Category talk:Images from the Canadian Copyright Collection at the British Library

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

fixing names?

[edit]

Wondering if it's appropriate - possible? - to correct misspelled names or e.g. "niahara canon" or "Mount Cheain" (Cheam) or if the image titles are because of how the BL names them, and that's that? Yoko/Yoho is another one I just came across.Skookum1 (talk) 10:13, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The BL names are usually transcribed from the caption (or the original indices?), and probably reflect transcription errors rather than anything else. I corrected quite a few obvious ones before the upload, but a lot more slipped through. Renaming typos shouldn't be a problem, but please make sure to rename both the JPEG and TIFF versions! Andrew Gray (talk) 14:35, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You may wish to create a section here like: Commons:National Archives and Records Administration/Error reporting. We could add them to this talk page and then remove entries that are corrected.--Canoe1967 (talk) 14:52, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you note any below (with preferred title!) I'll move them en masse later and update them in the master list. Andrew Gray (talk) 21:19, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just to note I am still logging these and will go through with a large-scale renaming (probably after Wikimania) - I've just had some other work come up in the past couple of weeks. Andrew Gray (talk) 17:55, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Corrections

[edit]

Add corrections below in file number order.

Misspelled, the correct spelling is....
"Niagara Canyon"....canon is the common older spelling of course.
"Mount Cheam"; official name is Cheam Peak but it's always called Mount Cheam or just Cheam. name error probably mis-read handwriting

Potentially problematic names

[edit]

location/topic items of interest

[edit]

How to figure these out may be via any bios or information on the photographer and year; some are very great photos, hard to say exactly where, or in need of further identification as to location/subject:

Ships

[edit]

I found this Canadian registry when we were trying to find which ships picked up bodies from the Titanic. It may just be civilian ships though.--Canoe1967 (talk) 17:13, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

issue with uploaded crop....

[edit]

I know I uploaded the right version, I cropped this one and in the "other versions" section, where I added it from, it still shows the frame which I'd cropped out; should I upload it directly, and match the file name plus "_crop"?Skookum1 (talk) 05:32, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, OK, what comes up with that link is cropped; it doesn't come up that way from the "other versions" table of the parent image. Why is that?Skookum1 (talk) 06:35, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, but it doesn't come up that way when I use the filename on that link on a Wikipedia page (Camborne, British Columbia is where it is for now, going to add it to "pack train" or "pack horse", which ever - one is a redirect to the other).Skookum1 (talk) 06:37, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like a thumbnailing problem. I'd recommend leaving it for a few days and checking back to see if it's sorted itself. Andrew Gray (talk) 22:44, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes with caching issues you can fix it by using in in an oddball size like 219px. I usually just put it in the other versions section and then revert after the cache clears: [File:image.jpg|thumb|left|219px] --Canoe1967 (talk) 02:25, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I just made a version with better light/contrast.....should I upload it the same way or upload it separately......would it go in the same category as the main collection?Skookum1 (talk) 09:38, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I had a good look at the full-size version, it's interesting because there's a bullwhip in flight if you note the lead horse, and the guy to its right far behind....Skookum1 (talk) 09:39, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They are probably fine on the same file page. If someone really wants to use an older version in an article they can take one out of the history and load it to a new page.--Canoe1967 (talk) 06:11, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with lightly edited (eg contrast change, rotated, recropped) versions overwriting the jpg; just make sure not to overwrite the original tiff. Andrew Gray (talk) 22:29, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think anyone usually uses or edits tiffs. Even if they are overwritten by accident we can always revert and upload to a new file page if they really want a diff tiff. Jpg and png are the common ones that are used, cropped, improved, etc. Even drastic changes to jpg can stay on the same file page and be split if there is an edit war. I had a recent issue with File:Sally Field 1971.JPG, see the talk page as well.--Canoe1967 (talk) 01:12, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actually *I* use TIFFs all the time, but never mind that......I just got a deletion notice in my Wikipedia account about a crop of one of this series of images that portrayed Slocan City really well. I'd indicated on my upload it was derived from one of these, and thought I'd filled out the correct licensing...but nope, some finicky tidbit in the licensing didn't suit User:Fastily and he deleted it, even though it said straight out on it it was part of one of these PD images.....WHY?. See User_talk:Fastily#Slocan_City_pic. The image I took it from is File:Central British Columbia Series 13 (HS85-10-38108).jpg, it's the image at upper right.Skookum1 (talk) 04:35, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to know how to license crops of these so I'm not constantly re-uploading things that trigger-happy deletionists don't even bother explaining why the license wasn't right. There's lots in these montages that could be used, once cropped, for article illustrations. File:Central British Columbia Series 7 (HS85-10-38102).jpg is I think Kamloops, I'm not sure, and the one main street shot would be good for that city's article. but I'm not going to bother even trying if I have to deal with someone who just wants to delete things instead of helping.Skookum1 (talk) 04:42, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You could use Template:Derived from in the source field but you still need a license that matches the source file. See an example at File:Altmer High Elf, Sweden, Baltic Sea.png. Don't worry about Fastily. He does delete many images and usually quickly to clear the backlogs. I think he believes it is better to shoot first and ask questions later. There is nothing wrong with that method as it does clear up copyvios very quickly. Just make sure you have a license tag on them at upload or within a few minutes. I usually just copy/paste the license from the source file straight to the derived work like I did with File:Altmer High Elf, Kiental, Germany.png. He made his own template and I added my license below.--Canoe1967 (talk) 17:30, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you're making extracted crops, the best way is to duplicate the existing metadata - copy and paste from the main image including details like the BL catalogue tag and license tag - and then link to the original in "other versions". Andrew Gray (talk) 19:13, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To add to this, the part I'm mainly concerned with is keeping the {{Picturing Canada|...}} and {{British Library image|...}} template code and copyright numbers, as these will make sure it's correctly attributed and tracked. Changing the description/title won't be a problem (but keeping HS85-10-xxxxx in the title probably helps). Andrew Gray (talk) 19:33, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I thought I had but all I got from User:Fastily was a snotty comment about making a mess; there was no deletion notice to try and resolve the problem, just a speedy deletion and now a snotty comment. WP:BITE on technical details was uncool. I was clear on the upload about it being from one of the HS85 series and even named the image; not good enough for him, he just deleted the thing without giving anyone a chance to fix whatever the problem was........discouraging re doing more of the same. He complains about being busy it's not like I'm not, too.....and when you ask for help and someone ignores that and deletes the contribution, WTF??Skookum1 (talk) 04:31, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think Fastily was brought to a drama board for de-sysopping over similar deletions. I think the conclusion was that he is a little harsh but kept his admin bit. Probably best to try and have proper licenses at time of upload and not be concerned with his motivations. You should be able to upload it again with the same file name and no further problems as long as it has a PD license.--Canoe1967 (talk) 16:14, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see his drama is what he thrives on, and apparently WP:CIVIL isn't part of his portfolio....I note there's a Spanish-language post complaining about his peremptory behaviour - the one you moved from his userpage to his talkpage. Deletionists are time-wasters if all they do is hit the delete button to fulfill themselves. This was obviously a crop of a public domain Commons image, it should have at least been given a chance to be re-uploaded. Yes, I can......but I still don't know where in the upload form to put in the license; I'll re-upload it in the "upload another version of this file" section, which is what I did with the image that's now on Camborne, British Columbia in Wikipedia......I see he's only been in the Commons since April 2013.......came here looking for more destructive things to do, sounds like to me. And yes, I responded in kind, but could have responded with much worse, as I'm sure you aware. I don't have time for snotty teenagers.Skookum1 (talk) 02:57, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't use the upload wizard because of those limits. I use Special:Upload. If the correct license isn't listed then just pick a similar one and change it after upload. I use Commons:Commonist for bulk uploads and it can take any license or none. You need to paste with Ctr+v though because mouse copy/paste aren't written into Commonist yet. Btw, see if you think I have the correct city at File talk:Central British Columbia Series 7 (HS85-10-38102).jpg--Canoe1967 (talk) 03:41, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

mis-identified as being in Mission, BC

[edit]

Please see File talk:From Mission Hill (HS85-10-36637).jpg and File:St. Mary's Indian Mission VPL 19946.jpg.Skookum1 (talk) 13:32, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]