Commons:Village pump/Archive/2023/05

Commons Gazette 2023-05

Staff changes

In April 2023, 1 sysop was removed. Currently, there are 183 sysops.

• User:Andre Carrotflower was removed on 25 April due to resignation. He had served as sysop since 10 July 2021.

We thank him for his service.

---

Edited by RZuo (talk).

---

Commons Gazette is a monthly newsletter of the latest important news about Wikimedia Commons, edited by volunteers. You can also help with editing! --RZuo (talk) 16:30, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

@RZuo: Commons administrators are not employed by Commons or the Wikimedia foundation so your usage of "staff" is incorrect. Multichill (talk) 21:01, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Can someone figure out the name of the photographer

Can someone figure out the name of the photographer, and any info on them? File:HÉCTOR R. ROJAS.jpg --RAN (talk) 04:20, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

• @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): Name is most likely "Crooks" (since that would fit the signature and is a common surname). I could imagine the first letter being a "G", and the next-to-last a "p" rather than a "k", but that doesn't produce any likely names. - Jmabel ! talk 05:13, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
• Oh, I see it now. Once you point it out, its hard to not see. I will keep looking for birth and death dates, thanks. --RAN (talk) 05:15, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

End of the Movement Charter ratification methodology community review

Hello,

The Movement Charter Drafting Committee has concluded its first community review of the methodology draft, which will be used to ratify the Movement Charter in 2024.

This community review included feedback collection on Meta, on the Movement Strategy forum as well as two conversation hours with communities and one conversation with the Committees of the Wikimedia projects. MCDC greatly appreciates everyone's input. The recording of the ratification methodology presentation is here and documentation can be accessed here. The timeline of the next steps of the methodology is provided here.

The WMF support team will produce a report on the community input in May. MCDC will incorporate the feedback and share an updated version of the ratification methodology in August 2023. The MCDC will continue to outreach to stakeholders regarding the updated methodology in late 2023.

Thank you for your participation!

On behalf of the Movement Charter Drafting Committee,

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 15:23, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Photo challenge March results

Laundering: Entries • Votes • Scores

Rank	1	2	3
image
Title	Facade of a house at 277, Fondamenta Cavanella in Burano (Italy)	Washing clothes in a open area	Laundry lines in a residential neighbourhood in Venice, Italy
Author	Ermell	Pauloleong2002	Marc-Lautenbacher
Score	15	12	11

Hotels and Motels: Entries • Votes • Scores

Rank	1	2	3
image
Title	Ice-Hotel in Quebec Canada, the only one in North America	Spa at Tschuggen Grand Hotel	The Dolder Grand, Zurich, Switzerland
Author	Marc-Lautenbacher	Roy Egloff	Roy Egloff
Score	15	14	12

Congratulations to Ermell, Pauloleong2002, Marc-Lautenbacher and Roy Egloff. -- Jarekt (talk) 18:18, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Are Google Maps photographs creative?

This section was archived on a request by: --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 11:31, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

I was just thinking about it, but content on Google Maps, HERE Maps, Apple Maps, Microsoft Bing Maps, Etc. is made by having an automobile drive around and automatically take pictures. A human isn't clicking "Click!" Here, this is done by a robot 🤖.
We all know that robots can't claim copyright ©️ because they're not legal persons, but if you automate a photograph that you personally directed then you are the copyright-owner, likewise most of photography is automated but because a human controls the device the human owns the copyright. So the question is, does the human driving the Google Maps car take the picture or does an automated mounted camera on top of car take the picture? -- — Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 13:50, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

• I think there is very little question that these are being taken according to a systematic corporate plan of Google/Alphabet, and that there is enough direction given here to humans who are working for hire in operating the vehicles, which are using deliberately programmed software to determine when to take the shots, that there is enough intention to merit a copyright. - Jmabel ! talk 15:32, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

  1+. Rule of thumb: If you're ever wondering whether you've just found a giant legal loop hole that nobody has noticed despite it being right in front of everyone's nose, the answer is almost always "no". El Grafo (talk) 07:16, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

  • That kind of answers my question, as the streets where they drive aren't random and there was plenty of creative direction involved. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 11:31, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

• There are a lot of automatic cameras wich are not creative such as a wildlife camera's watching birds nest and giving a constant feed. There are however data/base rigths wich protect non-creative work. You are allowed to use a telefone directory for specific items, but not to copy all the data or a large part of it. It would be usefull to sort a telefone directory on the telefomnumbers to find out who called. This is not permitted. The information/data is present but not in a searcheable vorm. There are also dynamic data (example speed of a particular train: [1] or weather radar) Can you printscreen this information and remove all text and other proprietory ballast and the publish this?

Consider a moving thunderstorm. These type websites can practicaly not be used without a printscreen. Al sources need to be verifiable and telling the reader that you observed a specific event on this website is not usefull (in the case that there are no historic logs.Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:29, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Get QID from page title?

Currently running into a bit of a screw up . I know there's Template:QID, which fetches the QID of the current page, and Template:GetQID which fetches the QID of the category's main topic. However, I want a template that gets the QID of a specified page's main topic. For example, {{getQIDfrompagename|Category:Minecraft}} which would return Q49740. Does this exist, or is there a potential alternate way of going about this? Thanks in advance.— Preceding unsigned comment added by OmegaFallon (talk • contribs) 16:06, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

OmegaFallon, the QID template you're referring to seems to be a red link. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 23:13, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Regarding the 2006-present coat of arms of Cyprus

I have been unable to find any evidence that File:Coat of arms of Cyprus (2023).png is freely licensed, and that file may need to be deleted. Thankfully we have a backup file by User:Di_(they-them). Therefore, users need to replace that file with File:Coat of arms of Cyprus (2006).svg every instance it is used. Also, the coat of arms was not changed in 2023. —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 98.213.225.105 (talk) 17:02, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

98.213.225.105, you can always nominate the file for deletion if you believe that it's a copyright ©️ violation. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 23:14, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

(Plants pictures) Cotoneasters mislabeled as Frangula

Hello dear registered Wikimedians, – to those with botanical interest – there are at least five files mislabeled as Frangula alnus which clearly are something else. I created Discussion/Talk-pages for them and explained there. You can start looking at this one('s): https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Frangula_alnus_15-p.bot-rhamnus.sp-1.jpg – I put in links to the others. Maybe someone has time to correct :-) —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2A02:3037:209:D124:C9F4:53F3:ACE1:1006 (talk) 13:29, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@2A02:3037:209:D124:C9F4:53F3:ACE1:1006: , you are always free to correct the files yourself by requesting a rename and contacting the original uploaders. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 23:15, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Image of a book

Can we make the image of book in pdf have the cover page the thumbnail for the pdf, instead of the Google page? File:Views from the Mosquito Reservation, Nicaragua C.A.pdf --RAN (talk) 16:28, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

It is possible by editing the pdf, removing the first page and reuploding the edited file. Ruslik (talk) 19:52, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

It would be good if we had a tool or script to do that. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:45, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Except for CropTool, we don't usually have tool to edit files once they are uploaded. - Jmabel ! talk 14:50, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

But in [[file: tags you can add a paramter to use a specific page of the pdf as thumb without editing the pdf. C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 12:26, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Images by Accession number

Hey, is there any way to view all images with a category in the order of the Accession number-field? I'm looking at Category:Finland_framstäldt_i_teckningar and wondering if all images are present, or if there is any missing. Thanks for tips! Robertsilen (talk) 19:01, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

First you have to understand the schema that the Institution is using. Does it always begin with FFiT_? What is the number range that it will not exceed? Could it be larger than 0-999? Broichmore (talk) 11:20, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

City of Sydney collection

I have discovered a lot of really historic photos of the City of Sydney that are not in copyright. They can be found here. I’m not sure if they have been uploaded! How do I check, and if not how can we import them into Commons? - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 17:31, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

• For me, that link just loops forever. - Jmabel ! talk 17:52, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

  Oh! I tried and it works fine from a seperate site... can you try again? - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 21:57, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

  • Working now. - Jmabel ! talk 00:51, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
  • @Chris.sherlock2: The fact that I get only four hits searching on "Demolition Books" strongly suggest that very little of this material is on Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 00:53, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

    I’ll see what I can do. What is the best way to upload these sort of collections? Like, do I need to add categories? - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 08:52, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

    • @Chris.sherlock2: Probably worth consulting with someone who's done mass uploads. It would be great if this could be semi-automated. - Jmabel ! talk 17:47, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Icon proposal for quality images

Hello, I would like to propose a new icon for Quality Images. For my taste, the current logo is not hyper readable and not modern. I was slightly inspired by the certification icons of social networks. What do you think? Regards. manȷıro^💬 12:10, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

 Oppose @Manjiro5: the proposed icon uses the "QI" text, but this only makes sense for English. Commons is a multilanguage project and so are quality images. "QI" would not make sense for "Laatukuva" for example: {{Quality image/fi}}. MKFI (talk) 06:51, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

You might not be aware of it but the current quality image icon also "QI" text. I assume you are though since you linked to {{Quality image/fi}}, which has an image of it. Either way, that's a rather weird argument to make against the proposed icon since the current one has the exact same text. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:08, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

I am a bit at a loss how keeping a fault of the current solution makes the proposed solution better? (And I think the proposed icon is ugly, while not necessarily more ugly than the currrent one.) C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 07:34, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

@Adamant1: I must admit I hadn't noticed that the old icon also had "QI" text - it is not very legible in small size. MKFI (talk) 08:09, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

I can see how that would happen. It's definitely not easy to make out the letters in the old icon. All the more reason to change it if you ask me. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:12, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, but do we really want further simplifications? "Not modern" is subjective, not every website uses the Corporate Memphis art style and I don't see why Wikimedia websites should all try to simplify to follow the trends. When seeing the current QI seal from afar it looks like a clear old timey seal of approval, this looks like a flower with letters on it. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 23:22, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

The current logo has to be hard for the vision impared to make out. It's never good design to have the letters inside of a logo the same color as the rest. Personally I don't care about following trends, but basic design rules that don't make it impossible for anyone who doesn't have perfect vision to see the letters inside of the logo would be nice. --Adamant1 (talk) 13:54, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Unknown town in the Abruzzo region

• thumb
• thumb

I scanned 14 slides from a organized hiking trip in 2001 in the Abruzzo region. These are from a town/village. From File:Abruzzen town 2001 1.jpg to File:Abruzzen town 2001 14.jpg. Location? Smiley.toerist (talk) 09:18, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

The church looks like this one: Chiesa di Santa Maria della Valle, though all the cables are missing. - Andreas Stiasny (talk) 11:26, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

It is the correct location. On Google Earth, the same bar Abruzzo is seen as in File:Abruzzen town 2001 2.jpg. I renamed all te pictures to Scanno. Thanks.Smiley.toerist (talk) 13:45, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Google Image search found the church; I suggest trying that in future. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:41, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

After Scanno we hiked along the lago di Scanno (File:Abruzzo landscape 2001 18.jpg). The next bigg village is Villalago, but I cant find a church there with a bigg clock house and a smaller one above. As it is 17:25 we where looking to the east and the geografy does not have a road at about the same level and a valley in between. PS: this is the last one on the hiking trip as we had a last dinner after these images. (File:Abruzzo village 2001.jpg)Smiley.toerist (talk) 13:42, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Image recognition

Is there any way to recognize small objects from a low resolution image? There are two towers like of music CD cases. Is there any way to recognize tiles/artist of these CD's? Here and here are a better image. Eurohunter (talk) 13:00, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

• I would say not a chance. - Jmabel ! talk 19:19, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Searching my own files

Hi, I am looking for some files I uploaded a few years back, and I can't find them. How is it possible to select only some file types (JPEG, PNG, PDF, etc.)? Yann (talk) 16:59, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

@Yann: You want the filemime: tag in a search. So you can use Special:Search/filemime:image/png, for example. See mw:Help:CirrusSearch#File properties search for more. --bjh21 (talk) 17:34, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

I don't get any result, so something is obviously wrong: [2]. Yann (talk) 18:04, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Try this: [3]. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 18:29, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

[4] C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 18:34, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

No, I tried that, it doesn't work. It doesn't show anything before 10 November 2021 (File:Tolstoï - Œuvres complètes, vol10.pdf uploaded in 2017 doesn't show in the list). And I want a list with the oldest first, to get a chance to find it. Yann (talk) 18:39, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

@Yann: Your first attempt didn't work because you missed out the quotation marks around the category name (necessary because it contains spaces). For me, Cryptic-waveform's suggestion finds File:Tolstoï - Œuvres complètes, vol10.pdf as the 659th result out of 692. I don't believe that Special:Search can list the oldest result first, though for smallish result sets like this one you can always just start from the end of the list. --bjh21 (talk) 21:22, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Easier sharing from Google Photos

When I think about things that could help Commons grow our collection, one of the best things that could happen, I think, would be for Google Photos to introduce a built-in option to donate a photo to Wikimedia Commons when a user clicks the share icon, alongside the existing built-in options for Facebook and Twitter. Most Android users already use Google Photos for photos they've taken, and because of that there are fewer licensing concerns than other places. I would envision a share option working by transferring the user to the upload wizard with the selected photo(s) sent to the wizard, and the user would then proceed through the normal steps.

The main obstacle here, of course, is getting Google to agree to the integration. I have some contacts that I might be able to pitch, but I wanted to check in here first to inquire about what considerations to have in mind embarking on that project. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:49, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

It's an interesting thought, and could build on the fact that YouTube currently has Creative Commons licensing available for creators who wish to upload videos under free licenses, some of which are compatible with Commons. Currently, I'm not aware of any licensing options for Google Photos. Photos isn't really a service that you use to share with the general public who can browse and follow accounts like on Flickr. Photos is generally geared as a personal repository and sharing with small circles of friends, who are typically also Google account holders. Photos is also a "vendor lock-in" site which doesn't take kindly to attempts to remove photos from the walled garden. For example, there's no "Print" options except for the ones which create physical photobooks through their paid service. So, just as wild speculation, I don't really see Google being keen on allowing CC licensing or donations to Commons from that service. They don't seem to have built it as a free-sharing service like Flickr or even YouTube. Elizium23 (talk) 01:24, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Sdkb, I think that it might be wise to also ask the technical staff on how to implement such things. While my wife is a computer scientist I'm not as technologically versed, but if I recall correctly websites usually have API's that developers can utilise when programming an application programme or website where they can integrate their services with. For example, you can use your Wikimedia SUL (Single Unified Long-In) account to sign into a handful of Non-Wikimedia websites like the Phabricator and some non-MediaWiki application programmes that integrate with the Wikimedia Commons.
I think that such API's probably already exist, but I've never seen a "Share to the Wikimedia Commons" button like I've seen for Meta's Facebook, Meta's Instagram, X' Twitter, Reddit, Discord, Meta's WhatsApp-Messenger, Pinterest, SmugMug's Flickr Etc. I assume that the developers of the Wikimedia Commons Android (Google Play) application programme probably use a similar system, but then the question is, integrate it with the Wikimedia Commons website or application programme?
Selling this to Alphabet, Inc. might be easy as they use Wikidata a lot in their services and if Wikidata had more access to high quality images its knowledge graphs would be more useful and of higher quality. -- — Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 21:01, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Coletivo Resistência Flickr stream

This Flickr stream seems to have some problems regarding licensing, like posting photographs which are not their own work under free licenses (see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Janja com cadela Resistência no colo.jpg). I have just found this image—it is in the public domain [sic], but Exif metadata tell us it is a work from Agência Brasil, and therefore not freely licensed in fact (see {{Agência Brasil}}). Anyone knows how to deal with that? RodRabelo7 (talk) 08:00, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Not to upload any photos from this stream. Ruslik (talk) 05:17, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Can we get rid of the "own work" default?

It seems most newbie uploads are labelled as "{{Own}}", and these poor newbies are accused of lying by stating so. However, the upload wizard by default has "This file is my own work" checked, and asks questions and fills in fields based on the assumption that the uploader is the author.

This is flawed – of course. Creating a file based on somebody's work does not make you the author, while arguably even downloading a photo results in a file made by you (people cannot be assumed to understand the copyright sense of "work").

How much less copyvios claiming own work would we get if the default were to have "not my own work" checked instead, and instead of asking about "this file", asking about the work?

(x) This file depicts a work by somebody else than me.

( ) This file is my own work and does not include works of others.

The follow-up questions could then include, for source, a checkbox for "the photo was taken by me" (adding "{{photo|{{own}}}}" to the author field). There should be checkboxes for freedom of panorama and de minimis and a possibility to state the licence for the photograph separately from the underlying PD/whatever rationale.

Isn't this the most common situation for copyvios that aren't directly off the net? Shouldn't this provide a fair chance for newbie uploaders to declare the true copyright situation? We might get a lot of "FoP" photos from non-FoP countries, but wouldn't this be easier to handle than bogus "own work declarations" – and it would educate users much better than the obscure "no permission since" or "copyvio" templates, which now seem to be our first line of defence.

–LPfi (talk) 08:50, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

I heartily agree. It is unconscionable for us to be prompting every new user with the tantalizing proposition that his upload was created by him by default. This should never have been the default and leads to many problems. Defaulting to "not my own work" and then compelling the user to manually declare authorship is the only logical way to go. Elizium23 (talk) 09:25, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Nearly all uploads that are not "own work" are by less than 250 power users (and not by newbies. I.e. Users with millions of uploaded files and users with hundredthousends of uploads. The three most prolific uploaders of commons have uploaded 10++ million files). These are mostly mass uploads from GLAM. A newbie has nearly no chance to find a work not by himself, that has not already been uploaded. The exception are works by deceased relatives. Files from YouTube and Flickr are mostly uploaded by tools (f2c, v2c). Tools that could be empowered to check the Flickr or Youtube license before upload!

But how about:

(x) I pressed the button on the camera.

( ) I personally know the person who pressed the button on the camera.

( ) I did not press the button of a camera to make the file I am going to upload.

--C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 09:56, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

@C.Suthorn I think you might me misunderstanding where @LPfi was going with this. This is, at least in part, about situations where the uploader did indeed push the button but is not the sole owner of all copyrights. That happens for example when you take photographs of sculptures, or an interesting figure or old photograph you find in a book or museum. The way UW works right now is suggesting that everything is fine as long as you are the one who pressed the button. That is true in most cases, but a considerable amount of copyright violations happen when that basic assumption fails. El Grafo (talk) 11:14, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

There comes FoP into play. The UW could consider the location of the uploader (if you look into the MW-cookies: WM does know your location) and offer advice for FoP rules at the location of the uploader (it is only a guesss that the uploader is in the same legislation as at the time them made the foto, but it could reduce wrong licenses). C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 11:23, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

• Yes. At the very least, require some active choice to be made by the uploader. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:16, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

  Yes. In the simple case of own photo of non-copyrighted motifs, the uploader would just need to actively check the "own work" box. They might get confused by having to make active choices about old architecture or other PD motifs, but I think that's a smaller problem than them just claiming own work in cases where the motif might be own work. Claiming own work for files from the internet would require an active choice, while at present they will get no warning if they just hit "next". –LPfi (talk) 13:28, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

At the very least, require some active choice to be made by the uploader. +2. The exact wording can be worked out, but there needs to be some kind of change to the choices uploaders currently have since the current options clearly aren't adequate. At least not on their own. --Adamant1 (talk) 13:47, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

When you upload your first file you get these message File:Licensing tutorial en.svg. There is a button to proceed and a checkbox that this page does not appear next time. There is no checkbox to say "I read the text", but I think this would also be skipped anyway. GPSLeo (talk) 14:00, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

"Tools that could be empowered to check the Flickr or Youtube license before upload!" Is this not the case with Flickr? Trade (talk) 20:16, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Flickr2Commons reads the license on Flickr, but we still check again after upload. - Jmabel ! talk 20:48, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

It's interesting how there's a never-ending tension between the WMF wanting to make Commons/Wikipedia/Wikiwhatever easy to use and the community wanting to force users to jump through more hoops. I imagine the success of the projects actually depends on balancing this tension. I don't know what the solution is, just an observation! Nosferattus (talk) 23:42, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

I think the problem is that WMF doesn't seem to account for the actual workflows on Commons. If an "easy" upload results in the file being deleted, very little was gained. Likewise, if experienced users are using a lot of time to figure things out to allow newbies not to do that work, we are not helping our backlogs, and we might get a smaller number of less valuable files than otherwise. Of course, if we have to work a bit more to get files from under-represented areas and in fact can save those files and complete their descriptions, it might be worth the effort. –LPfi (talk) 17:00, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

The most frequent misuse of 'own work' I come across is the upload of old postcards. The date is then quite often the scan date. A scanner is a camera but on a non creative use. This could be easily filtered out and checked by searching the postcard categories and on the word 'postcard'.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:40, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

It's completely understandable for people to call photos or scans they took "own work," regardless of whether the photos or scans are of postcards, physical photos, paintings or sculptures. It's not necessarily intuitive that that work is not your own work. Of course, the default also means that people essentially passively claim that uploads of images grabbed from copyrighted web pages are "own work." I think the best solution is for the default to be blank on the name of the author. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:08, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

The upload wizard also chooses question based on the "own work" check. If you keep the default, you are never asked whether the underlying work is PD or licensed in some way. I think the default should be "not my own work", with a suitable wording. Those who upload own nature photographs can easily check the "own work" without worry, after having read the help text once, while the others really should think twice before checking that option. –LPfi (talk) 17:04, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Category:White (human racial classification)

Why is "White women" linking to Category:Caucasian women (Q101103533) instead of White women? Eurohunter (talk) 15:16, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Presumably because the two are synonyms (and equally problematic, like any phenotypic description of people). - Jmabel ! talk 17:49, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel: Definitely not. Eurohunter (talk) 18:40, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

I would suggest restricting "Caucasian" to people actually from the Caucasus region. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:14, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Except that that's not how the word is usually used in English, particularly the US. Hollywood Goes Oriental: CaucAsian Performance in American Film (2010) is not talking about Asians being played by people from the Caucasus region, and Doing Engineering: The Career Attainment and Mobility of Caucasian, Black, and Asian-American Engineers (2000) is not comparing people from the Caucasus region to Black and Asian-American engineers. (See also https://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/07/sunday-review/has-caucasian-lost-its-meaning.html which points out that w:Fisher v. University of Texas (2013) calls Fisher Caucusian, despite the fact I can find no evidence that she has ancestry from the Caucasus region.) The phrase "Caucasian women", without context, is usually going to be interpreted the same as "White women".--Prosfilaes (talk) 00:59, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

This is not a U.S. site; it's an international one. And the only exact meaning of "Caucasian" is "from the Caucasus." Any other meaning will confuse loads of people, and as for the Americans who are confused by Caucasian meaning from the Caucasus, well, they may learn something. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:12, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

If you want exact meanings, write in Lojban. If you want to communicate, don't try and force the language you're using to match your biases of reasonable. Should I go to the German Wikipedia, point out it's an international site and the only exact meaning of "Deutschland" is the land of the Germans, not one random German-speaking country out of six?

The English parts of this site are in English, of which 64% of the native speakers live in the US. And I decline to believe that the US is the only place Caucasian has a racial meaning disconnected from the Caucasus region. A quick search on Google Books indicates that British medical books often use the term, and turns up a Facial Plastic Surgery Procedures in the Non-Caucasian Population edited by Yong Ju Jang of South Korea, and Between the Lines of Genetic Code: Chapter Five. Gene–Gene and Gene–Environment Interaction in Rheumatoid Arthritis by Leonid Padyukov and Lars Alfredsson of the Karolinska Institutet in Sweden uses "European Caucasian".

We certainly can't use Caucasian to mean "from the Caucasus" in an context where it might be confused with the racial usage, and using it with the racial usage is confusing and somewhat dated, so we should probably avoid it and use "White" or "from the Caucasus" in most cases.--Prosfilaes (talk) 22:59, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Donald Trung addresses the problems with the use of "Caucasian" as a pseudo-scientific racial term better than I think anyone will, but I certainly have no argument with simply not using the term as a Commons category. I have to wonder about your statistics on English, though. Are they restricted to people for whom English is their first language? How many people in South Asia and Africa speak English? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:18, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

The issue with these terms is also that they change over time, "White" typically refers to a skin colour (that is light-skinned individuals are usually called "White", but more narrowly it only refers to light-skinned people from Europe), historically the term "Caucasian" was meant to refer to a skeleton type and included people from North Africa and West Asia, but also "Brown people" (South Asians) and "Black people" (Ethiopians, Somalians, Eritreans, Djiboutinians, Etc., Collectively known as "Hamites"). In the United States of America the terms are very much disputed "Since the Ozawa v. United States court case had just decided that the meaning of white people for the purposes of the Court were people who were members of the Caucasian race, Thind argued that he was a white person by arguing that he was a member of the Caucasian race.[6] Thind argued using "a number of anthropological texts" that people in Punjab and other Northwestern Indian states belonged to the "Aryan race",[5]" and "Sutherland found that, while Thind may claim to have "purity of Aryan blood" due to being "born in Village Taragarh Talawa near Jandiala Guru, Amritsar, Punjab", he was not Caucasian in the "common understanding", so he could not be included in the "statutory category as white persons".[9]" (Source).

The above court case essentially says that while at the time the scientific literature regarded all Aryan people as "Caucasian" the "common understanding" of the term in the United States of America only refers to White Europeans. Racial definitions also shift over time, Mexicans were regarded as "White" until the 1970's in the United States too and in the United States of America today a blonde haired blue eyed Argentinian woman wouldn't be considered "White" because they use the "Hispanic and / or Latino" category while a dark-skinned Sicilian woman would. Because racial categories are so ambiguous I am personally against assigning them to any photographs or categories of people unless they self-identify as such and one country's "common understanding" of it isn't another county's. Here in the Netherlands for example the term "Kaukasisch" as a racial category has always had the more broad definition (as I found in some older Bos Atlassen), but in the United Kingdom, Germany, and France they use the same definition as the United States. Ironically, a number of actual Caucasian people aren't seen as "Caucasian".

This person is a Kalmyk, Kalmyks are descendants of Mongols who settled in the Caucasus region and are Caucasian people in the geographical sense, but not "Caucasian people" in the racial sense.

Personally, I'd say that "White" should probably refer to the common understanding of the definition as used today, that is "light-skinned people" and that "Caucasian" shouldn't be a sub-category of "Whites", especially since various "Black" peoples can also be described as such, in fact, I'd argue that the "Caucasian" categories should be mostly reserved to works in the literature describing it rather than actual humans as the "Caucasian" category is somewhat, and has always been somewhat, controversial to use. That or we just use ethnic groups and not racial groups for categorisation, "White British", "Non-Hispanic White-American", and "Autochtone Nederlander" are all ethnic groups with clearly defined lines, racial categories are all blurry. People who want to look for images of certain types of people can just find them by looking through categories, for example I found the above photograph of a Kalmyk by looking through pictures of ethnic Kalmyks, but racial categories are more ambiguous. For example in the 1970's Bos Atlas I have "Black people" don't exist and are sub-divided into several races (Negroïde, Bantoeïde, Khoi-San, Nilotisch, and Kaukasisch, with the latter refering to the Horn of Africa but also all White and Brown peoples, and all Non-Black Africans were only 3 racial groups together, so more than half of all racial categories exclusively referred to Black people), but in the United States of America during the same period the term Black is usually referred to as "the most homogenous group", so in the United States they are "the least genetically diverse" and in the Netherlands "the most genetically diverse". For this reason an international project which uses various definitions of various countries has a lot of trouble integrating such categories. Don't get me wrong, I am very much against deleting the categories about race as they are very handy for using works about race, I'm just not sure how useful such an ambiguous and controversial term like "Caucasian" would be to use for categorising actual people, old interviews from the 1970's also showed Ethiopians proudly calling themselves "Cucasians" but today one would be hard-pressed to find to find such a statement not being met with a lot of backlash. Plus "Caucasian" is extra ambiguous because it literally refers to a geographical region, should the man from the Caucasus region above be classified as "Caucasian" or not? --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 08:25, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

I assume the categories have their use, although I cannot parse "very handy for using works about race". They are obviously problematic: poorly defined and quite controversial. Do we need those categories for random (or less random) people photographed in the street, or on the beach? Should we restrict them to files where the source classifies them as belonging to the category, i.e. mostly historic images, and perhaps some medical ones? Cannot those who need an image of a contemporary Black American just look in any subcategory of People of the United States and identify images that fulfil their needs (and similar for Kalmyks, checking that the file description confirms their ethnicity)? –LPfi (talk) 08:54, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

LPfi, Wikimedia Commons categories first and foremost exist for discoverability, if someone wants a photograph of "A young Black woman in a white coat working in a laboratory" because they want to write an article about Non-Hispanic African-American female chemists and their contributions to science in general we should be able to make that as discoverable as possible, such categorisation actually helps with the discoverability of diversity. -- — Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 13:36, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

"Commons:Quality imports"

Quality imports.

Last year the proposal to create "Commons:Quality imports" was accepted but it wasn't implemented, I took the liberty of creating its main page to develop it further. While the proposal to adopt it was accepted how to implement it was being discussed but no clear conclusions were reached, I prefer to bring more eyeballs to the above page and discuss the implementation of "Quality imports".
Pinging @Nosferattus, Enyavar, Yann, Robert Flogaus-Faust, King of Hearts, Rhododendrites, El Grafo, Mateusz Konieczny, Jklamo, Kritzolina, Infrogmation, Strakhov, Mike Peel, and Ikan Kekek: . Pinging some folks involved in the original discussion. In particular User "Nosferattus" who had a large number of great ideas to implement it. -- — Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 23:00, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

In general: thanks for doing some progress on it Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:19, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Content included

I forgot to add that while the original proposal was only for images, I honestly think that making it broader to include "media files" rather than images might be better as it could then also include non-image files as a lot of valuable films, sounds, books, Etc. are also imported to the Wikimedia Commons every day. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 23:03, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for restarting the discussion! I'm not married to any particular implementation as long as it's not too complicated. Nosferattus (talk) 23:22, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

I still think this is a good idea, and what you already have there looks good, though of course more will need to be fleshed out if the concept is accepted. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:10, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

No opposition that this also includes other types of media. We need to define some basic standards: minimum resolution, etc. Yann (talk) 18:50, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Logo

Main gallery: Commons:Quality imports logo contest.

A new icon - and it is suffering from the same flaw as the QI icon discussed above? C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 09:38, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

@C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm), that flaw being the fact that it includes the English-language abbreviation "QI" or the fact that it doesn't incorporate oversimplified flat design? --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 14:27, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

first glance at this logo, while unaware of the discussion topic, made me think it's a logo for something downgraded from quality images. yellow being worse than green, and red downward arrow meaning something bad (like deficit, stocks falling...).--RZuo (talk) 14:35, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Copied from: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Graphic_Lab/Illustration_workshop&oldid=759631905#Quality_imports_logo

"This is what you described:

• 

  Quality Download logo 1.svg
• 

  Quality Download logo 2.svg
• 

  Quality Download logo 3.svg
• 

  Quality Download logo 4.svg

But your proposed program is called quality import. The word "import" is typically associated with an up arrow, similar to an upload arrow, so I made this:

• 

  Quality Upload logo.svg

Reading your comments at Village Pump, it sounds to me that the Quality Import program is more for people who find valuable and high quality scans, so I am spitballing these ideas around a "scan" theme

• 

  Quality Scan logo 1.svg
• 

  Quality Scan logo 2.svg
• 

  Quality Scan logo 3.svg

All of these have been grouped under cat:Proposals for Quality Imports logo--痛^Designism (talk) 19:25, 29 April 2023 (UTC)"

I wanted to put the logo up for discussion but use this one because I personally like it the most. Gold being the colour used for "#1 (number one) prizes" and a red arrow to symbolise the act of downloading (from an external source).

Though I thought of holding a design contest or a general vote for the logo after the project itself would be realised. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 14:44, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Might I suggest a green arrow pointing left, rather than up or down? My only concern is that up and down may get conflated with "positive and negative" or "voting yes or no" or somesuch. A green arrow pointing left may more easily be understood to be "coming in". — Huntster (t @ c) 23:11, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

I see no reason to restrict it to scans, for example I think that finding and uploading (or spotting already uploaded) NASA image would also fit Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:17, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Mateusz Konieczny, this isn't restricted to scans at all, rather it's a sub-category. "Quality images" only refers to photographs by Wikimedia Commons users, but "Quality imports" basically refers to any file not made by a Wikimedia Commons user (and even if the person is a Wikimedian, it could first be published elsewhere), some of these are scans, some videos, some are satellite images, some are 3D scans, Etc. I think that these different sub-categories could have separate logos, but I'll explain that in more details after starting the contest and deliberating with the community which sub-categories "Quality imports" should have, seeing as the logo I like the most is quite controversial I am sure that it won't be the final version, but like in the original suggestion this logo is merely a suggestion and it's my vision for it, but I'm sure that there's another logo waiting to be created that conveys the concept much better, the community can then approve their preferred version. — Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 13:32, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

copyright on document from family archive

Hi,

I uploaded an old document (1955) from my personal archive. I got an error about the copyright being wrong (and to be deleted automatically within 7 days). I now added {{PD-user|username}}.

Would this fix it?

Thank you,

Alex — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atudor (talk • contribs) 04:22, 6 May 2023‎ (UTC)

• {{PD-user|Atudor}} implies that you are the author of the document, which I take it is not the case. Who actually wrote it? Is that person still alive and, if not, are you the heir to their intellectual property (or do you know who is)? - Jmabel ! talk 05:49, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks @Jmabel! My father, who wrote the document, died in 1959, in Romania.

  And yes, I am the heir to his intellectual property.

  Alex Atudor (talk) 18:47, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

  • @Atudor: That makes this relatively straightforward. Credit him, not yourself, as author. "PD" is a little tricky here, in that it is not ipso facto public domain. If your intent is to place it in the public domain, probably the best choice is {{Cc-zero-heirs}}. That effectively says, "If it can be placed in the public domain, do so; if not, give it a license that lets anyone do anything with it that they could if it were in the public domain."
  • In the unlikely event that anyone questions whether you are the legitimate heir to his intellectual property (as against just someone who came along and made this claim), you might be asked to go through the process described at COM:VRT to carry on confidential correspondence to verify that. I don't think it will come up on this, though.
  • You may already know this, but the most appropriate place for a translation into English would be Wikisource.

  Jmabel ! talk 18:57, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Maintaining anonymity in an "heirs" situation

• PD has specific conditions. Usually old (in Europe 70 years) and author unknown and other legal rules. My father died recently and I am the only descendant, so there should be no problem in uploading his work. However to my knowledge there is no specific license for this. heirs. The rules in Commons:Volunteer Response Team are unclear in how to handle heirs uploading work from their ancestors. (even in the clearcut cases: no multiple heirs). Another problem is that I want to maintain my anonimity: If I have to mention my fathers full name, I lose almost al my anonimity. I am thinking of using an alias: father-of-smiley.toerist, but is it permitted to add dead persons aliasses?Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:05, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
  • @Smiley.toerist: I think this is more of a VRT question than a Village pump question (that is, better to ask at Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard). But, as I see it, if you go through VRT once to establish your situation as someone's heir, you can still remain anonymous to everyone except the members of the VRT (who are the only ones who see confidential correspondence), and once it is established by VRT that you own the intellectual property in question, it is pretty much your prerogative how it is credited. - Jmabel ! talk 16:45, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
  • @Smiley.toerist: My condolences for your loss. There are several licensing templates for works released by the heir(s) as PD or under a free license, for example {{Cc-by-4.0-heirs}} or {{Cc-zero-heirs}}, see Category:License tags for transferred copyright for more - {{PD-heirs}} seems to be the most popular, but personally, I would prefer one of the CC variants, though these haven't been used often yet. I think whether you need to go through the VRT process depends on whether your father's work was ever published previously. If not, I think stating here on Commons that it's your father's work and that you release it under a free license (or PD) as the sole heir is enough, as this is ultimately the same kind of assertion we just trust when people declare images as their own work. Of course, to back it up and as a precaution, you could still file a VRT ticket with your father's real name without revealing it here. Gestumblindi (talk) 18:18, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
  • @Smiley.toerist: My condolences too. I think the heirs templates are not the best approach if you want to keep your anonymity. On the other hand, if you approach the VRT, you don't need to state publicly why you own the rights. Just upload his works attributing them to him (which is fair towards him, and might prevent some problems – and e.g. in the EU he is entitled the attribution) and let the VRT ticket handle the licence claim. I'd recommend a -BY licence if he might have liked the publicity, the -SA I leave to your judgement. Creating a separate account for these uploads (still using VRT, and perhaps -heirs) is of course also an option. –LPfi (talk) 09:22, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

• Hi @Smiley.toerist, Thank you for the clarification on the "heirs" situation. I upload an unpublished document authored by my father. He passed in 1959, in Europe and I am the legal heir. Anonymity does not matter to me. I used

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

on the document.

• Is that the right action?

  Alex Atudor (talk) 18:57, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

  • @Atudor: I believe I've fully answered you above. I sectioned out Smiley.toerist's remark precisely because the anonymity is a separate issue and does not arise in your case. - Jmabel ! talk 18:59, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

    Indeed you did; looked at it again. There is simply too much information for a first timer to process.

    But thanks for taking the time nonetheless.

    I changed it to

The heirs of the creator of this work hereby publish it under the following license:

. Atudor (talk) 19:21, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Making backup of Commons uploads

Is there tool/script (I am fine with Linux command line tools) that can be used to create local backup of files I uploaded to Wikimedia Commons? Preferably with their file pages Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:22, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Here is a list of all file download tools Commons:Download tools. Saving file pages is not supported by these tools. If you have a list of the pages you could simply use curl for saving the pages. GPSLeo (talk) 11:49, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Actually you can export any number of pages including their version history with "Special:Export" without any tools. (and if you have a local MW wiki, you should also be able to import the pages into the local wiki) --C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 13:08, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Though I still need to iterate over my uploads and so on... So I hoped for something like that existing already Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 22:41, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

A list of your 288 uploads: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AContributions&target=Mateusz+Konieczny&namespace=6&tagfilter=&newOnly=1&start=&end=&limit=288 Extract the filenames (find-replade in any text editor) and put the list into special:export. Download the files with wget or curl. C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 08:57, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg has not reached consensus as to whether it should redirect to the 2:1 or the 3:5 version of the Union Jack. The redirect has been protected, but that is now threatening to lead to an edit war among admins. We need a stronger consensus on this redirect. If you have an opinion, please voice it in the discussion there. - Jmabel ! talk 14:50, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Who’d think that an edit war would emmerge? Oh wait: I did. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:38, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Jrascb Vol 13sandasaya.sinamavaRavanakavandaya

Ravanakavandaya 148.78.1.79 03:04, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

• Offhand, I don't see a question here. - Jmabel ! talk 15:22, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

According to Google it's in the Kannada language and is a romanisation of "ಜೆರಸ್ಕಬ್ ವೋಲ್ - ೧೩ಸಂದಸಯ.ಸಿನಾಮವಾರವಾನಖಾವಂದಯ", but the IP address points to Mountain View, California, United States of America. I don't know Kannada so I don't know what it means. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 19:16, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Journal of the Ceylon Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society Volume 13? RZuo (talk) 21:37, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Pixabay photo dates

I was hoping someone could tell me how one can determine the date that a photo posted to Pixabay was taken. I can't find any metadata/exif data confirming the dates and I don't see anything on the photo pages showing anything other than the date the photos were published on the site.

I just uploaded this image and am bothered that I had to write that the date was unknown. Unfortunately, the date taken isn't on its Pixabay page or in its metadata.

Contrast that with this image from the same author I uploaded in 2020. Somehow, the metadata there did show the date and time the photo was taken, even though its page on Pixabay doesn't.

Am I missing something? Did Pixabay remove certain exif data since 2020? Is there no longer a way to determine when these photographs were actually taken? Any help would be greatly appreciated. --Denniscabrams (talk) 04:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Promotional photos of people

I regularly come across photos like this one in “Category:Media needing categories”. It is the user's only contribution and the description is promotional. In Wikidata the person cannot be found nor the use of the photo in a Wikipedia article. Does a nomination for deletion make sense or is it better to leave it in case it could be used in the future? Wouter (talk) 08:26, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Most of them become deleted as they are not in scope and also because in many cases the copyright situation is not clear and would need VRT confirmation. Many of these files where used is Wikipedia articles they became deleted. GPSLeo (talk) 08:34, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

this particular one is fine. no apparent copyvio. subject is/was on the board of GAVI. https://www.gavi.org/governance/gavi-board/members/mahima-datla .

board of directors of an org that has a wikidata item can certainly be included on commons. RZuo (talk) 11:34, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

This is also why such images shouldn't be speedily deleted, many such images are tagged as "Speedy" and then lost forever, often with no logs of their existence beyond the upload log. Just because the English-language Wikipedia thinks that a person isn't notable enough for their encyclopedia doesn't mean that we should use their standards. Especially since it's quite common for people with Wikipedia articles on other language Wikipedia's to be considered "not notable enough" by the English-language Wikipedia. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 19:19, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

I agree with that. What I sometimes see is that the user also creates a Wikidata page. If done properly, all basic data will be available and it will be easier to add a Commons category that is more meaningful than, for example, “Women with black hair”. Wouter (talk) 20:00, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Location in formatted data

See: File:Delahaye LCCN2014718369.jpg where the formatted data gives an error message for location, I can only find GPS examples, how do I add a location, or am I expected to have depicts=Manhattan, which would be incorrect. --RAN (talk) 14:20, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) You're looking for location of the point of view (P7108) (fixed) - no idea why that doesn't show up right away when you start typing "location" in the search box ... El Grafo (talk) 15:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

• Perfect, Thank you! Or maybe when you try and use "location" the warning text can direct you to location of the point of view (P7108), can we change that? Most common mistakes have directions to the correct one. --RAN (talk) 15:15, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Nikhar Garg

As I'm unable to revert my own edit, can anyone of you please revert my edit at File:Nikhar Garg Scottish Open.jpg? I just withdrew my nomination. Thankyou. Zoglophie (talk) 13:39, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

• Done. - Jmabel ! talk 15:06, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Jmabel ! talk 15:06, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Photographer's mark

See: File:JERITZA, Maria, 1926.jpg, anyone recognize it and find the photographer in Wikidata? RAN (talk) 04:38, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

"Flair"? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:28, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

New blocked in Mobile interface changes

For IPs

Your IP address has been blocked from editing (Wikiname).
Try logging in if you have an account.
Blocked by (User)
Block will expire in -----
See details
Reason
(reason)
View source (new button)
Log in
OK

For users

You have been blocked from editing (Wikiname).
Blocked by (User)
Block will expire in -----
See details
Reason
(reason)
View source (new button)
OK
2001:44C8:4085:558:2406:A57A:DB4E:43CA 00:53, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

• I'm totally confused. Is this a statement of how things are? How you think they should be? What exactly is the recent or proposed change? - Jmabel ! talk 02:38, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Controversial edits to time zone map

File:World Time Zones Map.png started out as a time zone map from the Central Intelligence agency. It's likely from the PDF or JPG at the World and Regional Maps page at the CIA website. The CIA map has been modified by User:UnaitxuGV as indicated in the file's edit history. Edits to the border between Ukrainian and Russian time zones might not be what the CIA would make if they were to update the file, hence the controversy. This has resulted in a flurry of edits to the English Wikipedia articles w:Time zone and w:Coordinated Universal Time. Jc3s5h (talk) 14:25, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

We need to define whether the map shows the de jure or the de facto time zones. In occupied areas the occupier will decide which time zone to use. The term "official" in the description indicates that the de jure time zones are displayed and therefore not the time zone used by the occupier. GPSLeo (talk) 15:34, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

• Edits like that should be done in a separate, derivative file that cites distinct sources for its newer information. & then it's not Commons' affair which one en-wiki prefers to use. - Jmabel ! talk 15:35, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jc3s5h: In 2014, Crimea and parts of Donetsk and Luhansk started observing UTC+3. At that time, World Time Zones Map.png was changed to show these areas in UTC+3. In 2015 the map had an edit war reverting these areas to UTC+2 but in the end kept them on UTC+3, and they were not changed anymore since then. In 2022, after the invasion of Ukraine, a larger part of southeast Ukraine started observing UTC+3, so I recently changed the map to reflect it.

The map shows the time zone actually used in each area, regardless of law or political recognition. For example, the map also shows Abkhazia and South Ossetia in UTC+3, and some parts of Australia and Canada in their time zone that is actually used there different from what is defined by law. So for consistency, I think that the part of Ukraine actually using UTC+3 should remain shown in UTC+3 on the map. This doesn't imply recognition of the annexation, because the border between Ukraine and Russia (white line) is still shown as internationally recognized. The red line, although thicker, is only the separation between time zones, just like in other countries that have more than one time zone.

The CIA map was only used as an initial template, and we are not obligated to replicate it exactly or to update only what the CIA is expected to do. The CIA map was last updated in February 2021, and it still shows all of Ukraine in UTC+2, including Crimea. That map also has some mistakes or outdated information such as Chile, South Sudan, and parts of Canada and Greenland.

@GPSLeo: The map is de facto. I agree that the word "official" should be removed from the description, and maybe replaced with "de facto" to clarify. Heitordp (talk) 15:49, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Convenience link: File:World Time Zones Map.png. - Jmabel ! talk 17:25, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Again: this map gives the CIA as its source. If there is other info that comes from a different sources, then that should be a separate derivative work, and the changes should be overtly credited/sourced. - Jmabel ! talk 17:26, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel: This map has always been was a derivative work. It started from the CIA map as a template, but it has been updated numerous times for many years, mostly based on the tz database. I clarified this in the file description. Heitordp (talk) 02:58, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

@Heitordp: Thanks for the clarification. As I'm sure you'll agree, maps like this should be clear as to what they represent, not just at a loose level but whose data they attempt to follow. - Jmabel ! talk 06:40, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

@Heitordp: Does the map currently differ at all from the data in the Time Zone Database? Nosferattus (talk) 17:53, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

@Nosferattus: The map matches the tz database for almost all locations, but there are a few differences:

• The database lists the Mongolian regions of Govi-Altai and Zavkhan in UTC+7, but noting uncertainty due to conflicting sources. I changed the map to show these regions in UTC+8, based on the comments in the database and other sources.
• The database doesn't mention Abkhazia or South Ossetia. The map shows them in UTC+3.
• The database lists Ukraine in UTC+2, except Crimea in UTC+3. I changed the map show the more recently occupied areas of Ukraine also in UTC+3, based on other sources. Heitordp (talk) 20:09, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

@Heitordp: Could you note these differences in the file description (or alternatively create a separate map that has the deviations)? Also, it seems like it would be a good idea to discuss these changes on tziana.org (the discussion list for the Time Zone Database) so that maybe they will be incorporated into future versions of the database. Nosferattus (talk) 17:50, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@Nosferattus: I listed the differences in the file description, with references. I'll try to report them to the database. Heitordp (talk) 04:50, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Reducing line height in smaller text

Dear experts, At Template talk:PD-Australia, in the draft template at the very bottom of the page titled "Australian copyright-expired works (PD-Australia)", in column 2 there is a Note comprising three lines of text coded as "small". I would like to close up the lines a little (reduce the line height). Commons doesn't seem to have the same capability as Wikipedia in this regard. Can someone suggest a way of doing this? Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 11:14, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

I see only a note in column 1. Ruslik (talk) 20:10, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Column 1 has the numbers in. I'm referring to the reduced-size note un column 2 that starts: "Note: Copyright does not impose ..."  :-) SCHolar44 (talk) 01:35, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Will this do? Feel free to revert if not. - Jmabel ! talk 02:36, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, Jmabel. It worked, but the line height was applied to other text as well. I have tried to limit its extent, using the coding idea you gave me, but I haven't had success -- my coding skills are not very good. Any chance you could look at it again? I do appreciate your advice. SCHolar44 (talk) 08:12, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

@SCHolar44: I don't think the wiki approach to tables is flexible enough to confine it just to the one column.

For what it's worth, at an HTML level, it has to be applied to a "block" element (vs. "inline"). I suspect you might have to drop the wiki table and code it in raw HTML. Ideally, it could be applied to a single TD element. - Jmabel ! talk`

@Jmabel: Thank you -- much appreciated. Looks like I'll have to leave it and perhaps ask for help from a specialized coder when the draft process is complete. SCHolar44 (talk) 00:13, 15 May 2023 (UTC)