User talk:Jmabel

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Archives[edit]

/Archive 1
/Archive 2
/Archive 3
/Archive 4
/Archive 5
/Archive 6
/Archive 7
/Archive 8
/Archive 9
/Archive 10

Most memorable shot 2022 / Wikimania 2023[edit]

Dear member of the Commons Photographers User Group,

I wish you a Happy New Year! As it has been our tradition at the beginning of the new year for a while, we're sharing our most memorable shots of the past year with each other. I invite you to share a picture that is particular meaningful to you and to describe why that's the case. Also, as Wikimania 2023 will be here before we know it (August 16 to 19), please consider adding your thoughts on our planning page, where we gather ideas for how we can make Commons photography more visible than in the years before.

All the best to you, your family, and friends! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Sapiens et iustus es.
188.123.231.39 06:00, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your photo used with credit[edit]

@Jmabel, This photo File:Cement plant 02.jpg with credit to you appeared today on All In with Chris Hayes in reference to a Supreme Court case and hearing, which I think was also today. -- Ooligan (talk) 07:56, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ooligan: Thanks for letting me know! - Jmabel ! talk 16:21, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You are welcome. Congratulations, -- Ooligan (talk) 16:49, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Moving forward[edit]

Is it better to create CFDs for each empty category like Trivialist did at Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2023/01#Category:SCOOB!_characters or focus on reverting the edits first so that the discussions aren't pointless? Both options are terrible because I can at best half-heartedly say they should be deleted but I feel foolish saying "someone else gutted this and it's now empty but believe me, if we had what I think we had here, it would be a bad category." Maybe I can get a bot to make a list of what pages were in those categories first and then post that so the discussions aren't basically rigged from the start. It's a lot of work to have an honest debate even if I think they are all ridiculous. Ricky81682 (talk) 05:17, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @Ricky81682: obviously the categories should not have been emptied before some sort of consensus was reached. This is just not appropriate. Have you already brought that up with them? At least their edit summaries tend to be pretty clear, so you could probably go more-or-less sanely through their user contributions and find the relevant edits, but it looks like they are doing this over and over with categories they don't like. - Jmabel ! talk 07:48, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I see this is already being discussed on Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems, so why ask on my talk page? - Jmabel ! talk 07:50, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I don't know why actually lol. You are right, I'll bring it up with Trivialist myself. Ricky81682 (talk) 10:29, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • It looks like he's now undone a lot of this, maybe all. - Jmabel ! talk 17:59, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A question[edit]

Do you have an opinion on the Universal Code of Conduct and its revision. If so, do you want to share it? Krok6kola (talk) 17:15, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @Krok6kola: so far, what I've seen is reasonable. I'm not at all sure it is necessary, but it's probably inevitable. - Jmabel ! talk 17:19, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agree with the inevitable part. Krok6kola (talk) 17:24, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There has been a distinct show of courtesy on the part of some editors as a result of this Universal Code. So I am in favor. I can't get into the weeds of any changes. (My ADD and advanced years) Krok6kola (talk) 19:51, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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:

Yours sincerely, Abzeronow (talk) 16:05, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Livioandronico2013[edit]

Hi,I haven't had any arguments with anyone,I get insulted,they say my photos are crap,I don't intend to participate in QI OR FP but just put up photos but I get blocked for facts from 10 years ago. Thanks for your attention and sorry for the trouble. 151.46.218.2 00:29, 18 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • FWIW, I have never had any of my own photos selected for FP. The people who vote there have a very specific aesthetic, which for the most part I don't share. I personally find it not worth fighting over.
  • However, if you are interested in having an account restored here, I suggest you resist the urge to post from an IP address while blocked. Stick to making requests for an unblock on your own talk page. Anything else is likely to be considered block evasion. - Jmabel ! talk 00:32, 18 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    They don't even consider unblocking me, and anyway I didn't insist on posting pictures, I put up undoubtedly better pictures but since I am blocked then they say I insist. It's a dog biting its own tail. Anyway sincerely thank you for your interest. It was kind. 151.46.218.2 00:39, 18 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • You are kind! Krok6kola (talk) 01:38, 18 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Very sorry[edit]

I'm sorry to bother again but now he did this [1]--109.52.98.243 21:28, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • I hope you understand that by posting to my user page, you are violating your block, which makes it pretty much impossible for me to take you side in this. You obviously are not good at leaving well enough alone. Right now, I'm inclined to stay out of this. If you post to my page again, including if you respond to this, I'll probably have to support the ban. Just stop. - Jmabel ! talk 00:31, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Need some help?[edit]

@Jmabel Hello. How can i help here? This category needs to be emptied so it can be deleted as per your discussion, I could empty it unless you want to do it. - Category:Historic Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area Photos I found another similar one by the same sock. Category:Historic Photos Forest Service Pacific Northwest Region Thanks, -- Ooligan (talk) 18:36, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @Ooligan: I'll take on the Gorge one. If you want to take on the Forest Service one, great. Just a matter of working out what needs to be recategorized how, then getting rid of the empty category. I haven't started yet, so I don't know how much of an undertaking it will be. That last one is big, though: it might take a lot of work. I think it may be more a question of how can I help you on that monster? - Jmabel ! talk 18:40, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Jmabel Should I open a discussion on this Category:Historic Photos Forest Service Pacific Northwest Region before I take action or do I reference your and Pi's discussion on that similar category. I just want to do the process properly. I can ask for your help if I need it, but you always seem to have something you are working on. I enjoy these old files- I wish that some originating institutions would let us (The Commons) have the highest quality versions of these images that are reserve for paying customers. -- Ooligan (talk) 19:15, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Ooligan: I don't think we need a further discussion on this, it's pretty clear that a now-banned user left a mess which ought to be cleaned up. Judging by what I've seen in the last half-hour or so, it's quite a mess: so far all but one file I've looked at was terribly categorized (as in: missing any relevant categories, and most of them containing irrelevant categories, like a mountain that was 50 miles away and not in the picture). Not sure how much time I'll put into this right now: I was in the middle of working my way through thousands of genuinely good, high-resolution images from Seattle Public Library. - Jmabel ! talk 19:20, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Ooligan: Example of how bad: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:1790_Paulina_Peak_Lookout_Tower,_Deschutes_NF,_OR_8-1960_(22140420003).jpg&diff=735128683&oldid=735024309. Maybe we should turn those bad "Historic" categories into maintenance categories, and indicate that all the photos in them need a cat check. What do you think? - Jmabel ! talk 19:32, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      Sounds good. Others may help. When empty, these maintenance categories will be deleted? -- Ooligan (talk) 20:07, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A kitten for you![edit]

For deleting my page. Thanks!

Waylon111 (talk) 18:25, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Curation...[edit]

It needs an admin to change/implement it, but this change to {{Internet Archive Link}} is overdue. Template:Internet Archive link/sandbox. The next problem is how to implement a review process. The best guide I have is the existing License review process, but I am not sure how you prevent the user that uploaded the file self-signing that they verified it.

The intention with this change is that eventually all compatible files are in the /verified cat. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @ShakespeareFan00: Better to make this sort of request at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard than to hit me up. I don't really know enough about this template to make a judgement call, someone else will.
  • But a couple of comments: 1) the documentation will need to be updated as well. 2) I presume that the intent with "reviewed" is specific to when this is used to cite a source (since there can be other reasons to link to an archived file, e.g. for a citation). We don't want to end up categorizing some file as having a licensing problem because its description cites a copyrighted file on the Internet Archive. - Jmabel ! talk 21:04, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Hmm... That's a reasonable considerationShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:17, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Seed catalogs..[edit]

Any chance you could partition Category:Henry G. Gilbert Nursery and Seed Trade Catalog Collection by year?

Also if you find post 1928 editions of catalogs with notices, you know what to do, already :)

It would be nice to get this cleaned up quickly. :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:54, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @ShakespeareFan00: any particular reason you are asking me rather than someone who has worked on that category? I've got a lot of other projects I'm working on. I guess I'm willing to do this if there's some reason I'd be better than a random person... - Jmabel ! talk 19:06, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I asked you because you'd done splits of categories before:) If you know of better people, please kindly point them in my direction... ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:17, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @ShakespeareFan00: This particular one is immense (over 20,000 files) and doesn't look easy (no obvious consistent pattern to the filenames that indicates the dates). I suspect someone will have to spend hours, if not days, on this, and it isn't in an area I'm particularly interested in. - Jmabel ! talk 19:46, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      I was using a regexp on a field in the book template, not the filename ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:57, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Makes sense but, again: why would this be any easier for me to follow through than for people who have been working in that category? I don't bring any special expertise, and nothing here requires an admin. Or am I missing something? - Jmabel ! talk 20:00, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        No worries, I already got you were busy right now. I was giving a technicial explanation of how i was going to proceed when I had time. Generally, I try to find an admin to do big partitions because they have access to bot flags, a normal user doesn't (as well as higher level API access to do mass actions more quickly.). It doesn't need an admin as such, it just gets done more quickly with tools admins can use, but normal users can't. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:10, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good morning[edit]

Moved from User talk:Jmabel/Archival
Good evening, with your permission, I would like to know how to make the photos that I took with copyright or copyright Jimmy Yelzer (talk) 17:02, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Moved from User talk:Jmabel/Archival - Jmabel ! talk 18:49, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jimmy Yelzer: You cannot "make something copyright". Assuming the work to be copyrightable, I believe that right now under the law of every country in the world, it is copyrighted at creation. If it is legitimately your own work, you own the copyright, and can grant a license. If it is someone else's work, they own the copyright, and only they can grant a license. There is such a thing (in some countries) as transferring copyright, but usually that can only be done by a formal document or declaration by the old copyright-holder. In particular: you cannot take some random thing off of the Internet or off of a television screen and somehow make it OK to upload to Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 19:00, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good evening, my friend[edit]

Good evening, my friend, I'm sorry to bother you, but I wanted to know Mithal. I took a picture with my mobile phone, and I want to copyright it. I mean, the property rights remain in my opinion, because I am a fan of writing articles about the captured personalities, and I have knowledge about places and people. With your permission, I am sorry if this bothers you for free Jimmy Yelzer (talk) 20:25, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @Jimmy Yelzer: I have no idea who or what "Mithal" is, nor really what you mean by "the captured personalities" nor "the property rights remain in my opinion."
  • If you take a picture with your mobile phone, you own the copyright by default (unless it's just a picture of someone else's copyrighted work).
  • Please, though: there is nothing here that I can uniquely help you with. You already opened up a discussion on the help desk. Please let's keep it there, where anyone can step in, not just me. - Jmabel ! talk 20:30, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good evening[edit]

I want you to teach me how to copyright the photos I took with a camera Jimmy Yelzer (talk) 20:28, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please[edit]

Please how can I copyright the pictures I take with my phone camera Jimmy Yelzer (talk) 20:48, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

* @Jimmy Yelzer: See my reply above. - Jmabel ! talk 00:39, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to remove autocomplete from comment summary[edit]

Hi Jmabel: On 05:41, 4 January 2021 you helped me out on the Helpdesk in the thread "How to remove autocomplete from comment summary" (Sorry I don't know how Commons archives discussions). At the time you explained very clearly why edit summary comments are subject to autocomplete, but regular edits are not (thank you!).

Since that time I have periodically experienced strange additIons or removals of text from edits I have made, and am trying to figure out why this happens. Just wondering if you know something about this subject? I realize you are very busy, so please take your time.

Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 18:46, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  1. @Ottawahitech: "strange additions or removals" isn't specific enough for anyone to have a chance of answering you.
  2. Probably better asked on Help desk, where a number of experienced people will see your question, rather than just one. - Jmabel ! talk 18:51, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category pages that look like quasi-Wikipedia articles (VP discussion)[edit]

Atwngirl has responded to your post on their user talk page. Apparently, they were hospitalized due to a car accident and unable to respond at the time. Commons:Village pump/Archive/2023/02#Category pages that look like quasi-Wikipedia articles has already been archived. If you want to re-open the discussion to give them a chance to respond, then that's fine with me. I'm not sure how Commons works regarding that, but you might know since you're an admin, -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:21, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Marxist–Leninist Party of Germany discussion[edit]

Hi. I'm kind of wondering what the options are for the CfD now that GPSLeo started the competing discussion. It's not super great to have multiple discussion for the same issue going on at once. So is there even a point in leaving the CfD open for further discussion or will whatever the outcome of it is just be null in void because of the proposal? Thanks. Adamant1 (talk) 17:43, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @Adamant1: I hate to say it, but my answer is "I don't care". It's a minor political party, about which we will never have a large amount of media, and I walked away from the discussion because it essentially consisted of the same people restating the same positions over and over. - Jmabel ! talk 17:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I feel you. I should probably just walk away from it to since they clearly aren't going to be reasonable or care about other people's opinions. I guess it's pretty minor in the grand scheme of things. --Adamant1 (talk) 18:00, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Allentown discussion on Help Desk[edit]

Would you mind taking a look at the HD discussion about Allentown? Altwngirl posted a comment but in the process of doing so completely removed all of the other comments made by others. While I'm sure this was done by mistake, this is the kind of thing that can really piss others off and make them not try to want to help Altwngirl. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:58, 30 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your opinion is requested[edit]

Hi, I asked Jeff G. this question but then I thought you might know more about the subject: Do you think categorizing an airport that did not exist until 1973 as Category:Ben Gurion International Airport in the 1930s, when in the 1930s that area was part of the Category:British Mandate of Palestine, part of the British Empire? Since the airport was named for Ben Gurion after his death in 1973, is this categorization misleading? Am I being too concrete? Too hard-headed? (User:Geagea, an Admin, disagrees with me.) Thanks, Krok6kola Krok6kola (talk) 22:45, 1 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Krok6kola: it's really tricky, especially in a case like this where the names are so loaded with reference to ethnic and national identities (have a look through en:Talk:Gdańsk/Archive index if you want to see it carried to an extreme. Discussion of the name of the article exceeds the length of the article).
We certainly end up with things like Category:1870 in Washington (state) because no one is really invested in distinguishing Washington Territory from Washington State (or, in the case of Category:1845 in Washington (state), the part of Oregon Territory that later became Washington Territory). Similarly for a category like Category:644 in Spain. Spain? in 644? Oh, well.
I'd say the category name Category:Ben Gurion International Airport in the 1930s is probably OK, but it needs parent categories that relate to the political geography of the time (looks like it has that in Category:Aviation in the British Mandate of Palestine, and it certainly ought to have a description indicating what it was known as in that era. - Jmabel ! talk 00:24, 2 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Did Ben Gurion airport exist then? Did it exist under that same name?
The answers to this are pretty obvious: it existed, but as Lydda Airfield and later as Lod Airport. So IMHO, it should be named and categorized as Lydda when that is the contemporary name. These can all be sub-categories of Ben Gurion, as the contemporary name. There is no rule (as is regularly claimed) that category names for subcategories have to match the parent, or each other!
I have no strong opinions on Lydda airfield, airport or even RAF Lydda. It was an airfield. That much is definition-based, we are reasonable to choose to use it as a description and name. As a shared RAF and civilian airfield, it was typical to distinguish this by use: a civilian would describe landing at the airfield, and the military establishment hosted there would be RAF Lydda. Many contemporary maps for pilots already describe it as an airport, which implies a sense of international traffic and the customs facilities to support that – which Lydda did have. In its post–1948 era as Lod this was clearly as Lod Airport, so that should be used for that 25 year period too (and "Airport" is now clear).
More eyes could also be useful at Commons:Categories for discussion/2023/02/Category:Ypenburg Airfield, which involves a massive and half-done bulk rename of airfields in the Netherlands. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:29, 2 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Krok6kola and Andy Dingley: to be honest, I'd have no problem with that either. Maybe Category:Lydda Airfield and Category:Lod Field as subcats of Category:Ben Gurion International Airport, with their own subcats for the various by-year or by-decade categories? But do take a look at the way (for example) Category:1870 in Washington (state) handles this with template {{Washington Territory}} (which I added). I suspect a template like that may be in order no matter what solution is adopted. - Jmabel ! talk 15:21, 2 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I (vaguely) thought that Lod was always an Airport? Andy Dingley (talk) 15:35, 2 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Andy Dingley: Then you are probably right. Zero specific expertise here, just looking at the various acceptable ways similar things have been handled here, not trying to make a concrete suggestion. - Jmabel ! talk 15:43, 2 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Jmabel, thanks for your rational reply. I am staying out of this now. Too much vehemence. And with an Admin being unwilling to have a dialogue, it is a useless. My edits having nothing to do with the airport were reverted also, so I am staying away from the whole topic. Krok6kola (talk) 16:58, 2 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A kitten for you![edit]

i am very sorry so i decided to give you a kitten wikilove

--BoulevardBowl27 (talk) 18:00, 7 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

About yesterday...[edit]

Hi Jmabel, today I have seen that the user to whom it was reported yesterday insists on the issue (despite the fact that I said that I would let the matter rest), but as you can see, today he has threatened to denounce me as far as possible, which could be translated as a Wikihounding threat. I am not going to reverse the message and I am only limiting myself to informing about the possible consequences of what this user will do, taking advantage of your position in good faith and avoiding any problematic user. Taichi (talk) 21:45, 15 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Jmabel. By allusions, I must say that this user has provoked me by repeatedly whitewashing my discussion without any dealings with him here until I lost my temper, just because he has followed me from Wikipedia in Spanish (wikihounding, maybe?). It is not the first time he has requested my global block, already in Meta had tried, but failed then too, who knows why. Otherwise, it is false that he said that he "would let the matter rest", as he claims in your discussion, but that he took it to the extreme of his possibilities, as you could see. For my part, however everything remains here, just for information. Saludos. — Drachentöter78 (talk) 02:59, 26 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Recent DR's of mine ...[edit]

Can you also take a look at my related DR's? I suspect that some of these are speedy as copyvio, but took them to DR, in case there were other considerations. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:01, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

IAR[edit]

While I don't fully oppose your removal of the speedy delete tag, I wanted to point out that the speedy delete criteria at G4 state "The author or uploader may ask the deleting administrator to restore the file, or file an Undeletion Request." These were not done in this case; the material was simply re-created and expanded. I will follow-up with other deletion discussion methods. ɱ (talk) 16:38, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:People by age by country[edit]

What are your thoughts on the way the categories regarding age groups are modeled?

My suggestion would be moving Centenarians from the United States (included in Old people of the United States), Babies of the United States‎ (included in Children of the United States) and Children of the United States‎ (included in Young people of the United States) out of the main category to make it a bit more simple

Thoughts? Trade (talk) 02:10, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @Trade: Man, do I hate these categories. They're so incommensurate. I mean, sure Kirk Douglas lived to be 100, but putting Category:Kirk Douglas in Category:Centenarians from the United States? As if he'd never been young? Weirder yet, Category:Savita Ng under Category:Children of the United States: is she supposed to stop growing up? At least no one is (currently) categorized for their whole life under Category:Babies of the United States.
  • Do note that, in general, the "centenarians" category appears to be used differently from the others: the others are generally about the person at the time the picture was take, whereas "centenarians" is just about them living that long. But independently of that: I think it's a wreck. I can see a reason to distinguish babies and children, because they are so different from adults as photographic subjects, but young vs. middle-aged vs. old? Do we really want to categorize a picture of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez or Maxwell Frost acting in their current capacity as a member of congress as a picture of a "young person", Kevin McCarthy or Ted Lieu as "middle-aged", Patty Murray or Chuy Garcia as "old"? It just seems to me to be objectifying, uninformative, and ultimately kind of dismissive. - Jmabel ! talk 04:20, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Aren't all categories of humans based on age or appearance by their very nature objectifying? Trade (talk) 12:43, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Trade: And I tend to dislike nearly all of those categories, for just that reason. As I say, I have no objection to categorizing babies and children as such, because they are significantly different photographic subjects, but I find it absurd that a picture of me at this point would be described as an "old man", which tends to suggest decrepitude. I see little or no use for these distinctions in terms of the supposedly educational purpose of Commons. It might be useful for purposes of stock photography, but that is not why Commons exists. As a photographer, categories like this make me hesitate to contribute photographs of people to Commons. Example: four years ago, I had the chance to take a bunch of photos of Steve Perry of the band Journey. I don't think it would be doing anyone a service to slap Category:Old men or any of its subcats on those photos, and it would make me uncomfortable about having indirectly been party to that. [FWIW, I took the photos, uploaded them, no one has added that category, and I hope it stays that way.] - Jmabel ! talk 14:42, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikidata[edit]

Hello. Hope you don't mind, but I'm curious how to Category:Isabella of Castile, Duchess of York and her Wikidata Q434485? Cladeal832 (talk) 20:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks. With some more sleep I would probably have left it alone. –LPfi (talk) 10:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello again, Jmabel[edit]

This is what I mean by "harassment". Another user writes to me, with whom I have never had a relationship (but friend of Taichi, I suppose), I think, maybe to keep provoking me, and denounces me. This is the daily life in the Spanish Wikipedia. Un saludo. — Drachentöter78 (talk) 13:38, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Does not sound like fun. But there is really nothing to accomplish by complaining to me as an individual, and not mentioning who is harrassing you. If you have complaints, you really should take them to the relevant admin noticeboard. And you can certainly request that someone not email you in the future, after which you have a clear ground of complaint if they do so. - Jmabel ! talk 15:46, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay, thank you, Jmabel. Actually, they have not written to me by private mail. They just come one after the other to write to me and then to denounce me, it seems. I wouldn't know exactly what to report, I would just like to put it on record. They are like that, acting in packs. — Drachentöter78 (talk) 18:35, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Drachentöter78: To "put it on record" you really ought to go to the Administrators' noticeboard, not my user talk page. - Jmabel ! talk 18:40, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
But what exactly could I denounce, against whom? A generalized way of acting of another project? Some friends there, I suppose, who from time to time write to me and denounce me? — Drachentöter78 (talk) 18:46, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't know what to say, other than that it is not particularly useful to say all of this to me as an individual. - Jmabel ! talk 18:48, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agreed. And sorry for the inconvenience. — Drachentöter78 (talk) 18:54, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mer information[edit]

"Mer information" is Swedish for "more information" and I believe Knoppson is Swedish-speaking. But either should be easy to understand for them, and it is of course a bit confusing to mix languages like that. Thanks for the vigilance. –LPfi (talk) 10:03, 30 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment[edit]

I think your girlfriend has your number. Krok6kola (talk) 19:23, 30 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, on 4 April 2023 you reverted a page move to Category:Nileshpatelxyz, see Commons:Help desk/Archive/2023/04#Reverting a category rename. The category has been created again, and is empty. I think this category should be deleted: can you do this, or should I raise a deletion request in the normal way? Thanks, Verbcatcher (talk) 14:08, 1 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Schooner Equator at the Library of Congress[edit]

@Jmabel fyi, https://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/wa0888/ has a little history detail and apparently two undigitized photos of the 'Equator' in the LOC collection. I found that Port of Everett document and article interesting. -- Ooligan (talk) 06:02, 3 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ooligan: looks like the main PDF there is already in the External Links of the en-Wikipedia article. - Jmabel ! talk 14:14, 3 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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:

And also:

Yours sincerely,   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 08:47, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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:


Yours sincerely,   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 08:48, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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:

And also:

Yours sincerely,   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 08:49, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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:


Yours sincerely,   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 08:50, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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:

And also:

Yours sincerely,   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 08:51, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Flag ratio (again)[edit]

After settling the issue with the British flag ratio, a user has chosen to try to edit war to ensure their preferred ratio is redirected to by the redirect "File:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg". Ignoring all discussion and refusing to themselves discuss, they appealled to an administrator who, ignoring consensus, has redirected the redirect and fully protected the page. Could you reverse this to accord with consensus as it stands? GPinkerton (talk) 10:28, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@GPinkerton: As a party who has already expressed an opinion, I am probably not the one who should do this. @Ezarate: , are you following Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg and the prior discussions that led to tat? So far, there is absolutely no consensus here. I really don't want this to turn into an edit war among admins, but I don't think what you did there is appropriate. The relevant "status quo" when an admin protects a page in an edit war, as did User:Mdaniels5757, is the status quo they protect. There is always going to be someone who thinks it's "the wrong version." I see no reason to favor the version that happened to prevail a few months ago, when the whole reason for the redirect was widespread feeling that this title was wrong for that flag.
In any case, I will make a post at the Village pump to try to get more attention to the deletion request. - Jmabel ! talk 14:46, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The status quo is the edition prior to edit war therefore without edition of none of the two editors. Regards!! Ezarateesteban 11:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ezarate: That would be the status quo ante. Status quo means "the way things are". Status quo ante means the way things were before. I'm unaware of any policy/guideline about returning to the status quo ante, but I'm very open to seeing that there is one. - Jmabel ! talk 14:54, 11 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Privacy of editors who are minors[edit]

I am not sure if having minors uploading their full name, location and image onto Wikimedia Commons is a good idea. What does policy say about this? Trade (talk) 15:52, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @Trade: if it's already out there on Twitter (and more searchable there, because it is text rather than an image) I can't see it making much difference. - Jmabel ! talk 16:55, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Per WP:CHILDPROTECT. Wikipedia considers minorship to end at 15.5 years relative to there birth Stanislov Patrick 473 (talk) 12:27, 17 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Last remark presumably nonsense, by quickly-banned vandal. - Jmabel ! talk 14:41, 17 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RandomUserGuy1738[edit]

User:RandomUserGuy1738 uploaded File:Please Tag (29079149990).jpg that has been previously deleted thrice already. You have warned him in March 2023. Is it necessary to block him for re-creating previously deleted content despite warnings? A1Cafel (talk) 04:12, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @A1Cafel: its a different account that did it the other three times & I don't think it's a sock. Probably an innocent copying of the same file from Flickr. I'll just delete it. - Jmabel ! talk 04:25, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

More post-1922 tango audio files[edit]

Hello, per this deletion request you just closed, there are a few files this applies to that weren't tagged in the original request: File:El día que me quieras.ogg, File:Carlos Gardel-El dia que me quieras (1935).ogg, and, if the Spanish Wikipedia article about the composer and this site are to be believed, File:Soledad-Tango.ogg (apparently from 1934). I imagine these should be deleted as well. I found out about this situation because I monitor the old sound file lists on Wikipedia, and of course CommonsDelinker has been having fun with your recent deletions. Graham87 (talk) 02:20, 19 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @Graham87: feel more than free to nominate them for deletion (probably as a small "mass" nomination, rather than separately) and to reference the recently closed discussion. Since they weren't discussed there, leaving no one a chance to comment on any reason they might be different, they need their own DR. Not that I think there is any chance they are different, just a matter of process. - Jmabel ! talk 02:23, 19 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unsigned[edit]

I just added an unsigned template and incorporated date from the diff for your missed signature at Commons:Deletion requests/Audio files of tango music published after 1922. We should have some good closing apps that automatically add signatures like this reply tool that I am using. ─ The Aafī (talk) 17:41, 19 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question[edit]

Did I get that correct? You blocked User:Tm for reseting one of Tm's own uploads that was overwritten with a 'uncontroversial better' version by user:FMSky (that was later uploaded under a new name) after you resetted an 'uncontroversial better' version that FMSky uploaded over one of your uploaded files (instead of uploading it under a new name)? [This is a yes/no question, not about any rule, that may have been applied or broken or anything else. I am curious, nothing else.] C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 07:52, 21 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@C.Suthorn: No. I have no idea what may have happened in terms of any overwrites, but I blocked TM for edit warring about categories, where he was repeatedly putting highly specific categories on third-party photos (he may have uploaded some of these, I didn't check, but he was not the photographer) claiming this was based on expertise that TM claimed no one else here was competent to judge, and others were reverting to more general categories that did not require any specialized knowledge. Not sure how you (or anyone) thinks the FMSky thing from half a year ago is related, or even how anyone ran across it in this context, but do not consider that a better version, and if you read Commons:Overwriting existing files you will see that the very fact that the uploader/photographer contests and overwrite is sufficient for it to qualify as controversial.
Question: where did you get the idea that my block of Tm had anything to do with Tm restoring Tm's own version of a photo? I don't remember anything like that even coming up. It might have arisen tangentially in with the half dozen or so examples User:Mztourist and others provided about edit warring, but I don't recall it at all, and if it did I wonder what drew your attention to it. - Jmabel ! talk 15:18, 21 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
User:C.Suthorn please provide a diff of what you are referring to. My original complaint and Jmabel's block of Tm was solely related to his/her edit-warring of weapons categories. It had nothing to do with overwriting files. Mztourist (talk) 16:43, 21 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the answer (i.e. "No"). I was not aware about a dispute WRT categories. Many edits by Tm appear in my watchlist, the categories in question do not appear on my watchlist, therefore this created the impression I had and that i asked about. If I had not asked I would still have this impression, that I do now now was not the real situation. C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 08:16, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why oh why?[edit]

Why is there Category:Pictographs in the United States by state, but pictographs in the rest of the world, of which there are far more, not allowed but must go under e.g. Category:Rock art in Haiti? (I can't even remember the category correctly, even though I just dealt with it!) Except for a few countries, the rest of the world is basically ignored. This category system is horrible. Krok6kola (talk) 23:33, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Krok6kola: Presumably because the category system grows "organically". It looks like Category:Pictographs in New Mexico dates back to 2010, Category:Rock paintings goes back to 2012, and the bridging in between happened over time. Category:Petroglyphs in New Mexico also goes back to 2010. I'm not sure I understand the difference between pictographs and petroglyph (though there may well be one), and how (if at all) each differs from "rock paintings" in general (though it is clear that there are many forms of "rock art" that are not "rock paintings"). It might be worth a CfD or other discussion to try to get this clear, or someone could look into whether the respective Wikipedia articles clarify this.
Krok6kola, feel free to ping people into the discussion right here if you can see in the various category histories who looks like they might best help sort this out. My gut says that all rock paintings, or at least all pre-modern rock paintings, are "petroglyphs"; not sure what distinguishes a "pictograph"; and I would not call (for example) modern graffiti on a rock a "petroglyph", though it is presumably still a "rock painting". - Jmabel ! talk 23:58, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(edit conflict):Just hunted the correct category down and corrected above. Who makes these decisions? It is done away with by a redirect, although Category:Petroglyphs by country does exist. (And don't tell me "Categories for discussion" because nothing ever gets settled there.) Krok6kola (talk) 00:01, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I don't want to get into endless crazy discussions. I'd rather just complain to you! Krok6kola (talk) 00:03, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
File:Massacred - Israel kills scores of Palestinians. (42119227062).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!

Trade (talk) 12:47, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Geo Swan[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:70_year_old_post_stamp_of_Lesvos.jpg (there's other examples, but I don't think I should have to provide them just for you to do a simple thing like asking him to back off)

I don't want to relitigate the ANU complaint, but Geo Swan is still contacting me and making false accusations about my behavior in random places. It's fine if you don't think it's harassment for someone to repeatedly contact and disparage another user over multiple weeks on end. That said, the whole thing is causing me needless stress and anxiety, which I would think is more important then whatever Geo Swan is doing fitting someone cooker cutter, textbook definition of the word "harassment." I could ultimately care less if the guy is blocked or not. I just want him to leave me alone and I think that's a reasonable request considering how many weeks it's been happening, the amount of talks pages he's contacted me on, and the disparaging nature of the messages he's writing about me. Maybe I haven't acted 100% perfect myself, but I'm not the one continuing it. He is, repeatedly after I stopped contacting him. Regardless though, us communicating with each other clearly isn't productive anyway whomever said what, when, or under what circumstances.

I guess I could take it up with trust and safety since it's causing me a lot of unwanted anxiety, but I don't feel like I should have to just because it's not officially harassment or whatever. Not that I want a two way communications ban either since I'm sure we will end up the same discussion at some point. Just a little nudge at him to lay off and stop disparaging me. I think that's a pretty reasonable request considering how long it's been going on for and the fact that he's clearly unwilling to just shove off and go find another user to pester. Thanks. Adamant1 (talk) 15:50, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Adamant1: Your tone is at least as harsh as his, if not harsher. If you want to complain about others' conduct, you might do well to improve your own. What I will say to Geo Swan, if you want me to communicate it, is that he should try to keep his comments on anything that is supposed to be about content to the question at hand, not his opinion of others' qualifications. But don't expect him never to go there. I think we all end up crossing that line at times. - Jmabel ! talk 17:36, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's why I said I haven't acted great myself either. But the fact is he's the one who instigates things. I don't. If you can tell him to try to keep it about the content and the question at hand, cool. That's really all I want and I'm not going to fault him if he makes a mistake at it once in a while. Just as long he doesn't do it repeatedly or in a way that's obviously intentional. I'll try to tone my responses to. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 18:53, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 04:50, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

c - Jmabel ! talk 14:23, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Need urgent help[edit]

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Please temporarily block Svetlov Artem. Thanks. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 00:59, 9 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 01:47, 9 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Old goose pic[edit]

Hi Jmabel - I can only say that in thumbnail, File:Greater White Fronted Geese in South Park pond, ca. 1890 - DPLA - ed99c4a1b626ff35d4dd9fd6e008cd8e.jpg looked more like a photo published as an illustration in an old book, than an actual old photo. But it's a good thing this got queried, as when I look at the file full size, they're domesticated geese, not Whitefronts at all! Easily told by the heavy Greylag Goose-size bills, and fat rear ends with the tail sticking up typical of domesticated geese. Quite a common error, unfortunately. So I'll rename, and recategorise again... - MPF (talk) 15:07, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @MPF: Good on you for working out more about the photo (and I'll let the library know their description is wrong).
  • Unless I'm very mistaken, "illustration" in a category shouldn't mean "this photo was used as an illustration in a book", it means "this was drawn by an illustrator, not photographed." - Jmabel ! talk 15:12, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! No, an illustration is anything (including photos) used to illustrate something (book, magazine, etc.). You can see this on for example every file uploaded from the Internet Archive, which carries the wording "Click here to view book online to see this illustration in context in a browseable online version of this book." [my emphasis], even when the file is a photo published in an old book. It certainly makes much better categorisation sense, as it brings similar origin images together in the same categories, rather than mixing them up with modern photos. Hope this helps! - MPF (talk) 15:20, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@MPF: of course I'm aware the word has that broader meaning, but I don't believe that is how they've been generally used in categories. We should probably take this to the VP, because we are two long-time users and at least one of us is wrong about an issue of pretty broad application. Feel free to be the one who posts there (but please try to keep the post pretty neutral): I am about to be offline for a few hours. - Jmabel ! talk 15:24, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's certainly how I've been using it for a good ten years or more, and probably on many thousands of files! One or two people have occasionally queried my doing so on an occasional file, but it's been very rare that's happened. Another good reason for doing so is the imbalance in numbers of files; there might be 200 modern photos, and 10 each of art illustrations, and photo illustrations. Leaving the latter in the main category of modern photos, they look very out-of-place among the modern photos, yet there's usually not enough for it to be worth making a separate [Category:Historical photos of xxxx]. But putting them in the illustrations subcategory, they look well 'at home'. - MPF (talk) 15:34, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Art galleries[edit]

I was trying to get rid of the * symbol since I don't think there's a reason to sort it that way. My internet is being wonky though. So the edit and edit summary didn't save properly for some reason. Adamant1 (talk) 20:39, 6 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Adamant1: The reason to sort it that way (or similarly) is so it doesn't get lost among the individual organizations that make up most of the category. - Jmabel ! talk 20:48, 6 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah I know people do it in general. There was a couple of other categories that were organized the same way though and at point there should just be a sub category based on the type of gallery or something. I was actually going to do that but couldn't figure out if I wanted to do it by type or subject and then my internet wonked out. Regardless, I don't think special characters should be used as a lazy persons sub catergorization scheme or whatever. --Adamant1 (talk) 21:17, 6 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Adamant1: it seems that you are pretty clearly in the minority among active categorizers there. I wasn't doing it myself for a long time, but it became pretty clear that it has become a pattern, and I think at this point that it has become a consensus approach, even if the consensus isn't formal (much as I think MPF is going against consensus on the issue right above this one). - Jmabel ! talk 22:10, 6 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In the minority with what exactly? Category:Categories by subject (flat list) has like 6 thousand categories in it and Category:Categories by type (flat list) has a little more then that. So I don't really any consensus to use special characters as a way to create sub categories or whatever. At least not exclusive, if even at all. It's pretty clear that if there are enough categories for a subject or type subcategory then people should just do it that way instead of creating lists of subcategories with the * symbol. Not that I have a particular problem with it that way myself sometimes depending on the circumstances, but I just think it would be better to it by creating either a type or subject category in this instance. --Adamant1 (talk) 23:18, 6 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Adamant1: In the minority by not doing this with categories that are a mix of generalities and specifics, and where neither you nor anyone else is inclined to take the trouble to break it down to subcategories (or where the generalities are few enough in number to make it not worth doing so). There's a kind of weird mix as to whether people do this with asterisk, space, or (in a few cases) something else such as an exclamation point; as long as it's done consistently within a parent category, that difference has little effect on end users.
I would say that when there get to be about a dozen of these generalities it's definitely time to make a subcat (FOO by BAR, etc), and it's OK when there are about half a dozen, though I personally don't usually bother at that point. But it's certainly better to do the asterisk etc. thing than to bury reasonably broad categories in the middle of a list of specific names. - Jmabel ! talk 23:33, 6 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Jewellery galleries‎, sculpture galleries‎, plaster cast galleries‎, contemporary art galleries‎, photography galleries‎ Etc. Etc. seem pretty specific to me. Although maybe "by medium" would be better, but that doesn't mean they are to general to warrant being put in a subcategory. Also I'm not really where your getting the idea that no one going to break them down into subcategories when I said I was going to except my internet screwed up and I can't decide how to do. This whole back and forth doesn't really motivate me to care it either, but that said, I told I was going to do it. I guess I'm fine with waiting for there to be more things to put in the subcategory. At this point I rather just do that then get in a needlessly pedantic argument about it. --Adamant1 (talk) 23:42, 6 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A kitten for you![edit]

Please keep this e-kitten as a token of appreciation for all of the nice work that you do here. The kitten is amazed at your work.

The Aafī (talk) 16:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thankfully, my allergies are only in meat-space. - Jmabel ! talk 17:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WikiCon North America?[edit]

Hi Joe! I was wondering if you were going to make it to WikiConference North America this year? I am putting together a presentation on DPLA's work and I would love to invite you to share all the work you've been doing for the Pacific Northwest collections. Dominic (talk) 18:51, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Dominic: Nope. I currently have roughly no income, and the cost of a multi-day trip to Toronto to attend this is out of the question. - Jmabel ! talk 18:56, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(I live in Seattle). - Jmabel ! talk 18:57, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, I get it! It looks like scholarships are still being accepted, if you'd want to look into that. I could also make space for you in my presentation to give a short prerecorded piece, if you're interested. Otherwise, fair warning, I am thinking of talking about you, by using your work as an example of one of our success stories to inspire others to do the same! Dominic (talk) 19:07, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Dominic: Thanks. I just sent that in, we'll see what happens. - Jmabel ! talk 22:13, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am glad to see that your work is so appreciated. Krok6kola (talk) 02:20, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Commons photographers: next virtual meeting on August 5[edit]

Dear member of the Commons Photographers User Group,

I'm inviting you to our next virtual meeting on Saturday, August 5th. We'll have two speakers: Poco a poco will provide us with an update on his underwater photography and George Oates from the Flickr Foundation will talk about the Flickr-to-Commons bridge (“Flickypedia”) that is currently in the works. If you're interested in attending, please sign up on this page: Virtual Meeting on August 5, 2023.

I hope you're having a great time taking photos and I'm looking forward to seeing you on August 5th.

All the best, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:41, 20 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jack Halberstam[edit]

I'm curious why you put Category:Jack Halberstam in Category:Drag kings. Halberstam is a transgender academic, not a transvestite entertainer, as far as I'm aware. Nosferattus (talk) 14:38, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @Nosferattus: because when I created the page (and made that categorization) in 2011 as Category:Judith Halberstam, 5 years before James Allison moved it in 2016, he still was legally Judith and considered himself a female doing male drag, which was in fact the topic of their talk that day, where I took the pictures, the earliest we have of him. Later he changed his stated gender identity. Clearly, I didn't "have a crystal ball," and obviously it would be appropriate to edit this. - Jmabel ! talk 15:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Thanks for the explanation! Just wanted to make sure it was appropriate to remove the category. Nosferattus (talk) 15:29, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Curtesy deletion request[edit]

Hi. I accidently uploaded a couple of images before I cropped them and now I can't upload the cropped versions without replacing them, which I don't want to do. So I was wondering if you could deleted the uncropped images so I can just re-upload the crops as new files. The images are File:Occidental Hotel, Santa Rosa, California trade card back.jpg and File:Occidental Hotel, Santa Rosa, California trade card front.jpg. Thanks. Adamant1 (talk) 10:40, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Actually screw it. I'll just use the crop tool. Thanks anyway. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:41, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Quick reminder: Commons Photographers meeting this Saturday[edit]

Dear member of the Commons Photographers User Group,

This is a quick reminder that our next meeting will happen on Saturday, August 5th. If you haven't registered yet and you're interested in learning more about underwater photography and “Flickypedia”, please sign up on this page. Also, I invite you to fill out this survey created by the people who are working on the Flickr-to-Wikimedia Commons software. Your input will make a difference.

We haven't had a virtual meeting in a while and I'm so looking forward to this weekend!

All the best, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:15, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A cup of tea for you![edit]

Thanks for all your work at the help desk, including answering my various annoying questions. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 12:34, 9 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Perhaps you can help[edit]

For some reason certain keys on my keyboard don't work anymore, and it's not the keyboard as I tried another. So now I have to cut and paste things like brackets, my signature etc. Any ideas? Krok6kola (talk) 21:06, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Do all of these involve the shift key? And (I know this is the oldest tech question in the world, but) have you rebooted? - Jmabel ! talk 22:32, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes it involves the shift key, but not for everything. LIKE this is ok and & ?, for example. And yes I've rebooted. And I've been on the phone for the last hour because all my TV gets is something called Black Brilliance since it "updated" itself today. At least the sunset is beautiful. Krok6kola (talk) 00:07, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't have anything firm on this, but if you are using Windows 10 there have been rumors about some recently added features/fixes interacting poorly with the portion of the system that handles knowing which key is down when you hit another key. I've had a bit of a problem myself with the CTRL key (though thankfully not with SHIFT). But I have no more idea what to do about it than you do. - Jmabel ! talk 00:29, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Windows 97. Guess I like thin ice. I'm waiting for my complete world to fall apart. ̴̴ Krok6kola (talk) 00:56, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wow. Some of our admins are younger than your OS. - Jmabel ! talk 00:57, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Whoa. If I had to be stuck in a given Windows version, I’d go for Win2kPro or XP — not Win97, yikes. (Could be worse, tho: Millenium Home and Win7 coming to mind.) -- Tuválkin 01:12, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(talk page stalker) Maybe you selected another keyboard by mistake? (And I mean the keymapping bit of your system, not the actual keyboard.) If I recall correctly, Shfit-Shfit would do that, and also Alt+Shfit. Your current keyboard should be shown in the system tray, and typically keymapping should match whatever hardware you have plugged in, or else unexpected things may happen — unless you know exactly what you’re doing. If that’s the case, change you settings to match. (Doesn’t seem to be a Commons issue, not even a web browser issue.) -- Tuválkin 01:10, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(talk page stalker) I just noticed that in your 00:07 reply above you had typed "ːːː" (three IPA triangular colons) instead of ":::" (three regular colons). You might have swapped to a specialist keymapping and you should return to defaults since that’s not what you wanted. -- Tuválkin 01:24, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Tuvalkin: per the initial remark, "So now I have to cut and paste things like brackets," those were presumably copy-pasted. - Jmabel ! talk 03:30, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just had a big laugh over the August 12 Village Pump discussion about categories and "depicts" and babies with hair chest. I can't take this place seriously anymore.

What computer would you recommend? (No laptops.) What I have now is labeled Systemax, but it's been jimmied with and now it is some kind of hybrid. When I reboot a MS DOS screen flashes by after Windows has loaded. ̴̴ Krok6kola (talk) 02:12, 15 August 2023 (UTC) (signature pasted)Reply[reply]

  • @Krok6kola: why no laptops? (To be honest, I have no idea what desktop computer one would buy these days: haven't bought one in maybe 15 years.) - Jmabel ! talk 02:20, 15 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ː Don't you have to use your thumbs? (I like mice.̪) Well, what kind is yours? It better not be Apple. (When you get old like me, you don't like change.) Krok6kola (talk) 03:07, 15 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, you don't have to use your thumbs to move the cursor! There is a touchpad if I want it, but I almost never use it. I use a mouse. The options for a mouse are pretty much the same as with a desktop. I use a cordless optical mouse, and one of the three USB ports on my laptop is taken up with a little Bluetooth chip to talk to the mouse.
I have an H-P ZBook 15 G6, a little over two years old. If I wanted, I could even hook it up to an external monitor, but I don't. It has (I think) a 17"-diagonal screen, which I use at 1920x1080; it was a little cramped for software development, but it's great for anything else. 64 GB RAM (because I do graphics work), 500 GB solid state drive (rather than a disk: this has become typical, especially for laptops). I could actually do with a bigger drive, but I offload photos to an external drive after a year or two. It was about $1500 (I don't remember exactly). My guess, given what you've been getting by with, is that unless you do graphics work I don't know about (e.g. if you are actually post-processing images) you could do with 8GB RAM and a smaller drive than I have, but of course I don't know how much data you may have stored. You should be able to find something very satisfactory for about half what I paid for this, maybe less, but I can't say exactly what you should be looking for. - Jmabel ! talk 15:07, 15 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I discovered I have Windows 7, not Windows 97 (learned by paying attention during reboot). Don't care how much it costs, and I could hook it up to a MUCH bigger screen. (Hope you were properly admired at that wiki-get-to-gether.) Krok6kola (talk) 01:24, 23 August 2023 (UTC) (pasted)Reply[reply]
That makes much more sense. Only 4-5 years out of being supported, not 15 or so.
If cost isn't particularly an issue, then probably you are looking at Dell & H-P. And either of those, or Samsung, for the monitor. But I don't have any particular recommendations of models. - Jmabel ! talk 01:34, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just did an ordinary reboot but something screwy happened. All my old setting are gone. When I fired up Foxfire, it asked if I wanted to use it as my main browser, etc. etc. All my addons are gone. Fortunately I remembered my wiki user name and password. What do you think caused this? Krok6kola

@Krok6kola: Sorry, not a clue. - Jmabel ! talk 23:30, 29 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I used to know how to link to other wikis, but no longer. Category:Luis Ortiz Martinez is on the French Wikipedia, but I can't figure out how to link to it. Since you know everything, how do I do it? Krok6kola (talk) 02:23, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Krok6kola: fr:Luis Ortiz Martinez ([[:fr:Luis Ortiz Martinez]]). Or Luis Ortiz Martinez ({{w|Luis Ortiz Martinez||fr}}). - Jmabel ! talk 02:31, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I now have a new computer. My old one was Windows 7, much better than this version, although the new one is much smaller and sleeker. I am tempted to hook Windows 7 up and used it anyway, using "escape" to by pass the startup. Saw you were tangling with the big bad wolf. Thought he had changed, though he did fiddle with an Ecuador cat I started, for the better I must say. Krok6kola (talk) 00:13, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Krok6kola: Actual Windows 7 has a lot less protection from hackers. You can easily make Windows 10 or 11 have pretty much the same UI as Windows 7 (I assume the UI is what you liked about it). There are several ways to do that. Google "emulate windows 7 UI" (without the quotation marks) and you'll see a bunch of stuff on how to do it. - 01:31, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Thanks for that. I wouldn't say "easily". Krok6kola (talk) 02:36, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File rename?[edit]

@Jmabel, Can this file name be changed,- replacing "restored" with the more accurate "retouched" per your edit?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AKrisztina_Csáky._Portrait_in_Uzhhorod_Castle_restored_by_AI%2C_2023.jpg&diff=791969280&oldid=791771816 -- Ooligan (talk) 04:21, 16 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done. - Jmabel ! talk 06:38, 16 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, -- Ooligan (talk) 07:09, 16 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thoughts? I made the category based on your comment--Trade (talk) 19:00, 19 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Trade: I was about to say, "seems about right to me" but then I see you moved it to Category:AI images generated without prompts, which is absolutely wrong. That seems to say that no prompt was involved in generating them. Almost certainly there was a prompt, and that prompt is not identified. - Jmabel ! talk 19:45, 19 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Anyways, what is next step now we have the category? Trade (talk) 21:40, 19 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For people to use it!
I think we should normally be tagging AI-generated images to indicate what software & what prompt, but until we make that policy, that's just my opinion. I think we were getting close to consensus, but then discussion seemed to stall. - Jmabel ! talk 23:52, 19 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Do we need a category of AI images generated using known prompts? Or whatever you want the opposite of this category to be called. Trade (talk) 22:36, 20 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think so. But it's really hard to say until we have a clear consensus on rules. My view is that lacking a documented prompt should usually be a reason to delete. So I don't think we need a category for AI images generated using known prompts any more then we need a category for images where we have some indication of author. - Jmabel ! talk 22:45, 20 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is the simple issue that users simple have no way of knowing they are expected to include prompt with their images Trade (talk) 01:38, 21 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think this needs to become part of the Wizard: "Was this image generated by (or with the assistance of) an AI program," etc. - Jmabel ! talk 01:40, 21 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Would you be willing to work on a user talk page template that asks users to include software name and prompt with their AI uploads and explaining to them why its necessary?
I imagine engaging in conversation with every users who have uploaded AI images without prompts will be very time consuming otherwise Trade (talk) 02:36, 21 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sure, but not today. I've just gotten back from a week of travel during which I had limited Internet connectivity, and have spent practically my whole day catching up with stuff. - Jmabel ! talk 02:41, 21 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll let you guess which part of my poorly made pie chart represents images with prompts--Trade (talk) 04:46, 21 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yup. That's why I said we might have to grandfather in what is before a particular date. - Jmabel ! talk 15:52, 21 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Trade: I can see I'm going to be playing catch-up for at least a week. I'll probably try to get to this early next week. - Jmabel ! talk 01:36, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Things are getting better--Trade (talk) 02:58, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You reverted my change on Category:Wholesalers, but that was because of the changes discussed on Commons:Categories for discussion/2017/11/Category:Salespeople. If you do not agree with the conclusions there, I suggest you start a new discussion about this subject. JopkeB (talk) 16:19, 2 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JopkeB: I guess OK if you are going to work this through consistently. Your edit summary did not link that discussion, so of course I was unaware of it. I just looked at Category:Vendors and saw that you were using it entirely differently than what every single prior subcat was about.
Question: do you intend to end up with some category for street vendors, informal sector, etc.? Things that are below the level of what would normally be called a "shop" or even a booth at a fair? - Jmabel ! talk 16:26, 2 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for your reaction. I am sorry I did not add the link to the discussion to the edit summary, and so bringing confusion.
Category:Street vendors is a grandchild of Category:Salespeople, subcategory of Category:Retail salespeople‎. My questions to you:
  • What else should be done in the context of "work this through consistently"?
  • What do you mean by "that you were using it entirely differently than what every single prior subcat was about"? What should I do to make the category structure more in line with expectations of you and perhaps others?
JopkeB (talk) 07:05, 3 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@JopkeB: It looks like you've done some of this already, but Category:Vendor's trays certainly belongs at least under Category:Retail salespeople‎, probably under Category:Street vendors (although I have seen these at a ballgame or—from before my lifetime—a nightclub). Category:People selling plants is presumably under Category:Retail salespeople‎. Category:Boat vendors certainly belongs as far down the hierarchy as Category:Street vendors.
I'd also note that a lot of the categories under Category:Vendors by country appear to be entirely street vendors, and (at a quick glance) I wouldn't be surprised if they are entirely street or market vendors (thus all retail salespeople, and really something narrower than that: you're not going to find a used car salesman or a person at a cash register in a department store). And Category:Vendors certainly deserves a note indicating which definition of vendors it is about.
There's probably more than that. Area isn't one where I've been focused, but by "work it through consistently" I mean take the time to look at what's there (more than I'm inclined to take on at this time, or I'd just do it myself) and actually organize it in consistent categories that make sense and have teh appropriate relation to one another. - Jmabel ! talk 15:03, 3 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! You are right, there is still a lot of work to do.
  • I just put Category:Vendor's trays under Category:Retail salespeople‎, because of the reason you mentioned and I know those trays were also used in cinemas, so Category:Street vendors is not appropriate now. Later on, when there are photos of other uses than by Street vendors, this category can be split.
  • Theoretically Category:People selling plants can also be about plant nurseries where plants are being sold to plant wholesalers or to flower shops. But in this category are now only images of people selling plants to consumers. So perhaps the category should be renamed, split or get a description.
  • I thought that "boat vendors" are people who sell boats. But looking at the images I now get the impression that they are vendors who sell their products from a boat instead of in a shop or market stall. Is that right? Then the category should have a proper description and be moved. (Personal reminder for me: perhaps Category:Parlevinker should become a subcategory.)
  • Yes, Category:Vendors by country needs better organization. Perhaps the subcategories should be the main categories about selling of the countries, and the other categories of a country about selling should be subcategories too. And all should get proper descriptions to avoid confusion. Lot to do.
  • Category:Vendors already has a description. What should be added?
JopkeB (talk) 06:32, 4 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@JopkeB: I think the current description in Category:Vendors is fine.
Category:Boat vendors could be changed to Category:Vending from boats, or it could be given a description. FWIW, while "boat vendors" is technically ambiguous the same way just "vendors" is, I don't think any native speaker would use it to mean anything other than what it means here (just like it would be only a joke to call someone who sold a turnpike a "street vendor").
Yes, given the way you've decided to go it would seem the by-country thing needs a similar structural revisit for each country.
- Jmabel ! talk 16:07, 4 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I hope with "you" you mean the participants in the discussion, because I did not decide that on my own. JopkeB (talk) 05:10, 6 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@JopkeB: To be entirely honest, I hadn't given a lot of thought to whether the "you" was singular or plural, but you (singular) are correct that "you" (plural) is more appropriate and that you (singular) are at least working on the thing, whereas the others who wanted the change don't seem to be working at all on getting it done, and they (plural, need to say that these days) ought to be helping you (singular). - Jmabel ! talk 15:37, 6 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. It is very rare that others help with work getting done after a discussion has been closed, I resigned myself to that. And I also think it is odd that people start a discussion, I guess to solve a problem, and then let it go on for years, although there is agreement or at least a lot of support for a proposal. That's just the way it is. JopkeB (talk) 03:39, 7 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is it perhaps better to move this discussion to Category talk:Vendors? JopkeB (talk) 06:47, 4 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Feel free to copy-paste and end this here. - Jmabel ! talk 16:08, 4 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reverted facts[edit]

Hello and thank you again for helping with that Wikidata item. I am a bit troubled, however by these subsequent reversals of updated facts. Can they possibly be reinstated somehow? The subject, as of 1996, is more known as a book author that a "screenwriter" for example, and today has a total of 7 books listed with LIBRIS. Best wishes, SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:57, 7 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @SergeWoodzing: The only change subsequent to mine that seems not to have been reverted is to change "Swedish director" to "Swedish-American director". - Jmabel ! talk 20:23, 7 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry wrong link. I'm very good at wrong links. Getting old. These are the three reversals I meant. The IP meant to remove "screenwriter", and add "writer" and "hotel manager" with refs, and was right in doing so. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:29, 7 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@SergeWoodzing: you'd have to take up the reversion with wikidata:User:Saroj. - Jmabel ! talk 20:31, 7 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
✓ Done, thanks. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:54, 7 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Difference between solution and suggestion[edit]

I disapprove the culture of work if reader of a question writed an answer on how should the user should ask the question but totally ignore to provide the solution for which the user has asked the question. The user of this talk page should go back to the edit from where I have come and provide the needed solution or guide which is essential. In Short the question was "what to do now" and answer was given "ask like this" ? Anyways I am happy that a good suggestion was left in edit but I was in need of something else. I know how to master your given craft but you should that I will never know your craft if am never found here. I am happy that you read and this happiness is more than everything. Thank you for it. 2409:4081:AD10:115F:0:0:CC4A:C08 18:07, 10 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Report of infringement of your work[edit]

FYI, File:2017 Fremont Solstice Parade - cyclists 094.jpg has been posted without attribution and marked with the PDM 1.0 on Flickr at [2]. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:20, 10 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mystery[edit]

https://kingcounty.gov/~/media/depts/dnrp/wtd/capital-projects/nmienatai/docs/1506_nmercer-enatai-news.ashx?la=en credits me for the photo at the top of the document. It's clearly the East Channel Bridge, but I can't work out what photo of mine it would be (definitely not in that category). I'm guessing it is a tight crop of something much broader. - Jmabel ! talk 02:00, 12 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

https://www.ezview.wa.gov/Portals/_1962/Documents/WCMAC/9.28.2020%20WCMAC%20Meeting%20Materials%20with%20Presentations.pdf credits me for two photos. Offhand, I don't have a clue on when I took either one, and there isn't enough context for me to be able to search for them. - Jmabel ! talk 03:23, 12 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

https://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/Neighborhoods/HistoricPreservation/Landmarks/LandmarksPreservationBoard/MeetingDocuments/ElMonterey_NOM_application.pdf Figure 64 is credited to me, and while I've photographed the Hacienda Apartments, I don't think that photo is actually mine. (Figure 65, a different view, is mine, and is credited to me.) - Jmabel ! talk 05:39, 12 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Monroe (Washington) City Council briefing Needle Clean-up Kit Program credits me for the third photo on p. 7 of the PDF, but offhand I don't recognize it. - Jmabel ! talk 01:16, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Al Kooper 03.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!

Solomon203 (talk) 10:59, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Commons Photographers User Group: Board Elections 2023[edit]

Dear member of the Commons Photographers User Group,

in preparation of the 2023 board election of our group, we invite you to take a look at the following page:

Commons:Commons Photographers User Group/Board Elections 2023

and provide feedback.

The timeline for the 2023 election will be

  • September 15 – September 30: Applications for the election committee
  • October 1 – October 9: Vote for election committee (ideally comprised of three members)
  • October 10: Election committee starts work
  • October 20 – November 9: Nomination phase for candidacies
  • November 10 – December 10: Elections
  • December 15: Results announced

In the first step we ask you to be part of the election committe. Please add your name on the Election Page.

We are very much looking forward to hearing from you. Please use this talk page for your thoughts.

All the best

--Ailura (talk) for the CPUG board

A beer for you![edit]

I felt you deserved something for your helpdesk work. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:08, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Technical Barnstar
I can't thank you enough for your help with moving my files into a user category. It will now be much easier to find specific files since the Uploads tool gets harder to use with so many files in it. I hope I didn't cause too much trouble/inconvenience for you. Again, thank you for your help and have a great day! DiscoA340 (talk) 21:03, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Empty/erroneous categories[edit]

Hi Jmabel, I am a bit shocked how many categories had survived until you deleted them in the last days, all of them I deemed to have long been deleted... Just to get the pic right, I think I created at least maybe 500 categories in the same time which were correct and live happily, ok? ;-) ;-) Pittigrilli (talk) 21:15, 29 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Pittigrilli: I believe the problem is that when you've wanted to get rid of a category, you just blanked it, rather than marking it for deletion. Typically, if a category is no longer useful, it should be marked either with {{SD|C1}} if it's not an appropriate category name or {{SD|C2}} otherwise. I've been systematically going through the parentless categories for about a week now, probably deleted a few thousand altogether, still at it. User:Billinghurst also knocked out a few hundred (maybe more) and a few other admins each took out smaller numbers. - Jmabel ! talk 21:21, 29 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel: Ok, sorry for that, and I will change my practice. Best, Pittigrilli (talk) 21:34, 29 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel: I want to add something just for clarity - if I created a category in error (e.g., wrong logic, as showed mostly 10 min later, or typos, or a missing "parameter word" in the name), I to nearly 100 % emptied it AND wrote sth. like "was created in error, please delete" in the cat text and also in the comment line. While I see that this clearly was not enough (see above, formal request missing), I almost never left a category just blank. This is what I just realized: During months, a number of the 500+ cats I made were in fact emptied (sometimes kind of reorganized) by others, often not to my pleasure and sometimes making the cat tree worse. As this was not grave though, I did not bother to start discssions which I dislike. Hence, the really blank categories without even a hint "can be deleted" or so were definitely not from me, maybe with very very few exceptions. Pittigrilli (talk) 12:56, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Pittigrilli: That's fine. Some of the ones I ran across did have messages like "created in error". As you can imagine, in cleaning up thousands, I haven't been keeping careful track. Mostly I've been killing anything that didn't have even a parent or a child; I've been doing some other cleanup as well. There were some obvious redirects to do. I believe the only times other than that in this process that I've killed a cat with a parent it's been an empty cat where the that parent, in turn, had no parent.
Oh, and another relevant code for deletion would be {{SD|G7}}, for something you created in error and just want quickly deleted. Best used on something recent enough that you can be pretty confident no one else ever used it. - Jmabel ! talk 14:26, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel: I am fully informed by now to be a pro level cat destroyer, I guess ;-) BTW, I know from personal experience that the "thank you for that" level for maintenance work like yours is disturbingly low in general, thus I want to say thank you for this clean-up and for the things I don't know, either... Pittigrilli (talk) 17:17, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. FWIW, I'd accidentally created that as a typo, then added images to it later without realizing it was the one I had blanked as empty. Jarnsax (talk) 03:51, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm just talking and wondering why you don't let me sign in Wikipedia page just why ?!![edit]

why ?!! 196.70.123.179 01:46, 1 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have no idea who you are or why you are asking me this. - Jmabel ! talk 01:48, 1 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Explosions here[edit]

Have things suddenly sped up on the Commons? Seems to me it has. e.g. yesterday I created Category:Projekt Kolaborator and today it suddenly is in Category:Collaboration by country , Category:Economy of Poland, Category:Culture of Poland, Category:Communication in Poland , and Category:Human behavior in Poland. What's going on? And many of my very old categories are filling up, e.g.Category:Turpan Museum! And places in Xinjiang, etc. Plus the categories on "Reflections" has completely new variations. Krok6kola (talk) 23:07, 5 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You might happen to be working in/looking at areas where someone is particularly active at the moment. I doubt the overall rhythm has changed much. But I am pretty proud that we got Special:Uncategorized categories down to 3795 entries, around half of what it was a couple of weeks ago. - Jmabel ! talk 23:11, 5 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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:


Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 02:36, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User edit warring[edit]

Hello, Jmabel. Could you review this user's contributions? They've been involved in an edit/move dispute over categories and files, persistently altering them to a version that disrupts the broader consistency among numerous other categories. Despite my warning on their talk page, they continue to move the categories. — Golden talk 19:53, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Golden: I don't have any special knowledge here, and am very hesitant to wade into Azeri/Armenian disagreements. If this calls for admin action, use COM:AN/U and probably someone a lot more qualified than I am in the relevant area will take it on. - Jmabel ! talk 20:01, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I did leave them a further note. - Jmabel ! talk 20:52, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
File:Chittenden Locks during large lock maintenance 113 - worker with spray washer.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!

— Draceane talkcontrib. 07:20, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tagging[edit]

Would you mind help me tagging recently uploaded film posters and album covers as needing permission? I can't edit so much due to my laptop being in the process of dying Trade (talk) 03:07, 15 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Trade: I'm up to my eyeballs already. I've taken on three almost open-ended projects besides my own photography: categorizing content placed directly in Category:Seattle, assaulting Special:UncategorizedCategories, and better categorizing media in Category:Media contributed by Seattle Public Library. And each of these has a tendency to reveal missing categories, Wikidata items that need to be built, etc.
Are these being uploaded by a specific, small number of users (in which case if you identify the users I can easily do this with COM:VFC, or is this something that involves lots of looking for problematic material (in which case you need to find someone who isn't already doing a bunch of other things). - Jmabel ! talk 03:13, 15 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just go to film poster, album cover or

book cover once in a while and tag the copyvio if you have time. It's not really hard to find cooyvio this way--Trade (talk) 16:20, 16 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Trade: No, sorry, if you are talking about another ongoing task, I'm not taking this one. You need to find someone who is less swamped. Besides what I listed above, I'm one of the 3 or 4 people who does the most on the help desk & village pump, I upload content from Seattle Municipal Archive, and several other things. If anything, I'm looking to drop ongoing tasks, not take on more. - Jmabel ! talk 17:45, 16 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've secured a PC so i should be able to tag images more effectively now Trade (talk) 17:07, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Trade: Glad to hear it! - Jmabel ! talk 18:02, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Descargar logos con banderas[edit]

Buenas, se puede descargar logos oficiales con banderas de Venezuela (por ejemplo si descargo un Logo de una Alcaldía incluido la bandera de Venezuela que todavía existe en Wikimedia) es necesario agregar el "Derived from" (Derivative versions)?? AbchyZa22 (talk) 22:55, 31 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@AbchyZa22: Quizás a veces no necesario, pero nunca mal. {{Derived from}} da claridad sobre cuyo era la fuente. Eso is casi siempre mejor, pero (por ejemplo) si la fuente es en el dominio público, se permite omitir esa plantilla. Yo lo emplearía in cada caso, porque siempre estaría más claro. - Jmabel ! talk 23:43, 31 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel: OK, tengo un claro ejemplo de un Logo pero no oficial inspirado por mi
File:Logo no oficial Alcaldía Romulo Gallegos Apure 2021-2025.jpg
pero hice una versión derivada de una Bandera de Venezuela, Wikimedia Commons acepta si agrego "Derived from"?? AbchyZa22 (talk) 12:53, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
De un lado, la inspiración queda solamente en los colores, y no llega al nivel de obra derivada en el sentido to derechos de autores. Pero, de otro, ¿cómo puede ser en el alcance de Commons? Es una ficción no notable. - Jmabel ! talk 14:30, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel: que significa “la inspiración queda solamente en los colores” me refiero los colores de la bandera de Venezuela??
AbchyZa22 (talk) 18:03, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AbchyZa22: Exactamente. El uso de los colores del tricolor no tiene derechos del autor. Pero, como pregunté ¿cómo puede ser esta imagen (el tuyo) en el alcance de Commons? ¿Cómo es educativo? - Jmabel ! talk 18:13, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel: Ok, te lo cuento, agregué el Logo de la Coalición política Mesa de la Unidad Democrática (ese logo es oficial pero todavía existe en Wikimedia) pero puse la descripción "ALCALDÍA de ROMULO GALLEGOS" pero el eslogan es "UNIDAD" por que el Alcalde opositor qué fue electo en el año 2021 se unió a la oposición para derrotar al Chavismo (el creó la "Revolución Bolivariana"). Eso me refiero la imagen la qué yo cree.
AbchyZa22 (talk) 18:39, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AbchyZa22: entonces, indica lo que usó (el Logo de la Coalición política Mesa de la Unidad Democrática, no la bandera). Pero, por la tercera vez, ¿cómo puede ser esta imagen (el tuyo) en el alcance de Commons? - Jmabel ! talk 18:43, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel: Si así es, con los colores de la bandera, pero usé mi computadora pero salio error (por falta de batería en mi Laptop) antes de hacer Upload, fotografié en mi teléfono para modificar dentro de mi teléfono y después hice el Upload
AbchyZa22 (talk) 21:31, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Clearly, AbchyZa22 is not going to explain how this would be in scope and I have therefore nominated it for deletion. - Jmabel ! talk 22:15, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Es bastante claro que AbchyZa22 no va a explicar cómo la ficha esta puede estar en el alcance de Commons. Por lo tanto, lo he nominado para borrar. - Jmabel ! talk 22:15, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jmabel: OK, por favor borra eso la imagen, la otra vez no voy a hacer eso
AbchyZa22 (talk) 22:30, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AbchyZa22: entonces, explica en el DR (no aquí) come es en el alcance de Commons. Te pregunté arriba tres veces y mo me no me respondiste. - Jmabel ! talk 23:01, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Hola, Jmabel. No me he leído todo este hilo, pero si te sirviera de algo, he llegado a la conclusión de que donde AbchyZa22 escribe "descargar" (download), en realidad quiere decir "subir/cargar" (upload). Un saludo. Strakhov (talk) 12:47, 18 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Strakhov: esto yo entendí, pero ¿qué puede significar "inspirar"? A veces, supongo, "grabar", pero a otros veces no estoy seguro. - Jmabel ! talk 16:16, 18 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Pues yo no lo entendí, me costó bastante. No. En "pero no oficial inspirado por mi" [sic] entiendo que quiere decir algo así como que: no es un logo oficial, sino que es una obra derivada suya, en cuya creación habría intervenido su inspiración artística, o algo así (en cualquier caso: se expresa muy mal y se le entiende fatal). Saludos. Strakhov (talk) 16:25, 18 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The easy solution for a Upload Wizard issue I had[edit]

I write to you because I had an annoying issue with uploading images for months and no-one had a solution even though I opened several discussions about it at the help venues. In the end, the solution to the problem was to close the browser completely and reopen the browser from start. Too many tabs were open for too long I was told. Maybe this helps you make someone else's life much easier, if one appears with a similar issue again. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 09:48, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Paradise Chronicle: Amusingly, I got this message just after waking up this morning, turning on my computer, and doing my first full reboot in several weeks. - Jmabel ! talk 15:00, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Observation[edit]

It's always funny to me how I can be dragged through the dirt and lied about for multiple months and no one even bats an eye or does anything about it, but then I'm the one in the wrong and should be blocked or banned if I so much as blink in the wrong direction. Adamant1 (talk) 20:13, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Adamant1: I would say on the whole you give [almost] as good as you get. When you are engaged with people who play dirty, you usually show slightly more restraint than they do, but only slightly. If you'd stay more to the high ground, by the time it comes to AN or ANU I'd be in a position to sanction them without having to also sanction you. But you keep letting yourself be dragged in. https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump/Copyright&diff=next&oldid=818505048 was particularly egregious: going back and editing yourself to make what you said less temperate.
And you really don't need to always speak last, or if you do you can sometimes just say (when the other side has added nothing meaningful), "none of that is germane. I stand by what I said before," instead of continuing a slugfest. I imagine you've seen times when I say something to the effect of, "I believe I've said my part. If you need to have the last word, go ahead. I won't be responding further on this thread unless I'm directly addressed." And what happens? They almost inevitably write exactly one more time, they stop piling on bullshit, and the thread comes to an end only slightly after it should have. I trust that the people who will read the thread can tell who is making sense and who is not, and that they can do so a lot more easily if the thread doesn't reach from Milan to Timbuktu. - Jmabel ! talk 20:26, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You pinged me from somewhere[edit]

but I can't figure out where. And I don't remember what I was thinking at the time that I made that category. Krok6kola (talk) 01:30, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I found it. Probably it should just be deleted. I don't know what I was thinking at the time. Krok6kola (talk) 01:37, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Proposal for some improvements for image retrieval[edit]

Hi Jmabel, I have an idea or better a mini concept (relatively simple but quite unconventional and promising) how we could acquire high quality PD images in areas which (on Commons) inherently lack both quality and quantity. As you are the only person I know on Commons who seems to have a quite broad knowledge on how things work here in general, I would like to send you some sentences on the idea via email before posting it to a broader audience. Would that be ok or would you suggest a different course of action? Best, Pittigrilli (talk) 16:43, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Pittigrilli: I'm very willing, but I am headed early tomorrow morning to WikiConference North America and will be mostly incommunicado until Monday, 13 November. I almost certainly won't have time to think about it before that, so you might do well to hold off a week in sending me anything so I can give it proper attention. - Jmabel ! talk 19:36, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel: - SCNR: 1) Where on the web are really good pics of ALL kinds of things? Ebay. 1600x1200 only, but hey.
2) How does Wikimedia get them? Cooperation with ebay, they freak about about the PR opportunity and agree to this: During the "place an ebay ad" process, ebay inserts a banner with opt-in option: "I agree that my pics may optionally be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons so that they can be used in Wikipedia and other Wikimedia-projects with my ebay-username as image author (etc.)". Bonus for that: 10% off on the sales fee (or the likes etc., or just the fame...).
3) Wikimedia developers program an interface so that Commons users can browse and easily import the pics from ebay, no action at all from ebay required, no API access, etc. (probably also optional)
4) Sophisticated enhanced option to all the above: Ebay temporarily (for 6 months, e.g.) stores the original files (5000x3500 or so today on average) so that we get better pictures, but this seems to be a hard one: Does ebay agree to temporarliy host an awful lot of files which they (today) just throw away to spare storage? Can this be solved differently? But this would be step 2 imho.
That was it. The shortest IT proposal in history ;-) So I will be patient for about 10-14 days or so... Best, Pittigrilli (talk) 20:27, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Pittigrilli: an awful lot of images on eBay are copyvios to begin with, and I wouldn't trust their users to have a clue about whether or not they were (especially when the issue is derivative work). - Jmabel ! talk 20:30, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok (I have a remedy for that one), have fun on the conference! Pittigrilli (talk) 20:35, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Pittigrilli: I'll be interested. Meanwhile, if you haven't already done so, I'd suggest looking through 100+ random or pseudo-random eBay images and seeing what percentage look like all we would need is the photographer's sign-off.
BTW, additional issue: eBay does not currently require the uploader to even assert that they are the photographer. That would have to be part of any CC-0 release. - Jmabel ! talk 20:57, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Two items - of course, many ebay pics are not brillant, but the quantity is so enormous that we (the then users browsing) could really do cherry picking - of 10 ads with an Accuphase amplifier (rare high end producer), one would choose the best one, I am not talking about 'mass uploads', but of the really good ones. Now the more important copyright issue: Imho, absolutely nobody posts pics on the web or integrates them in webpages (well, except on commons...) which are larger than about 1600 width, in very rare cases maybe up to 2000 width. But nearly all copy vios will be from the web, right? At the same time, nearly every digicam or mobile-phone-integrated cam used today has way more than 2000x1400. Hence, a simple means to make sure we do not get copyvios is that ebay would show the banner only from the start if their IT recognizes during the downscaling (or seldomly, upscaling) to 1600x1200 (which they do for standard) that the source files have a resolution with a larger dimension of more than, say, 3000. Hence, we would make sure that the uploader has the original file from a digicam or phone, and not somewhere from the web. The only aspect left is that people might take pics from Commons (yes), but then they would probably not choose the opt-in, or the Commons-user uploading the pic to Commons would realize this and skip the whole process. More convinced? Pittigrilli (talk) 21:18, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Pittigrilli: many copyvios will be by having your friend or family member take the photo. - Jmabel ! talk 21:24, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
All right. Make another tickbox "I was the photographer of these pics" beneath the "opt-in" for Commons, and we put the responsibilty for this on the ebay user. And in German, we say "where there is no judge, there will be no hangman" ;-) 21:33, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
@Pittigrilli: Fair enough, but three of the five points of Commons:Project scope/Precautionary principle specifically reject that last reasoning. I'm not opposed to what you are proposing, but I think it is full of pitfalls; we might do better to have systematic outreach to get a broad permission from each of certain eBay users who seem to post a lot of useful photos. - Jmabel ! talk 21:44, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This indeed sounds good, but has an inherent disadvantage, I assume - people placing many good pics (and frequently) in their own ads are most likely ebay professional (or semi-pro) sellers, which in turn for sure do not want to have their pics in PD - as their competitors would most likely think "Hey, good pics of the items I sell" and use them, too... On the other hand, I see your point on the "Grandpa/my spouse took it" issue and why this might be a show stopper for my proposal. Well, maybe something useful results anyhow... So from my side, I think we can terminate this thread for now, and thank you for listening... Pittigrilli (talk) 21:59, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Commons Photographers User Group: Board Elections 2023 - Nomination Phase[edit]

Dear member of the Commons Photographers User Group,

the 2023 board election of our group is run at

Commons:Commons Photographers User Group/Board Elections 2023.

The next steps in the timeline for the 2023 election are

  • October 20 – November 16: Nomination phase for candidacies
  • November 17 – December 10: Elections
  • December 16: Results announced

If you are interested in being a member of the board, please nominate yourself on the Election Page.

We are very much looking forward to hearing from you. Please use this talk page for your thoughts.

All the best

--Ailura (talk) for the CPUG board

Thanks![edit]

Krok6kola (talk) 19:02, 18 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Although I don't know of a formal discussion about the category in question, I have noticed the most editors don't give a category to the TIF image, giving one to the .jpg only. Krok6kola (talk) 00:34, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Krok6kola: It's not absolutely consistent across Commons, but it is pretty near consistent on the NARA and LoC TIFFs. - Jmabel ! talk 00:48, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Strange license problem with combo pic[edit]

@Jmabel: - after years of happy Commons work without any problem (well, almost...), I ran into a bizarre one yesterday - as you may have noticed, I produced quite a number of PDP pics without background recently, also based on some of your images. One of the goals of this was to produce an overview pic with 6 models (in first pass I did one with 1, 7, 8, 8e, 11/70, and 15). Put that into "DerivativeFX" and - got the error message "Sorry, your images can't be merged!". Though all are somehow CC, but with different numbers, versions, etc. Is that the end of the game or is there anything I could at least try? Is there the option of making some minimal license which fits to all of them or whatever? I invested hours just for this combo pic and do not want to give up...

This is the error message I got from DerivativeFX (with nowiki tag to avoid spamming your talk page, sorry for the resulting spaghetti code):

Sorry, your images can't be merged!

The licenses are incompatible or the licenses can't be detected. See above for all license tags the tool found for this images: File:DEC_PDP-1_Minicomputer_(1959)_in_Computer_History_Museum_(edited,_with_white_background).jpg {{Cc-by-2.0}} File:DEC_PDP-7_Minicomputer_from_1964_standing_in_Oslo_prior_to_restoration_in_2005_(edited_image,_partially_without_background,_persepctive_corrected)_No_4.jpg {{Cc-sa-1.0}} File:DEC_PDP-8_SN_85_front.JPG {{Cc-zero}} File:PDP8E_Full_Front.jpg {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} File:LCM_-_DEC_PDP-11-70_-_01.jpg {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} File:DEC_PDP-15_Minicomputer_in_tn_Living_Computer_Museum_Seattle_(strongly_edited).jpg {{Cc-by-2.0}}

Service for your convenience ;-) - all licences for the 6 pics as identified by DFX:
Cc-sa-1.0
Cc-by-2.0 (2 images)
Cc-by-sa-3.0
Cc-by-sa-4.0
Cc-zero

Any constructive advice possible? Pittigrilli (talk) 11:22, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Pittigrilli: I never use Derivative FX, but you should be able just to upload with Special:Upload, which means you have to write the whole file page by hand (using copy-paste for the bulk of it, of course). You should be able to upload your contribution to the image as Cc-by-sa-4.0, working with images originally based on any of the above-mentioned licenses. Take a look at File:Asahel Curtis Panorama of Stimson Mill, Ballard, 1904.jpg for a way I did this one time (derivative from three files in the public domain). There are quite a few acceptable ways to acknowledge the original files, but this is one of them. - Jmabel ! talk 16:00, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel: Man, you really made my day! Good news, and I was already prepared for sth. like "Sorry, no way...". Now I know why I never particularly liked DerivativeFX. Thanks, Pittigrilli (talk) 17:02, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel: Done. What a sh&%$-load of work... File:Six Minicomputers from Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) from 1957 to production end in 1979 - PDP-1, PDP-7, PDP-8, PDP-8-E, PDP-11-70, PDP-15.jpg. Any suggestions/improvement proposals? Pittigrilli (talk) 18:10, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Pittigrilli: Great work! The only thing I might add is to mention the specific licenses of the source works (which you can do in the gallery). And, yeah, it's a lot of work to properly license something that derives from six differently-licensed works. - Jmabel ! talk 18:35, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Chomsky picture replacement didn't go through[edit]

I made a request for the CommonsDelinker bot to replace File:Noam Chomsky portrait 2017 retouched.png -> File:Noam Chomsky portrait 2017 retouched.jpg. You removed the request, but according to the file usage links of the PNG, it doesn't seem to have gone through? Could you try running it again maybe? Or what else can we do about those wikis? Σ (talk) 04:13, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Σ: The bot said it was running it, but I guess it didn't. I'll try again. - Jmabel ! talk 04:16, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:CommonsDelinker/commands&diff=prev&oldid=825754900 - Jmabel ! talk 04:18, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
TYVM! Σ (talk) 10:34, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Caricare immagini[edit]

Ciao, scusami il disturbo ma tu sei sicuramente più esperto di me, un’associazione mi ha mandato delle foto sulla Reggia di Monza, i suoi interni e i suoi esterni e le sue planimetrie, chiedendomi di caricarle su Commons a patto “di citare la fonte e il nome del comitato.” Mi chiedevo come potessi farlo e se in caso, inoltrandoti la mail e le informazioni necessarie, potresti farlo tu in modo da non commettere errori. Fammi sapere e grazie in anticipo! Fefecece (talk) 13:14, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Assuming the materials are copyrighted (which they almost certainly are) and that they own the copyright (which I have no way to know) a necessary first step is that they send an email as described at COM:VRT/it either granting a specific license or indicating that you are authorized to do so on their behalf. Have them cc you on the email.
(Tramite Google Translate; leggo l'italiano, ma non lo scrivo bene :) Supponendo che i materiali siano protetti da copyright (cosa che quasi certamente lo sono) e che possiedano il copyright (cosa che non ho modo di sapere) un primo passo necessario è che inviino un'e-mail come descritto su COM:VRT/it concedendo una licenza specifica o indicando che sei autorizzato a farlo per loro conto. Chiedi loro di inviarti una copia dell'e-mail. - Jmabel ! talk 19:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Grazie mille, sei gentilissimo! Posso chiederti un favore? Se ti inoltro la mail con le immagini e con ovviamente l'indirizzo email che me le ha mandate e che le possiede, potresti scrivergli direttamente tu dicendogli cosa fare e alla fine caricandole su Commons? Ovviamente io manderei una mail a questa Fondazione proprietaria delle immagini avvertendoli che un utente più esperto gli scriverebbe per prendere accordi. Grazie mille ancora e fammi sapere! Fefecece 151.48.5.227 12:59, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Fefecece: as long as they can deal with my writing in English! I can read Italian moderately well (basically be triangulating between Spanish and Romanian), but am very limited in my ability to write it. Or you might just want to look at Commons:Volunteer_Response_Team/it. I think it's pretty clear, and it includes an example for the letter they would need to send. I'd recommend the license CC-BY-SA 4.0, which does what you say they want to do. - Jmabel ! talk 16:24, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Tranquillo, penso non abbiamo problemi con l'inglese, in caso potresti anche usare il traduttore comunicandoglielo come hai fatto con me l'altra volta, cosi non ci son incomprensioni. A che mail posso inoltrarti quella che hanno mandato a me? Fefece 151.48.5.227 16:27, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Fefecece: I sent you an email just now, so you now have my email address. By the way, you really ought to be logged in when you carry on an exchange like this. - Jmabel ! talk 16:30, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request to blur a photo subject to a DR[edit]

JMabel, Can you help on this one here: File:Give Me Liberty - Hong Kong Graffiti 6 October 2019 (48851461613).jpg The graffiti text on both sides of the art are desirable to keep as apart of Hong Kong recent historical protests. Thank you, --Ooligan (talk) 05:36, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ooligan: so get rid of Pepe & keep the rest? - Jmabel ! talk 16:23, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel, yes please. The text has historic relevance. It is not necessary to delete the photo, just because of a creature feature. BTW, do you use GIMP? --Ooligan (talk) 17:15, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ooligan: Yes, GIMP is my tool for this. - Jmabel ! talk 18:38, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ooligan: blurred to a level I believe is acceptable. If someone thinks this needs to be blurred further, let me know. - Jmabel ! talk 18:45, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel, Please, blur to obscure all features of the creature or use full grey/ black, if that is easier. Thanks, --Ooligan (talk) 19:33, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:14, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is this OK?[edit]

See Category:Leopold Musil. I gave a link to the Czech article. Krok6kola (talk) 00:11, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Krok6kola: not actively wrong, but this is a lot more correct:

Also: how is anything in that category not a copyright violation? - Jmabel ! talk 03:46, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Thank you. And you are probably right. You know I'm a halfwit. And I know you don't "love" making wiki boxes. So perhaps all for naught. Krok6kola (talk) 18:35, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template[edit]

Oops, sorry about that! - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 01:29, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Flickypedia soft launch and a huge thank you[edit]

Dear fellow Commons photographer,

I hope this message finds you well. As you might already know, the Flickr Foundation has been busy creating a new Flickr-to-Commons bridge (“Flickypedia”) this year. After a successful demo at the GLAM Wiki Conference in Montevideo, the Flickr Foundation team is now inviting all members of the Commons Photographers User Group to be the first to review their alpha, reporting any technical issues or other feedback via the Flickypedia project talk page.

At the same time, this message is an opportunity for me to thank you for your trust and support over the past couple of years. Since 2017, we've grown into being one of the largest user groups in the Wikimedia universe. I've tremendously enjoyed interacting with all of our members when it came to joint photowalks at Wikimanias, virtual Zoom meetings where we covered a wide variety of photography topics, as well as our annual “Most memorable shot of the year”, among many other events. As I'm not running for an official position in our current board election, this will be my last message on behalf of the user group to you. Thanks for all the happy moments we shared together over the years! I hope you'll continue creating free images for the millions of people we serve through Wikipedia and Commons.

All the best, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 19:36, 9 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

NARA & LoC: tiffs & jpgs[edit]

jpg - 37 KB (tiff =1.66 MB)

Dear Jmbabel, A few weeks ago we talked about the removal of categories from ãpprox. 240,000 tiff files who were "identical" to jpg files. I asked about the rationale for this removal and got two arguments: (1) tiff files are very large, which results in slow page rendering, and (2) categories get too crowded. The arguments for not removing the categories were: (a) professional users are looking for highres images, and will overlook these available images if they are hidden away like they are now, (2) categorizing all files in Commons make more complete categories and leave the choice up to users themselves. Crowded categories can be subdivided, if needed. Moreover: many tiff images are not large at all (see the first page of this category, where >20% of the images is less than 5 MB. You were kind enough to point me to the discussion about this issue at Category talk:NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs, and I found a few other talks about the topic, but I still couldn't find a community decision on the issue. Could you help me out? Vysotsky (talk) 20:10, 9 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @Vysotsky: The JPEGs should render at the same resolution of the TIFFs (and should thumbnail as well or better). The TIFFs should be discoverable, because they should be linked with {{Other version}} from the JPEGs.
  • The community decision was implicit, and was carried out by the people uploading from the relevant GLAMs, who by now have followed it for hundreds of thousands, probably millions, of files. The enforcement has come mainly by simply removing topical cats people add to TIFFs (and transferring them, if necessary, to the corresponding JPEGs).
  • You are welcome, of course, to re-open the issue (on the Village pump or in a similar venue), but I'm not interested in going out and researching it for you. I have plenty else that I'm doing. Nor am I particularly interested in discussing it further on my talk page. - Jmabel ! talk 02:13, 10 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"The community decision was implicit". Ah, now I understand why I couldn't find any decision. I will first consult two main uploaders known to me, and then decide if I will open the issue at Commons:Village pump/Proposals. As you are not interested in discussing it further on your talk page, I won't bother you again about the issue. Thanks for the information. Vysotsky (talk) 11:18, 10 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I may be wrong but I have seen repeated evidence that Fæ wanted the category NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs. If you look and some of the file histories, e.g.[3]"... PASS THE AMMUNITION." THE ARMY NEEDS MORE LUMBER - NARA - 515166.tif: Revision history, you will see that Fæ added the category NARA TIF images with categorized JPGs himself and therefore he was aware of the problem. It is not a stretch to believe that if he had not "been driven off", he would have seen the need for LC TIF images with categorized JPGs as well. A persistent problem is that jpg images are separated from their TIF counterparts and put in different categories. Krok6kola (talk) 22:51, 10 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is also User:Fæ/LOC in which he explains some of the issues that occurred and how he dealt with them. Krok6kola (talk) 23:01, 10 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Krok6kola: Fæ was definitely one of the people who objected to categorizing TIFFs in topical categories when there was an equivalent JPEG available. - Jmabel ! talk 00:41, 11 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Chewzy[edit]

I am holding my tongue.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 03:13, 11 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jeff G.: a fine policy. - Jmabel ! talk 03:17, 11 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request & objection[edit]

Hello & thank you for your kind help on that one grave matter! Please see my talk page re: 2 more related problems. Also, somebody has been busy creating very questionable categories like this. No such era has ever been known. The last Swedish era named for any king was the Gustavian era (Gustav III, d. 1792). Best wishes, SergeWoodzing (talk) 05:09, 11 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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:

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 03:38, 12 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Another ugly consequence of a foolish law. - Jmabel ! talk 03:41, 12 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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:


Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 02:59, 13 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

categorisation through template and the uncat list[edit]

Heyho. I think that I saw you mention a bug in categorisation where they are added through templates like category:July 2017 in Bourgogne-Franche-Comté. Was that the case or do I recall incorrectly. Is there anything that can kick them? like purging? or just leave them be? Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:11, 18 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Billinghurst: I've tried purging the cat, purging the template, etc. No luck. It's a bug, and I don't know why it occasionally happens, usually doesn't, and seems particularly virulent for that one Bourgogne-Franche-Comté template. - Jmabel ! talk 01:20, 18 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
By the way, you might be interested in Template:How to delete empty categories, which I've created as an easy way to message people who "blank" a category page rather than using {{SD}}. - Jmabel ! talk 01:21, 18 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Participation in North American Hub research[edit]

Hello, Jmabel! I'm writing on behalf of the North American hub research committee to see if you would be interested in participating in a one hour focus group. During the session, we will discuss how a potential hub could support Commons contributors by providing services such as professional development and grant support. Our research phase is ending very soon (12/31). I apologize for the short notice. If there's any chance you can join us for a meeting on 12/20 @ 1pm ET, please respond to Ariel.Cetrone at wikidc.org. Thanks for considering -Ariel Cetrone (WMDC) (talk) 18:39, 18 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Structured data for AI images[edit]

I have added some structured data to this AI image

Thoughts on the statements used? I'll add the statements to the rest of the images if there aren't any issues Trade (talk) 19:07, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @Trade: Mostly good. I don't think one jurisdiction's copyright should be "preferred" to another, though (it may matter more to us, but so what?) and I'm also not sure you are correct about UK status, where I gather there is some current judicial controversy. But, as I say, mostly good.
    "I'm also not sure you are correct about UK status" Does that mean we can finally get rid of the ridiculous CC-BY-SA 4.0 templates from AI images?--Trade (talk) 19:19, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Trade: No, I think it's still being fought out. The precautionary principle means we want to say, with a license, "even if it proves to be copyrighted, it's licensed." And even if it turns out differently in the UK, it's pretty settled that AI outputs are copyrightable in China. - Jmabel ! talk 19:24, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • You might find find this very interesting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCdSJ8E3qmE, especially at about minute 28. - Jmabel ! talk 19:24, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see you posted (maybe about this?) at Commons talk:AI-generated media but there seems to be a server problem at the moment accessing that page. - Jmabel ! talk 19:14, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Seattle[edit]

Do you have a "junk" category for Seattle? I've added some images to known categories, but what do I do with those I can't find a category for? (Thanks by the way, for you intervention today.) Krok6kola (talk) 21:57, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Krok6kola: Just stick them in Category:Seattle if you can't do better. - Jmabel ! talk 21:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Seasonal Greetings![edit]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello Jmabel, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025.
Happy editing,

~~~~

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

20 upper 15:40, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fake?[edit]

Where would I be able to find the origin of this:

Public domain This work has been released into the public domain by its author, Bernadotte Library. This applies worldwide.
In some countries this may not be legally possible; if so:
Bernadotte Library grants anyone the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law.

That library is not known for generosity. Is there an OTRS involved or how do we know it's legitimate? Happy Holidays! SergeWoodzing (talk) 11:13, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SergeWoodzing: if you want me to look into it, you'd have to refer me to a specific file or files. After all, anyone can slap any template on anything. - Jmabel ! talk 16:56, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you! I've checked quite a few images with the template and find absolutely nothing to imply or confirm that the template itself is legitimate. Here's one. Can we find out somehow who created it and and how and why? I do not know how to sleuth such a thing. Can anyone create a template and then, as you say, slap it on anything? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:05, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@SergeWoodzing: There is no template there saying anything of the sort. - Jmabel ! talk 17:08, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I beg your pardon! Got my royal Swedes mixed up. I meant here. Another obvious studio portrait, identified as such, including famous photographer, on the Royal Court website. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:24, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Uploaded by User:Tomás de H y B-P, whose only Commons contributions were a bunch of things on which he made similar claims; seems occasionally to edit other wikis, so you might get hold of him. It's not like we have a template specific to Bernadotte Library: I could write {{PD-author|Leonardo da Vinci}} but it doesn't make it so.
The cited source pages are all 404s, but can be easily found on the Internet Archive (e.g. https://www.kungahuset.se/royalcourt/royalfamily/thebernadottedynasty/princebertil.4.164e81b015607465dc12f8b.html or going as close as we can to the upload date, https://web.archive.org/web/20200729021352/https://www.kungahuset.se/royalcourt/royalfamily/thebernadottedynasty/princebertil.4.164e81b015607465dc12f8b.html). Nothing I find there says anything about the images being in the public domain. So it looks like a very occasional Commons user claimed a license that wasn't there. - Jmabel ! talk 17:55, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you! Here's another one, which I was particularly surprised to see that that library would have released to public domain, which they apparently did not then. What do you feel should be done about this? I wrote to the trickster now. Remove the fake template & delete the five images we see it on? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:54, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
PS "Tomás" has never replied to anything on a any of h talk pages not even on Turkish Wikipedia, the only project where there is a user page. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:07, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@SergeWoodzing: I'll DR them, saying pretty much what I said on my last response. - Jmabel ! talk 18:15, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Tomás de H y B-P - Jmabel ! talk 18:26, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Extra brackets[edit]

Why? Category:Albert Kerr in the link to the enwiki article. Krok6kola (talk) 00:46, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Krok6kola: Because below you have:
[[Category:Stanley Cup champions]]
}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Kerr, Albert}}

But, really, you'd do much better to link the two pages by attaching the approriate interwiki link to the appropriate Wikidata item. Then the en-wiki article will show up in the left nav, as will articles in any other languages. - Jmabel ! talk 00:55, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! How do I find the appropriate Wikidata item? Krok6kola (talk) 01:05, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Krok6kola: in this case, you already know the English Wikipedia article, so you can click to it from "Wikidata item" there. If you didn't have that, you could go to https::/wikidata.org and use the search box. - Jmabel ! talk 01:08, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I found my user page on wikidata and looked at my contributions. Turns out I have been contributing like crazy and did not even know it. On another topic: I have a scheme to make my life better and want to ask you to do a tiny favor for me in Seattle. Will you cooperate with me? Krok6kola (talk) 01:28, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Krok6kola: Yeah, every time you move a much-used photo you affect a lot of wikis.
    • I'm likely to be able to do a favor for you, but I need to know what it would be before I'll say "yes." - Jmabel ! talk 02:46, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy holidays[edit]

Happy holidays and thanks for your help Ottawahitech (talk) 16:07, 29 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Courtesy deletions[edit]

Should courtesy deletions always be rejected if the image was uploaded three months ago? Or is it up to admin discretion? Trade (talk) 00:25, 30 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Trade: it's complicated. I guess it is ultimately admin discretion, though of course others may weigh in. For example, we will pretty readily make a courtesy deletion over the privacy of a minor; we will almost never make a belated courtesy deletion on the basis of "I decided I don't like that photo I took." There's a lot in between those two. It also depends on how useful/unique the photo appears to be. E.g. we are a lot more likely to be sympathetic to "last June I uploaded nine pictures of actress X, and she's asked if we could take down two of them, because she really doesn't like those two," than "last June I took the only known photo of Bigfoot and I've decided I'd rather not have it free-licensed." Also, "last June I accidentally left the wrong permission for three days on my newly uploaded photos on Flickr, and I see that someone put it on Commons during the brief period when it had the wrong license" is a lot more likely to be granted than "I've been uploading to Commons for ten years, and I just now decided I want to take down all of my photos because I'm having a hissy fit." Also, the longer the image has been here, the less we are likely to grant the courtesy. And if we know the image is now "all over the Internet" we are very unlikely to grant the courtesy. - Jmabel ! talk 00:41, 30 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Would you agree my rev was justified? --Trade (talk) 00:51, 30 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Trade: No. No reason was provided for a courtesy deletion, and the image was not uploaded in the last seven days. A courtesy deletion more than seven days after upload requires a clear rationale as to why the courtesy should be granted. - Jmabel ! talk 00:56, 30 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For something different, what do you think we should do with the videos uploaded by this guy? I think it's better to judge the videos seperately since they are so different from one each other--Trade (talk) 01:26, 30 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Trade: probably, but I have no plans of going near them. - Jmabel ! talk 01:44, 30 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Gumball Watterson.jpg[edit]

I Nomiated it, because, you owned an Cartoon Network image 5 years ago, because you owned it, he nomiated for deletion since January 13, 2018? 111.125.106.57 05:05, 31 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Convenience link: File:Gumball Watterson.jpg.
I have no idea what you are talking about (or who you are). - Jmabel ! talk 06:29, 31 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

vi-Wikipedia dramas[edit]

Hi Jmabel! I'm really sorry that you had to see those. I wasn't aware that Commons is not the right place to bring up those issues. Now that I was advised to report those to Meta Request for comments, I created a report there. Sorry again about everything! And Happy New Year! Đại Việt quốc (talk) 00:30, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MyFirstBlog30Dec2023.pdf What is this? Spreading drama using picture? I believe that it's probably encrypted or something. It's the whole drama story in encrypted version. I'm not an expert, so I'm not sure. Commons is not a place to upload picture for personal agenda such as revenge. This picture should be deleted imo. Đại Việt quốc is literally ignoring your warning. You're the local admin, so I'll leave it for you to decide. Thank you! Nguyentrongphu (talk) 09:57, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is encrypted using w:en:ASCII characters and Vietnamese signs. JrandWP (talk) 16:47, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Estonian wants to judge notability of categories and to do so alone[edit]

Hello again! Could you please weigh in here and here? An Estonian user (who to my surprise it an admin at Wikidata) wants to warn people against using Wikidata info on category pages of lots of people the user thinks are not notable or "probably not notable". Needs to be straightened out. I have really tried to get through to h. Goes on and on and on. SergeWoodzing (talk) 00:45, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Flickr2Commons[edit]

Saberia informar o que houve com o Flickr2Commons? Estou tentando baixar algumas imagens, mas está dando alguns problemas para carregar. Luiz79 (talk) 18:08, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Luiz79: I know nothing other than that there are reports that it has stalled out. - Jmabel ! talk 18:19, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What will happen to the results of our long Discussion about AI images? Is there any chance that we did not put all the effort into it in vain? JopkeB (talk) 04:35, 3 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JopkeB: I placed the summary at Commons_talk:AI-generated_media#Possible_alternative/additional_text_for_this_page. That seems to be the page that is most likely to move toward becoming a guideline or policy. I suspect the next step would be for people to look at whether some hunks of it should be moved from that talk page to the project page (and possibly to push toward some of that becoming at least a guideline, if not a policy). - Jmabel ! talk 04:39, 3 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! I am glad this extensive summary has been kept and our remarks can help to make a Commons policy on this matter. JopkeB (talk) 06:07, 3 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]