Commons:Village pump

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

Shortcut: COM:VP

↓ Skip to table of contents ↓       ↓ Skip to discussions ↓       ↓ Skip to the last discussion ↓
COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES (index)
Welcome to the Village pump

This page is used for discussions of the operations, technical issues, and policies of Wikimedia Commons. Recent sections with no replies for 7 days and sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} may be archived; for old discussions, see the archives; the latest archive is Commons:Village pump/Archive/2022/05.

Please note:


  1. If you want to ask why unfree/non-commercial material is not allowed at Wikimedia Commons or if you want to suggest that allowing it would be a good thing, please do not comment here. It is probably pointless. One of Wikimedia Commons’ core principles is: "Only free content is allowed." This is a basic rule of the place, as inherent as the NPOV requirement on all Wikipedias.
  2. Have you read our FAQ?
  3. For changing the name of a file, see Commons:File renaming.
  4. Any answers you receive here are not legal advice and the responder cannot be held liable for them. If you have legal questions, we can try to help but our answers cannot replace those of a qualified professional (i.e. a lawyer).
  5. Your question will be answered here; please check back regularly. Please do not leave your email address or other contact information, as this page is widely visible across the internet and you are liable to receive spam.

Purposes which do not meet the scope of this page:


Search archives:


 
Turkey Beypazarı district Hırkatepe Village pump. [add]
Centralized discussion
See also: Village pump/Proposals • Archive

Template: View • Discuss  • Edit • Watch
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 7 days.

May 03[edit]

Are these promo?[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Vecho3745 — Preceding unsigned comment added by VScode fanboy (talk • contribs) 12:09, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, I thought they were photos of some restaurant opening. VScode fanboy (talk) 07:25, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 07[edit]

Harvest / Harvesting[edit]

It looks like the category tree around Category:Harvest and Category:Harvesting is a bit of a mess with, for example, Category:Harvesting being the direct parent of Category:Harvesting wheat but Category:Harvesting => Category:Harvest => Category:Harvest by crop => Category:Grain harvest => Category:Oats harvest. Category:Harvesting wheat and Category:Oats harvest are, as far as I can tell, two categories that differ only by type of grain, but they are in entirely separate parts of the cat tree and are not named in a parallel manner. I have no concrete suggestion how this should be, but surely it should not be like this. Pinging @Anthere, Auntof6 as people I know are active and who have edited the relevant categories. - Jmabel ! talk 00:54, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hmmm. yeah. Ideas anyone ? Anthere (talk) 01:18, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The noun "harvest" can mean either the process of gathering resources or the gathered resources themselves after a harvest. That makes the term ambiguous. I would do the following:
  • Eliminate or rename the categories that use the word "harvest" because that word is ambiguous.
  • Use the word "harvesting" in categories that show the process. This could include images of already-harvested items if the image shows something that is specific to harvesting. For example, this image doesn't show the activity of harvesting, but the apples are in a container that is used during harvesting. This image shows apples in a basket, and you can't tell how long ago they were harvested, even if they look like they're sitting in a field.
  • The products of harvesting (mostly crops, but harvesting can be used for other kinds of things) are probably already in appropriate categories such as "apples," "vegetables," "grain," etc. If not, they can be put there. I don't think it's necessary to specify that they have been harvested if they are shown already removed from the place where they grew.
The various subcategories would need to be examined because some of them contain media both for gathering resources and for the resources that have been gathered. See Category:Tomato harvest for an example; the contents there could be split between Category:Tomatoes and some subcategory of Category:Harvesting. Auntof6 (talk) 04:34, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Auntof6's proposal seems reasonable. @Anthere and Auntof6: Do you think there are others we should ping? Or should we go through a whole CfD thing? or what? - Jmabel ! talk 01:14, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with CfD is that discussion often lose momentum, and people forget about them. This seems like a relatively straight-forward idea. I'd say maybe wait a little bit longer for others to chime in here and then just do it. I'm just wondering whether it should be Category:Harvesting of wheat or Category:Wheat harvesting rather than Category:Harvesting wheat. El Grafo (talk) 10:32, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
i think "Harvesting of xyz" is the best title. for crops that are a few words long, like black glutinous rice, "black glutinous rice harvesting" may not sound so natural.--RZuo (talk) 07:31, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Second that. It is also more readable to have list of categories that all start with the same words. But that being said... I see here Category:Grain harvest that most grain are of the type « Category:GrainX Harvest ». Not sure if it was ever meant on purpose or not... Would this imply renaming those as well ? Anthere (talk) 22:56, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is also the huge category Category:Harvest by country‎ with many sub categories. All named Harvest, not Harvesting. I am happy to help implement any change. But English is not my primary language, so I am NOT sure whether Harvesting or Harvest make the most sense. We need more opinion here... Anthere (talk)

May 08[edit]

Heads up[edit]

Have an idea to simplify setting up POTD using titleparts and some subst commands. I'll have to test it, though, so expect a few test pages with dates in the Middle Ages or so which I'll nominate for speedy deletion after. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:05, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I've got it down to this, which simplifies the first part:

{{Potd filename|Menger-Schwamm.png|{{subst:#time: Y|{{subst:#titleparts: {{subst:PAGENAME}} | 1 | 2 }}}}|{{subst:#time: m|{{subst:#titleparts: {{subst:PAGENAME}} | 1 | 2 }}}}|{{subst:#time: d|{{subst:#titleparts: {{subst:PAGENAME}} | 1 | 2 }}}}}}

With appropriate use of <includeonly> on the subst: parts of that, that can be templated no problem. The problem is going to be extracting the language code from the rest of it for the description. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:35, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Is there any reason why StringFunctions is disabled on Commons? Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:41, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are they enabled on any WMF wiki? There is Lua for this. Ruslik (talk) 08:29, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is, but ideally, we don't want to break anything that already exists, which means it should subst: down to the extant format ideally. Also, I believe the transclusions require it to be subst: to stay working, since the details being filled out depend on the specific page.
We could get aroubd this by changing, say, 2022-02-03 (en) to 2022-02-03/en but that changes functionality. Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:02, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
are you trying to do something like Template:Motd/Day/preload Template:Motd_description/preload?
since potd and motd template formats seem to differ by only one letter, we could tweak the preload templates to make it serve for both. do you want that?--RZuo (talk) 16:00, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is pretty much exactly it, yes! Didn't re alise you could subst invokes.Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:22, 9 May 2022 (UTC) Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:21, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
i've edited both preloads, which should now work for both potd and motd. i'm sorry i'm quite busy so i'll leave editing Template:Change image to you. it should be similar to previous changes to Template:Change media file. RZuo (talk) 19:17, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@RZuo: Should be live. Had to edit Template:Potd and Motd/Day as well. Template:Editnotices/Group/Template:Potd could probably use an update to match. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:50, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
i meant to utilise the same preloaders for both motd and potd... anyway, since you created a separate preloader i'll revert them back to motd only.
an unrelated note: i've always wanted to make an interactive gadget like vfc or a tool to make the whole process easier -- by filling in a form it creates both the main template and the description templates, but i'm lack of the sufficient coding skills and time for now.--RZuo (talk) 07:31, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 10[edit]

Attribution issues and Media Viewer[edit]

So, as you may know, there's a bug in Media Viewer, that's existed for 8 years, where if a file has more than one Creator template, or a Creator template and a text attribution to another creator, it only returns the name of the first creator as the credit. So, for example, in a Brady-Handy photograph, only the first of them will be listed on Media Viewer. On a collaboration such as File:Humanité René Philastre and Charles-Antoine Cambon - Set design for the second part of Victor Hugo's Les Burgraves, première production.jpg, you can choose whether it credits Humanité René Philastre or Charles-Antoine Cambon, but not both.

Since it's been made very, very clear that it's not going to be fixed any time soon, I think we can fix it on our end relatively easily. All we need to do is to check the input, and if it either A. has text outside of a Creator and/or Wikidata template, or B. has more than one Creator/Wikidata template, we can add the following code:

{{Information field |name= |value=See file page for creator info. |class=fileinfotpl_credit |id=fileinfotpl_credit |style=display:none; |stylevalue=display:none; |classvalue= }}

Ideally with internationalised text. I suppose there should be an override for if people want to enter the credit manually, but... let's be honest, the percentage of people that would even know about the bug so that they knew they had to fix it manually is tiny.

It's better to do it on our side, so that in the unlikely event the bug is ever fixed, we can simply pull the code out. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is quite frustrating. When using {{Artwork}} at least is shows "PersonX and n other authors" (example). But if you can override the default and let it show "See file page for creator info", doesn't that mean you should also be able to force it to show whatever you want, including the correct author(s)? El Grafo (talk) 14:46, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In theory, yes. Although it might require some clever a code to strip author info from whatever Creator templates are used Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:09, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think the easiest way might be to add something to the base Creator template to have it return the name of the creator. Might require a certain amount of bot work to modify existing Creator templates (probably just add a mode= switch to all of them, but I think it'd work. So the credit line would just add mode=nameonly to the Creator template using lua. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:32, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Adam Cuerden, I think all you are trying to do is for the Commons templates to be broadcasting hidden metadata that will inform Media Viewer about what attribution to display. I think that can be done by improving {{Information}} template. I always considered Media Viewer as kind of broken as it usually displays nonsense matadata. Then there was hope that the code can read Structured data and not rely on noisy wikitext. However If there is some published documentation on how to set the metadata so it shows correctly in Media Viewer we can try to set it correctly. --Jarekt (talk) 04:22, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jarekt: With the code I quote above, we can improve it by replacing "See file page for creator info." with a better credit line; the trick is going to be getting the better credit line. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:46, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
</nowiki> Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:45, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Adam Cuerden, {{Information}} or {{Artwork}} templates can access Wikidata items of Creator templates in the "author" field. I am just not sure if that is helpful. --Jarekt (talk) 18:55, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Let me do a code dive. It at least gives us a start. Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:56, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This appears to be Template:Label/Module:Wikidata label, though I'm not quite sure I see how the wikidata number is extracted. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:35, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 11[edit]

freedom of panorama in the US: paintings on buildings[edit]

Hi, newbie here doing some research about FoP. I've understood that freedom of panorama in the US only applies to buildings, which do not include other 3D arts and 2D art. However according to Leicester v. Warner Bros., paintings on the exterior of buildings are integral parts of the buildings, thus included in the FoP. Is it safe to say that those paintings, murals and graffitis are with FoP so suitable for Commons (talking only about paintings right on the buildings, not about posters or separate paintings which are not parts of buildings)? Taking the mural in Quebec City for example, if this were located in the US and within time period of copyright protection, would this mural still be under FoP in the US because it's an integral part of the building? Thanks --Suiren2022 (talk) 01:36, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Two (almost) identical images[edit]

I just found two almost identical photos, well, of the exact same subject at least, but with totally different descriptions and categories. What do we do about that kind of thing?

Thanks, --217.239.10.196 12:52, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reporting this! Let's dig into it: They both show the same section of the en:Bayeux Tapestry. File:Flotte normande.jpg seems to be fine in terms of description and categories. File:Floki Vilgerdarsson.jpg seems to suggest that this is the ship of en:Hrafna-Flóki Vilgerðarson. That name is not on the list of people known to be depicted on the tapestry provided at en:Bayeux_Tapestry#People_depicted. The blog this one comes from has an image description that translates to something like "Representation of the voyage of the Viking Flóki Vilgerdarson, called Raven-Flóki, due to the episode of the launch of the crows, which led him to find Iceland." That does not seem to fit at all with how this section of the tapestry is being described at en:Bayeux_Tapestry_tituli: The ship is part of section 5, which is Aabout Harold arriving in en:Ponthieu. I can't see anything that would link this section of the tapestry to Vilgerðarson or Iceland. --El Grafo (talk) 14:20, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So how do we handle it? I'd say rename the file to something less speculative and adjust categorization and description to reflect the state of what is actually known. For transparency reasons it might still be a good idea to mention that the source website sees some kind of connection to Vilgerðarson and Iceland, but we should make clear that that is speculative. El Grafo (talk) 14:26, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is not necessary to save two identical pictures, especially if one transports a historical incorrect description. See: de:Benutzer_Diskussion:RAL1028#Teppich. Regards. --RAL1028 (talk) 20:36, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, they are of the identical subject, but the pictures themselves are not exactly identical. We'll have to make sure we keep the better one of the two. Which is an easy choice, as the "Flotte normande" one is of much better quality.
So, does that mean we simply nominate the other one for deletion? --217.239.10.196 22:42, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We routinely keep multiple photos of the same artwork (compare e.g. Category:Mona Lisa), even if one of them is clearly inferior. File:Floki Vilgerdarsson.jpg has been on Commons for more than 10 years. One reason is that if we just delete it now that may break source links and attributions on an unknown amount of external (non-wikimedia) pages. Description etc. have been fixed, and I have requested a move to a more reasonable file name. Unless you find anything else that needs improvement, there's nothing left to do. El Grafo (talk) 08:11, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Near identical images[edit]

So I've stumbled across File:George Washington John Trumbull.jpg and File:John Trumbull - George Washington (1732-1799) - H54 - Harvard Art Museums.jpg, both allegedly from the same source although one came here via Wikidata and they are the same resolution but are not the same file size (although despite the file size difference I can't tell that the larger is definitively better than the smaller, just a different compression). I'm not sure how that should be handled, or if anything should be done with it at all, so here I am. Help? VernoWhitney (talk) 14:40, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • @VernoWhitney: They are visually different, though subtly so. I'd recommend linking them in the "other versions" field of {{Artwork}}. - Jmabel ! talk 14:51, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, I noticed the compression is different so they've got different artifacts. If one was clearly worse I would've nominated it for deletion on that grounds, but this is just a weird middle ground. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:09, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
strangely, neither of them seems to be the exact same as the original https://ids.lib.harvard.edu/ids/view/45398647 which is 84 kb. RZuo (talk) 14:54, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • At full resolution, they look exactly the same to me. If I were in your situation, I would have applied {{Duplicate}} to the smallest file. --HyperGaruda (talk) 05:34, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 12[edit]

Bot to upload National Archives photos[edit]

I would like a bot to transfer all of the photos in https://catalog.archives.gov/id/532388 Black and White Photographs of Marine Corps Activities in Vietnam, 1962 - 1975 to Wikimedia Commons Category:United States Marine Corps in the Vietnam War. Its more than 13,000 images, hence the need for a bot.

Is this something that Python can do? If so how do I start? Or can someone create this bot for me?

Any help gratefully appreciated. Mztourist (talk) 10:50, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Painted borders[edit]

John Cleveley the Younger - Shipping in a calm - 10704.jpg

Do we have a category for artworks with painted borders, like the above? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:06, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Paintings with borders would seem to be it. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:38, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. That seems to include a lot of pictures like File:Brooklyn Museum - Bathers - Edward Henry Potthast - overall.jpg, where the border is an artefact of cropping; not painted. Perhaps it needs cleanup? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:49, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 13[edit]

how can i add us flag to the combatent comanders section of a battle history template in wikepedia[edit]

how can i add us flag to the combatent comanders section of a battle history template in wikepedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krisshna.J.Peswani (talk • contribs) 08:31, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Krisshna.J.Peswani: If you have a question about how to do something on Wikipedia, you would do better to ask it on Wikipedia. (This page is part of Wikimedia Commons, not Wikipedia.) Also, when you ask it there, it would help to link the particular template you have in mind. - Jmabel ! talk 14:39, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    thanks Krisshna.J.Peswani (talk) 16:15, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IP blocked[edit]

Recently I found a blocked notice on my Commons page, telling me I was blocked for two years. The info people said it had something to do with some obscure relationship I allegedly had with Amazon, which was a complete mystery to me. After a few days, the block disappeared as mysteriously as it had appeared, and things were back to normal. Has anyone else had this experience? Sardaka (talk) 09:06, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You only got blocked on commons one week in 2011 for "Repeated DRs after warning" globally your account was never blocked. The IP you have could belong to AWS, an amazon VPN or an other amazon service blocked because such services are often used for spamming. --GPSLeo (talk) 09:32, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 14[edit]

Let's talk about the Desktop Improvements[edit]

WP20Symbols MediaWiki light background.svg

Hello!

Have you noticed that some wikis have a different desktop interface? Are you curious about the next steps? Maybe you have questions or ideas regarding the design or technical matters?

Join an online meeting with the team working on the Desktop Improvements! It will take place on 17 May 2022 at 12:00 UTC and 19:00 UTC on Zoom. Click here to join. Meeting ID: 86217494304. Dial by your location.

Agenda

  • Update on the recent developments
  • Questions and answers, discussion

Format

The meeting will not be recorded or streamed. Notes will be taken in a Google Docs file. Olga Vasileva (the Product Manager) will be hosting this meeting. The presentation part will be given in English.

We can answer questions asked in English, Italian, Polish; also, only at the first meeting: Farsi, Vietnamese; only at the second meeting: Portuguese, Spanish, Russian. If you would like to ask questions in advance, add them on the talk page or send them to [email protected]

At this meeting, both Friendly space policy and the Code of Conduct for Wikimedia technical spaces apply. Zoom is not subject to the WMF Privacy Policy.

We hope to see you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 05:02, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 15[edit]

Photo challenge March results[edit]

Parliament. View from the Danube: EntriesVotesScores
Rank 1 2 3
image 09423 - Havanna Capitol E facade.jpg London Parlament-20090730-RM-110352.jpg Parliament. View from the Danube.jpg
Title Eastern facade of the Capitol in La Habana, Cuba The House of Parliament alt=Országház
Author Virtual-Pano Ermell Vi Ko
Score 16 14 8
Refraction: EntriesVotesScores
Rank 1 2 3
image Stift in Wasserglas.jpg Krokuswiese in Glaskugel IMG 0193WI.jpg Rainbow and drops on a CD.jpg
Title Stift in Wasserglas Krokuswiese in Glaskugel IMG 0193WI Rainbow and drops on a CD
Author ThoBel-0043 Kora27 Balise42
Score 13 13 9

Congratulations to Virtual-Pano, Ermell, Vi Ko, ThoBel-0043, Kora27 and Balise42. -- Jarekt (talk) 02:01, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 16[edit]

VRT[edit]

Zdravím, OTRS už není v provozu, je někde nějaký vzorek, jak správně sepsat VRT oznámení o odsouhlasení použití souboru na Wikipedii? Aby to zase nekrachlo na slovíčkaření.

Děkuji. --Profil 1652022 (talk) 05:34, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

VRT

Hello, OTRS is no longer up and running, is there any sample how to correctly write a VRT file usage approval notice on Wikipedia? So that it doesn't crash into words again.

Thank you.
translator: Google Translate via   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 11:47, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Profil 1652022: Ahoj a vítej. Udělal jsem VRT/cs a označil pro vás vaše selfie {{subst:PP}}.
Hi, and welcome. I made VRT/cs and tagged your selfie {{subst:PP}} for you.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 11:47, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Uploads[edit]

After a week or so of tranquility, the uploads have stopped working again. Is it just me or has anyone else had the same problem? Sardaka (talk) 09:17, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sardaka: Special:Newfiles shows 50 in the past five minutes.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 11:19, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Media may be deleted - what to do[edit]

Hi! Norwegian contributor with limited technical experience here. I have received a warning that a picture I uploaded may be deleted, due to unclear copyright status. I did my very best when uploading this picture, which I have taken myself. The bot warning me now, have written a nice "how to", but I'm afraid I still don't understand how to do it right. I would really like to do as suggested, but I don't understand where to insert the right tags.

"If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)"

Anybody out there who could help me in the right direction, please? Would really appreciate it! Link to the warning here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:EllenPaulsen

In the preview I can see my question is already answered by auto. But I really still don't understand where to put the text, and how I copy it correctly with links and all. I'm so sorry, this is new to me.

Thanks! --EllenPaulsen (talk) 12:04, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@EllenPaulsen: Hi, and welcome. In your upload, you specified "Permission= Free Art License 1.3 (FAL 1.3)" as plaintext. Above, you mentioned "{{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}}" and "{{PD-self}}" as active templates (without code or nowiki tags or quotes), and Andy was kind enough to defang them for you here using code and nowiki tags. The copyright tag which you seemed to like at first is {{FAL-1.3}}; you may use that copyright tag (without "t2|") as an active template in the licensing section or after "Pemission=".   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 13:01, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this, Jeff G.. I have tried my very best, and hope I did it right this time. Could you please take a look, and see if it's good enough to remove the delete-warning? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:DUGG_konsert_Gamla_16102021.jpg Thank you, and I really appreciate it! --EllenPaulsen (talk) 06:34, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adding SDC metadata to vertical aerial imagery[edit]

I have uploaded some aerial imagery, taken vertically, on Commons.

I want to "warp" it, so that mapping tools know the coordinates of its four corners.

I want to add multiple "depicts" statements, with coordinates, to note the various features seen.

I am sure we have tools to do these things, but I can't recall where. Am I mistaken? I have searched using obvious terms, and looked at pages like Commons:Georectification and Commons:SDC, to no avail,

Where are these tools, and why is it so hard to find them? What could we do better? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:11, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, is there a tool to convert (old-style) "notes" to SDC? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, the answer to the former, as detailed at Commons:Wikimaps, is to replace {{Information}} with {{Map}}, then use the big blue button that it generates. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:42, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The other - excellent - tool, for locating "depicts" (P180) and "named place on map" (P9664) using "relative position within image" (P2677) is User:Lucas Werkmeister/Wikidata Image Positions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:35, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 17[edit]

Smartify[edit]

I don't want to complain too much; having the files brought over here is useful. But Smartify uploads tend to be scaled down a fair bit from the original. Take File:Anonymous_-_Deans_Yard_-_B1977.14.16416_-_Yale_Center_for_British_Art.jpg. Is it great Smartify uploaded it for us? Yes. Is it the full resolution? No. The upload from Smartify is 1920 pixels wide, if we go to the source that SmartifyBot linked, https://collections.britishart.yale.edu/catalog/tms:33245 , and just click on the download button, we can see one that's 5390 pixels wide is trivially available.

Especially for the Yale collections, it'd be really useful to have a bot to just go in and grab the largest JPEG available (not any TIFF, I'd say: File:William Byrne - Carnarvon Castle - B1977.14.14573 - Yale Center for British Art.jpg had a TIFF with much, much lower resolution than the biggest JPEG) Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:25, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rename request, can only be done by an admin[edit]

Hi, this request is open for a while. I doubted if I should decline it the first time, because it was all Dutch, but it was also 'uploaders request' (criterion 1). Now the requester self thinks like that, but I cannot rename it to the Dutch name now, and it's 15 days ago, see: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Invoice_Jan_Perquin.png Thanks in advance, - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 14:34, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Richardkiwi: We mere mortals have to wait for Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rekening Jan Perquin.png to be closed as delete by an Admin. Why is "(talk)" in your sig twice?   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 15:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Please check. Also User:Richardkiwi, please add categories to File:Rekening Jan Perquin.png. - Jmabel ! talk 15:53, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel: Thanks!   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 16:08, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 18[edit]