--D-Kuru (talk) 14:04, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

@D-Kuru: it's just marked as deprecated. From deprecation: In several fields, deprecation is the discouragement of use of some terminology, feature, design, or practice, typically because it has been superseded or is no longer considered efficient or safe, without completely removing it or prohibiting its use. Multichill (talk) 14:20, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Licence replacing

Hi Multichill, your bot added structured data in some of the files, that I uploaded. During that process, it replaced the original licence-information (Template:PD-textlogo & Template:Trademarked) by Template:Cc-zero. Although both options basically allow the same rights for reuse & modifications, my original licence information is more precise in it's description, why I was allowed to upload the logo.

Somehow your bot edits make it appear, as if the licence information was missing before [4][5][6], but this is definitely not the case. I used the same licence information for several other logos, e.g. File:Share Logo.png.

Can I revert the edit, or is there any reason for the CC0-licence to be used instead of the PD-textlogo ? --Johannnes89 (talk) 18:07, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@Johannnes89: that sounds very far fetched. The bot doesn't touch the wikitext and didn't remove anything. You probably just forgot to add it. You can just update the wikitext. Nothing to revert. Multichill (talk) 19:22, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

I cannot explain it, but I was 100% sure, that the files always had the licence information that I mentioned. But according the version history it has been CC0 already when I uploaded the file [7]. Anyway thanks for responding, I've now updated the wikitext [8]. --Johannnes89 (talk) 19:39, 28 September 2020 (UTC)