User talk:Billinghurst/Archives/2020

Could you please explain...

Hmmm. Is it possible you deleted File:Kris Holden-Ried (6128856769).jpeg, in favour of the poorly named File:Mg 11757 (6128856769).jpg, without checking to see whether the two images had the same description and were included in the same categories?

Uploading images is only part of the job here. With tens of millions of images it is probably a minor part of our job. Our readers have to be able to find the images they need. We have to do a lot of work to add meaningful descriptions, meaningful, well-organized categories.

Usually, keeping the first version of an image to be uploaded makes sense. A good reason to keep the first version would be because it annoys the first uploader if their version is deleted, in favour of a later version, uploaded by someone else. In this particular case I uploaded both version.

I uploaded them years apart. This is apt to happen when the original flickr uploader did not change the image's name from something assigned by their camera, like "Mg 11757.jpg". Ideally, our tools would warn us when we were uploading a duplicate at the earliest possible moment. They do a less than ideal job at that, today.

Since I uploaded both versions, keeping the second version, not the first version, is not going to annoy me.

I would be concerned if the category and description weren't updated when you chose to delete the version I thought should be kept, and kept the version I thought should be deleted. Geo Swan (talk) 04:44, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

If you wanted it renamed, just get it renamed. If the description you entered was wrong, then fix it. If the categories are wrong, you cannot expect me to know which are better. You have all those existing skills that don't require administrator's time and effort. So please don't come here whinging at me about my following due process by deleting the recently uploaded file when it was an exact duplicate. Look to your own processes.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Creator:William Allen Neilson

Creator:William Allen Neilson has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this creator, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Mutter Erde (talk) 14:13, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Mutter Erde: This is best handled with simply moving the page, and documenting in the move reason, and/or on the talk page. This leaves a redirect which is system-cheap; updates wikidata; and gives clarity.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Hey, thanks for being so prompt with those name changes. Really appreciate it. Veggies (talk) 01:21, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

@Veggies: when you make it easy to do with all the ticks in place, then the kudos is all for you , I am just pressing some buttons.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:38, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Missing files

Hi Billinghurst. In 2009 I made a serie of photographs, the Atlantik Wall in Katwijk. Now I can only find one picture. I used Richardkw as username in 2009. Is it possible they are deleted, without someone noticing me? It were my own pictures. Can you please take a look if you can find anything? This is very strange. The photo that still is there is this one. I hope you will take a look if you can find deleted pics (or existing, but I can't find them). Thanks in advance. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 13:59, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

I still have them, I will upload them again. Grtz. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 14:21, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Marianna Komlos and policemen on WWF Heat 1999.jpg

Dude seriously, the woman on that picture was Marianna Komlos, you can even check it on this video on YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wrxu6aquGuw here she appears with the same clothing, with the cops etc. I am not playing dirty here. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 17:31, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@TheBellaTwins1445: Mate, this is not stopping the rename, it is giving it a fair process. You wouldn't like a process where your uploads are just renamed without giving you an opportunity to comment. The documentation explains why something was done when someone asks the question in another ten years. Please put your above comments on the talk page. What is the urgency and imperative, on a file that has been here for years.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:53, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Deletion request ignored

Why defend this file from deletion as a duplicate (which it is) when it's a historical document with literally false distorted colours, has inferior detail, is not used anywhere; also we have 5 similar versions as alternatives, the artist painted at least 12 versions. This copy is unlikely to be used anytime, anywhere... -Broichmore (talk) 07:53, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Broichmore: You were not ignored, you were handled in line with the guidance for managing duplicates. A few things:

1. Speedy deletions through {{Duplicate}} is exact matches, and how am I to know which is the right colour? So I don't, they belong as DRs if required.
2. The purpose of duplicate was about cache, and thumbnails, it was not about limiting versions, or limiting choicee, and is why it says exact matches, not other wording.
3. We are not limited to space, and the requirement of scope is not about having one best copy, it is about having educational copies, so if someone painted 12 versions, then we should have twelve versions available if someone writes an article about painters reproducing same subject. If there are colouration differences, then we let the users decide which version, they use. Use the talk page and make comment.

So don't fuss them, categorise them, and let people have their choice. Guide them and enable them to find the best copy.  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:04, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Renaming Denon AV equipment ... JPG

@Billinghurst: Hello Billinghurst,

in which way was my request not compliant with the renaming guideline? AV equipment is very general, it could be Blu-ray or DVD-Player, amplifier, preamplifier, Poweramp. and so on. Additionally, shows no equipment, just tags (especially prices, if you don't have a very exact watching). Please let me know the reason for your decision. Thank you in advance. Regards, --Wikisympathisant (talk) 14:00, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

@Wikisympathisant: Your files can be moved within reason as the uploader making a request. Other people's uploads have a different standard and I didn't believe that your request met that standard. Also there is a string of files at special:Prefixindex/File:Denon AV equipment and that should be a holistic review, and you should consider discussing with the uploader. The courtesy of asking is always a good approach.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:20, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

United Nations Treaty Series

As I do not fully agree your rationale to decline renaming File:United Nations Treaties and international agreements registered - Volume 221 (13 November 1955 - 30 November 1955).pdf, how about also reverting File:UN Treaty Series - vol 1.pdf to File:UNTS 1.pdf while enWS still uses UNTS 1.pdf?--Jusjih (talk) 04:20, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jusjih: You asked about this at enWS earlier, and that was my statement when you asked. A rename fouls up all the global links on the djvu/pdfs so you cannot see the pages in use and it provides no value to the WS, just the first step to a mess. Create a redirect to the work here if you truly want to see a better name. I have reverted the file, and instructed the filemover.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:17, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

I set up File:UN Treaty Series - vol 221.pdf to redirect to File:United Nations Treaties and international agreements registered - Volume 221 (13 November 1955 - 30 November 1955).pdf to indirectly "harmonize" naming the United Nations Treaty Series. Your not renaming was right while unsure how to deal it on Wikisource, yet your act would have been even better if having set up File:UN Treaty Series - vol 221.pdf before I did. I see a new "textbook case", so see also Commons talk:File renaming#Exception to harmonize the names of a set of images so that only one part of all names differs as I dare not to directly annotate the guideline.--Jusjih (talk) 02:38, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

It is imperfect, I know, however, renames for djvu and pdf creates a swag of moves for little to no value at the WSes. With regard to name harmonisation, that has typically been for use in templates, like flags, the football uniforms, and the rail connectors, and where someone has uploaded all the images of a book so that they differ in one aspect. It hasn't been for nicety in names. This is all why we encourage good filenames prior to transcription/proofreading. 🤷  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:39, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

File:President Jean-Pierre Boyer of Haiti (Hispaniola Unification Regime) Portrait.jpg

Hi Billinghurst. I just noticed that my request for the renaming of Jean-Pierre Boyer had been denied, though I am wondering why exactly that was? You cited that the request [did] not comply with removal guidelines, however, I am the original uploader.

According to the same guidelines you had used to deny my request, there is a note that states: Unless there is a compelling reason not to, uploader requests should be honored. This is a courtesy, not an absolute right, however. If a file mover feels that a proposed new name is disruptive or inappropriate, they can suggest a different name or decline the request.

I would greatly appreciate if my request were fulfilled; not the exact wording that should have been used for this file. I'd be more than happy to update all the pages that correspond to this file. Thank you for your time concerning this matter. Savvyjack23 (talk) 02:59, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@Savvyjack23: it is not an absolute right, as explained at the first dot point at Com:FR, and the suggested name is not more informative. I have to weigh up the value of a rename, and there are none of the other criteria being met, it is six years in place, and widely used on wikis. If you want an alternate name, please feel free to create a redirect for the work, add a better description, put in the wikidata, and add a title there. etc.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:44, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Les moeurs et fachons de faire de Turcs

File:Les moeurs et fachons de faire de Turcs ... (BM E,6).jpg was not a duplicate; please restore the original and maintain the recreation as a separate file. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:30, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

 Done Maybe identify how it differs on the talk page, and utilise {{Other version}} to tag it as so.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

The amendment to the image of the traffic sign that the Armenian government ordered to cancel and the violation of the order of the Armenian government to allow the uploading of traffic signs arbitrarily. And the sign is not uploaded as per the traffic signs of the ГОСТ 10807-78 in the Armenian alphabet, pages 105 - 110

Please I do not allow you to upload images of traffic signs arbitrarily. Because it was violating the order of the Armenian public government Therefore uploading images must go to clear with the Armenian government. Allow me to revise the traffic signs of Armenia as instructed on 11 April 2019. N439-N: Subject to changes and amendments And maintain the traffic sign of Armenia and some of the traffic signs of Armenia have been canceled and replaced by new signs announced by the Armenian government. Therefore do not allow you to edit and request to disqualify the traffic signs of Armenia from now onwards.มองโกเลีย๔๔12:35, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

@มองโกเลีย๔๔: Uploads are based on Com:scope not my opinion, and as an administrator I do not make arbitrary decisions about these files. If you believe

• that files are out of scope, then please nominate them for deletion per Com:Deletion policy
• that they are copyright violations, then you can similarly request their deletion

Outside of that the Armenian government does neither define nor describe how we name our files. If there is new naming scheme for a series of files, then I suggest that you create a new harmonised scheme for their names, and maybe add something that indicates the year of the new images taking effect, or something similar. If the images are simply now retired images, then they are still within scope, they should be tagged as being historical, not current.

Either way, you should follow the guidance at Commons:Overwriting existing files and not overwrite images with updates. Renames need to comply with Com:File renaming, other reasons that you have different ideas are not within scope.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:01, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: do not believe what you claimed. You do not claim that it is an old picture. The old image should be properly replacing the new image at the previous upload, before I upload that new one. The picture of the traffic sign in Armenia Like an ignorant and foolish man who made traffic signs in Armenia Instead of studying the Armenian alphabet before doing it instead of meters, it uses the characters Մ, մ, go back to use Ն, Ն, stupid. So humiliating, I absolutely didn't forgive. Because of being stupid and still being stubbornly again, so I had to end all the wrong things In order for the Aeneas to disappear, file names, I must follow the file names of traffic signs of the USSR and in tandem with the government announcements that Most currentมองโกเลีย๔๔08:57, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi. I have told you what I can do as an administrator. I have explained to you the steps that you can take.

I suggest that you upload your files, under a harmonised set of new names, and the problematic images/files can be managed separately. @Benoît Prieur: do you want to have a go?  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:05, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi billinghurst :). Actually I read rapidly the discussion. I'm not sure to understand everything. How can I help (if I can)?

Have a good day, ----Benoît (d) 09:30, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

@Benoît Prieur: Hurry and get rid of this billinghurst What you like to do is silly, meddling, acting more than the Armenian government.----มองโกเลีย๔๔11:05, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

@Benoît Prieur: I reverted overwritten files, and I rejected renames of files, all Armenian road signage. Our contributor believes that the new Armenian road signs as prescribed by that government should be both overwrite old signage and then renamed. I am going to AGF and presume that the contributor's approach is language-related rather than just rude, though that assumption is wavering. Not certain whether having it written in Armenian may lead to a different interpretation.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:14, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

As far as I understand, I think your were 100% right. ----Benoît (d) 13:52, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

@Benoît Prieur: See? Come and accept yourself. It is very appropriate to show responsibility for what is caused by Express your stupidity billinghurst I have the right to correct by the government of Armenia. I have to follow the government of Armenia. And I never acted above the Armenian government Can you billinghurst take the time to think about doing more creative things?“Learn to eat some fish Do not eat only some clever grass”มองโกเลีย๔๔14:27, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

@มองโกเลีย๔๔: That is enough. I have assumed good faith, and now I am just going to see further comment like that as rudeness. I have been nothing but polite, and do not deserve this approach of yours. Please have some basic civility and courtesy.

The law of Armenia has no importance here at Commons beyond offering us guidance. As an administrator I have applied the policies of Commons, and that is the role of an administrator. That you dislike it has to be your dislike, so be it. You have been given the direction on how to have your uploads, and to give them a new naming system. If you wish to progress, you have your direction.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:34, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Thank you for accept Because I do an Armenian traffic sign, not easy to do Have to study the Armenian alphabet match with Russian and English, it takes 1 month to pass the course มองโกเลีย๔๔14:44, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Updating road signs

I just noticed your problem with มองโกเลีย๔๔. As far as I am aware, updating proportions, colours, and typefaces, is not a violation of COM:Overwrite, unless it is a complete alteration of the image, in which case it should be uploaded as a separate version. มองโกเลีย๔๔ would appear to be in the right, in this case. As I recall correctly, you and I also had our own little spat on a similar issue, where I was also correct. Perhaps you should step back from this particular topic. Fry1989 ^eh? 16:33, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

My reading of the policy document is different; and I have always retained old signs for difference and management by community review, they have their own historical significance, and we can have versions. User has been given direction on how to have those files added, and manage the existing files separately.

I believe that our disagreement was over file extensions of maps and their retention where I refused what equated to speedy deletion, again allowing for community review. I would have to check the archives for exact circumstances. Yes, you do remember yourself as right, which has often been your issue and why you ran foul of so many administrators for those years.  — billinghurst sDrewth 16:52, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

The disagreement I am referring to was a mistake by an uploader, where they had uploaded the same sign twice under two file names. This required 5 or so of them to be shifted over one. You invoked COM:Overwrite, but shifting them over was the only practical option, the other being to delete them and upload them all anew. I had a particularly difficult time explaining it to you, and don't expect you to remember too well. Now, in this particular case (using File:Armenia road sign 7.1.1.svg as an example), the only thing that มองโกเลีย๔๔ appears to have changed is the Armenian language character for metres, and slightly altering the typeface for the numbers. This raises a few questions.

• Is the Armenian language character as uploaded by Gigillo83 incorrect? If so, มองโกเลีย๔๔ is correct in overwriting with the correct character.
• Was the Armenian language character as uploaded by Gigillo83 correct at one time, but since been changed by the Armenian Government? If so, than มองโกเลีย๔๔ would be wrong in overwriting, and their version should be uploaded separately as a new file, and Gigillo83's file should be renamed as now obsolete.

Neither of these questions are raised, or answered, simply by invoking COM:Overwrite. This similarly applies in instances where the typeface is changed, or where the proportions are changed. If the original file is wrong, correcting it is the right thing to do. If it has been revised by the relevant authority, the revision should be uploaded as a new image. Just saying "COM:Overwrite!" is like using a sledgehammer. Fry1989 ^eh? 17:19, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

@Fry1989: Traffic signs at Gigolo 83 are uploaded to both Armenia and Georgia. The font does not conform to the standard ГОСТ 10807-78 font used by the Soviet Union. And even worse, the Georgian alphabet is sloppy. Was different from the customs, such as customs meters. The police that I tried very well at checking the pictures would be the web images of Armenia And check the accuracy before uploading over the wrong file, so there is a problem. 1, Name 2, Picture is not suitable reason And wasting space, not a reason. มองโกเลีย๔๔17:41, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Well, I didn't simply say Com:Overwrite, I provided specific instruction about the issue, and how to progress on the appropriate user talk page. But let us not quibble about that reality.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:11, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Conalep seal

I have uploaded a new version of - File:Conalep_logo_1980.jpg without the geometric stuff behind, could you delete the other one? regards. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 03:27, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

@TheBellaTwins1445: Commons:Deletion request or duplicate request are the means we have, not requests to user pages. To me it would seem to be a case {{Svg}} and later a replacement and a deletion request.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:41, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Rename

Please rename File:Schöningen WIK Ausgrabung 13 Serangeli 01.jpg in File:Schöningen WIK Ausgrabung 12 Serangeli 01.jpg. The 12 is important. AxelHH (talk) 01:01, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@AxelHH: Rather than give direction, it works better if you give a little bit of a narrative of why a move should be made. In a case like this, a simple statement of please revert the move that I requested. I am accountable for a move that I make, the deletion that I make, so having the reasoning and the background gives me confidence that I am meeting the policy requirements.  Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:12, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Please see the discussion under File talk:Schöningen WIK Ausgrabung 13 Serangeli 01.jpg. The 12 is important because it is the number of the "Fundstelle". (founding place)--AxelHH (talk) 08:22, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@AxelHH: I have already done it. I was more giving you pointers for future reference. If you had included that link in the rename request initially, it would have been done first time around.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:51, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

OK. --AxelHH (talk) 14:00, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

File nominated for deletion "presenting norman mailer"

i received a notification from you a few hours before i posted a substantial text (where directed) on reason to keep the file and also a rename request. The content was not clear from my title. i request your reconsideration.Janvermont (talk) 15:57, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

==adding to the preceding discussion - just learned how to ping or request response - nominated for deletion "presenting norman mailer"

@Billinghurst: i'm not sure I have the name parameter correct but please let me know if you read my explanation on the deletion request page. thank you, JanvermontJanvermont (talk) 20:59, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Janvermont: I nominated the file citing Com:Scope, and your commentary on the DR is all that is required. I don't handle files that I nominate, others will express their opinions and someone will assess the relative arguments and determine our consensus.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:38, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

file:presenting norman mailer.tif for reference.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:39, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

==referring to your addition to the presenting norman mailer. itoook everything you said about scope etc. into account added text and published with my name and wound up with them reporting there is no page called ...Deletion/ presenting Norman Mailer. Im not accuraate here i know i amoverwhelmed with all i have bben through,. Ifyou can help or advise me i would appreciate it.Janvermont (talk) 16:11, 16 June 2020 (UTC) t

File:Hemingway crater.png

I disagree with you declining to rename the file from "Hemingway crater" to "Hemingway crater EN0131771988M". First, there are other photographs of this crater, and this one is not the best one, and so it should have an additional component of the name to distinguish it. Second, I am trying to harmonize MESSENGER images (such as this one) to include the NASA photo number as I have done for images of the surface of the moon for the most part. The NASA source image ties to the spacecraft that acquired it. Jstuby (talk) 03:20, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

@Jstuby: Please see Commons:File renaming for the community's direction to admins, and your proffered reasons are not there; and to note that you are misreading harmonise, it is not about getting them to your preferred naming. Harmonise is about flags, and football jerseys and train icons so they can be templated. Per the instruction, you EW welcome to create redirects from what you think is a better name, to the original files.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:41, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Coat Of Arms Of Belarus

• 
  1919 — 1927
• 
  1927 — 1937
• 
  1937 — 1938
• 
  1938 — 1949

I didn't understand the reason [1] Валко (talk) 02:51, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

@Валко: It needs evidence to be changed. I cannot just change it based on a single user's statement/opinion. The {{Fact disputed}} process is one means to do it. Or talk to the uploader and request them to request a change.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:55, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

I did write into the edit summary the reason for the decline.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:56, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

[2] [3] Валко (talk) 03:05, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

ru:Герб Белорусской ССР be:Герб Беларускай ССР Валко (talk) 03:29, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

@Валко: Please use the template:fact disputed process and the supporting information onto the file's talk page, rather than on this user_talk page. This is justifying to the community why we are making a change; admins and filemovers are just the conduit.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:08, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

See the difference File:Emblem of Byelorussian SSR 1937.jpg Валко (talk) 13:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

@Валко: Apologies for the delay. This is not a debate for my user talk page, it is a documentation for the rename of the file and belongs on the talk page of the file. I have pointed you to the process, please use it.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:21, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Request of Revision Deletion

Hello, sorry for any mistakes; I'm not native speaker of English.

I want to request Revision deletion on File:Gwanchon Station Front 1.jpg, which I uploaded. After uploading I realized that I didn't blur the car numbers and person's face, so I blurred them in a later version, but I can still see them in old versions. I'd appreciate it if you could delete 3 revisions, everything except present version, as it contains car numbers and face.

Commons:Revision deletion stated I can request this in any administrator, so I came to the first person I saw. Have a good day :) --Aspere (talk) 12:46, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

@Aspere:  Done Two revisions removed from public view.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:25, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! --Aspere (talk) 02:16, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

US Photos

Hi Billinghurst. I hope you're good. I uploaded this file. This photo is taken by the US Embassy employee. So it is public domain according to US law. But the embassy posted this photo only on Instagram. Would there be a problem in this situation? Wherever a public domain work is published, I think it will be public domain. :) Uncitoyen (talk) 19:44, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Uncitoyen: With regard to {{PD-USGov}} the required evidence is that it is a US Gov employee, and less the location of the publication. So do you have enough evidence to ensure we can apply that tag? As a general pointer, you will find Com:VPC a quicker and more reliable place for answers.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:28, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I added Instagram link of the US Embassy in Turkey for the source of the photo. In this context, the name of the embassy employee and the name of the embassy are written in Turkish in the source description of this photo. The fact that the person who took the photo didn't publish it on his own personal social media accounts also suggests that it was the first time that the embassy published it. I think that's enough for now. But if there is a problem in the future, I ask the relevant pages. Thanks. Uncitoyen (talk) 09:02, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

About File:Fresco of Saint Sebastian in Salardú, Vall d'Aran, Spain.jpg

Hi Billinghurst. I think your reverted my edit in File:Fresco of Saint Sebastian in Salardú, Vall d'Aran, Spain.jpg

My edit consisted in changing link http://bode.diee.unica.it/~giua/SEBASTIAN/ into https://www.alessandro-giua.it/SEBASTIAN/. I am the creator of this website on the Iconography of Saint Sebastian. The site was originally hosted at the address bode.diee.unica.it but since 2015 that server went down. I recently was able to migrate the website to the new address www.alessandro-giua.it.

Please do not use the address bode.diee.unica.it as that server does not exists any more. Sorry if this message is a breach of netiquette: I am not very familiar with the way one is supposed to [talk] on wikipedia.

Alessandro — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alessandro Giua (talk • contribs) 10:33, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

@Alessandro Giua: A source is a source, and shouldn't be removed. Please consider that we can add extra information without removing source details, we do have {{Deadlink}} if required.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:52, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Infinite IP blocks

Hi! Thx for your info "earlier" ;) I checked the ones I blocked. Mostly learning curve I guess. Sorry for the late reply. Stay safe, Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 08:18, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Hedwig in Washington: no issue at all, it was all courtesy ping. I was cleaning up my mistakes and left messages for others. It was an issue when infinite was the default.  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:23, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy pings'n things deserve a reply IMHO. So, thx again! :) -Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 08:27, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Edit filters

Maybe try Commons:Village_pump/Proposals/Archive/2020/02#Proposal_to_implement_blocking_by_abuse_filters again? Of the last 1000 blocks, 30% were spam related.--BevinKacon (talk) 15:07, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Basse-Normandie

Hi, BN doesn't exist anymore, what's the point to put a link just to find it's a redirection page? A prank to make people loose their time? Also, there's a résumé field, it's nice when it's filled. --Birdie (talk) 08:36, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

@Birdie: {{Category redirect}} works with HotCat, so when people put in old names it will assign the redirected category. It is standard protocol in such situations, per Commons:Rename a category. If you feel that this usage would be better with a reason, then feel free to add one.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:05, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Need help is moving few files from commons to local (kn)

Hi,

As per the copyright guidelines, we can upload the works to local but not to the commons. So, can you move the following files from commons to kannada wikisource (https://kn.wikisource.org/) ?

• File:ಬೆಳಗಿದ ದೀಪಗಳು.pdf
• File:ತೊಳೆದ ಮುತ್ತು.pdf
• File:ಯವನ ಸೈರಂಧ್ರಿ.pdf
• File:ಔರಂಗಜೇಬ.pdf

Please let me know if you need any more info

Gshguru (talk) 10:35, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@Gshguru: I have moved these files to knWS. Would you please check that the files are to the right names, and that I have the right descriptions in place. Once that is confirmed, please get back to me and I will delete these four files locally.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:20, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Thanks. I have confirmed that all books have been moved and names are correct.

@Gshguru: and the descriptions align with the right files? Also are the files to now be deleted here?  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:27, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: They all look good to me. Gshguru (talk) 03:07, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

 deleted  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:58, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Email: Deletion of our Filmposter "Der Sportpenner"

“	thank you for keeping an eye open on ownership violation. I think its important and great that there are people outhere taking care of it.   In our case I've to admit you reached out to the wrong guy. I'm the director, screenwriter and executive producer of the German Film "Der Sportpenner". Please find more informations under www.sportpenner.de   I own every right of the film. I even did the poster with our graphic design agency myself. The poster is a collage of several photos on which I also own every right.   The film is distributed by Studio Hamburg Enterprises which belongs to ZDF, Germanys biggest TV Network.   I hope you see that everything is legal and fine with our film.   In an email from Wikipedia they mentioned I should contact you first before doing any other formal way. It would be great if you could bring back our poster on our Wikiside. I'm really not familiar with Wiki's languge and programmation so it would save me a lot of time.   If you have any questions plaese contact me under <email address>.   All the best and thank you in advance.	”
—Centurio Graz (talk · contribs), email

@Centurio Graz: Please see Commons:Copyright for the policy, then look at Commons:OTRS for how to lodge your permission as the copyright owner. For any questions or direction, then please take them to Commons:VPC for solutions and guidance.  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:17, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Once you have your permissions in place, you can make an undeletion request at Commons:Undeletion request  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:19, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Herschel

Hey. Regarding File:Hector Macpherson - Herschel (1919).djvu (currently in exile at s:File:Hector Macpherson - Herschel (1919).djvu) and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hector Macpherson - Herschel (1919).djvu. It looks to me like you might have jumped the gun a bit on this one. Nobody was arguing much for its deletion, except SF00 as the nom, but they'd raised doubts even before the close (Ellin closed it as housekeeping because you'd already deleted the file).

Looking at it now it looks like this is the first edition (1919 is the first publication found for this work), and it lists both UK and US publication info on its title page. The primary publisher is the UK-based "SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE", whose stated goal was to push Christian books both at home and in the British colonies, primarily in America (and later on in Scotland and India). In other words, absent any actual evidence to the contrary the most reasonable assumption is that this was a pre-1923 simultaneous UK+US publication and thus within policy for Commons.

Since this was deleted on Commons I don't want to transwiki our previously-transwikied-the-other-way copy here, over the rev history of the original. Could you have a look and undelete it here if there aren't any blockers? --Xover (talk) 09:12, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Xover: Precautionary principle of lessons learnt often just has me transferring to enWS rather than argue here, or find out that they have deleted despite commentary, and me moving it then. The edition of the work is co-published in London and New York, though there is no clarity in the work that it wasn't previously published in the UK. If we can demonstrate that it is the first edition then we can undelete it.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:59, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Is lack of evidence of any previous editions sufficient? In that I haven't found any, I mean. --Xover (talk) 11:45, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Xover: Macpherson died in 1956, so all his works under copyright in UK, so no we cannot bring it here. I need to pay better attention not half-pay attention to two things. That it was jointly published in the USA makes no difference here, and it is post 1925 works that it makes a different to us at enWS in some circumstances.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:59, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Heralds of God

And Commons:Deletion requests/File:Heralds of God.djvu; discussed on enWS at Index:Heralds of God.djvu. If the work was simultaneously published (within 30 days) it is a US work for Commons policy purposes, and the non-renewed copyright means it's PD-US.

This DR was actually closed (vs. the "housekeeping" close above), so maybe it'd be better to take it through COM:DRV? --Xover (talk) 11:54, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Xover: Work is under copyright in UK and EU, so cannot be hosted here. That it was jointly published in US and non-renewed is what allows us to reproduce at enWS and why it was moved there.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:02, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

You sure? I was convinced simultaneous publication meant it was considered a US work for both US copyright purposes and for Commons policy purposes. Since one was published in 1919 (US copyright has expired) and the other failed to observe US formalities (renewal) they are PD in the US for copyright purposes; and because they were simultaneously published in the US the "country of origin" is the US for Commons policy purposes. No? --Xover (talk) 12:55, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Xover: You are correct that the work is public domain in the US, which is the sole criteria for enWS, and sufficient for WMF, and why they were repatriated to enWS. Commons:Copyright rules states two parts for scope with regard to copyright--public domain in US and home country--and has that tighter criteria, and probably more due to their concerns around EU copyright claims.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:19, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Deletion request for files with same problem

Please don't create separate deletion requests for files with same problem. Help:VisualFileChange.js is great tool to handle that. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:47, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Geeth chaturvadhi.png

Hi billinghurst - quick question about the {{duplicate}} request on File:Geeth chaturvadhi.png that you fulfilled recently. I remember seeing the deleted file (File:Geet Chaturvedi-Orkut.jpg) had either similar or bit higher resolution and no bars of color bordering the photograph (on its left and lower sides), but I'm not too confident about that. Wouldn't performing it in the opposite direction be more appropriate? Thanks, Aranya (talk) 03:49, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Ugh, I shouldn't have been deleting a jpg and merging with a png. my mistake. I have recovered the file. Both are able to exist, they are not duplicate.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:58, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Kaitlan Collins.png

Could you explain this edit you made, removing the copyvio complaint? The image seems to have been incorrectly tagged with CC-3.0, where the YouTube source does not support that. — Aᴋʀᴀʙʙıᴍ ^talk 16:13, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

You are correct.  Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:53, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

File:Der Gründer - Kinoplakat.png

Hello. Can you please undo the deletion? I created the poster myself. Of course you can also find it on other sites. Such as. in the IMDB or on my homepage www.hordesfilm.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hordes (talk • contribs)

@Hordes: Please go through the Com:OTRS process to give permission for it to be onsite, and then progress to Com:Undelete. It is not usual for us to have personal or modern commercial artwork onsite, and then when it is within scope, it needs permissions. As a copyright holder I am sure that you understand why have some rigour to this process.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:52, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

PDF vs DjVu

File:The siyar-ul-Mutakherin, a history of the Mahomedan power in India during the last century (IA siyarulmutakheri00ghulrich).pdf (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

In the light of this (weak) consensus and the fact that the DjVu does not exist at IA, so cannot be verified, can you restore the PDF please? Though some folks may advocate for DjVu, there are probably more that don't, and in particular the IA no longer supports it. There may be differences in the quality of the two versions, I would be interested to see if a deletion rationale could be raised on one of them for those differences.

I recommend that any deletions of this specific type are allowed to go to a DR rather than speedied without explanation. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 12:20, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Correction: I can find the original DjVu, it's not deleted, just not actually displayed on the webpage for the document. I guess this is part of them abandoning the format since 2016.

By the way, on a tech tangent, implicitly neither format is the original scans which IA also holds. Were there a discussion about differences in quality, the original scanned pages could be used as the benchmark of how to judge those differences. --Fæ (talk) 12:31, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

@Fæ: (ec) Are you needing the pdf or just uploading just because? The djvu work is as available for individual page reproduction as easily as the PDF and is being reproduced at a Wikisource. DjVu are created on the fly when uploaded here, with the djvu xml at IA, so I am uncertain or the relevance of why it is not at IA. Half the reason that we have stopped having pdf/djvu duplicates of the same edition is that someone will start a reproduction of the pdf format, and we have problematic duplication, and the PDFs are generally more problematic from the WSs' perspective. 12:32, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Re scans themselves, we recommend that the JP2000 are used for image reproduction. And the rest is all dependent on when the works were taken from IA as they have rederived works over time, either on request or due to other aspects in their tech development.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:35, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

The rationales here are harmonization, consensus (per the VP discussion) and the appropriate use of speedies. Rather than deletion, both versions may be kept without causing anyone a headache, with the versions linked. Because a consensus exists to keep the PDFs when duplicates exist, speedies for these cases can be considered outside the definitions given at COM:CSD. I have no personal immediate need for the file, my concern is the 800,000 documents already uploaded as part of COM:IA books. Had there been a consensus to prefer DjVu, then the reasoning here about deletions would be different, as would be the way the batch upload project works and whether to avoid multiple formats being created for the same work; which could have been done by testing for the sha1 values for all possible formats. --Fæ (talk) 12:42, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

I am sorry, I am not taking that conversation as a consensus opinion of the community. For a transcription purpose the DjVus are significantly better when coming through to ProofreadPage and the text extraction process. We have had a DjVu version here for five years and that has started to be transcluded, and the PDF does not serve a better reason. I have explained the difficulties with competing djvu vs pdfs. The file format conversation is not particularly relevant as that more relates to the use of images and you are not demonstrating to me that you are using the images. We typically delete PDF files that are solely uploaded as image holders.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:54, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Could you provide a link to the best policy or guideline that supports We typically delete PDF files that are solely uploaded as image holders? As for the consensus issue, the weak consensus for PDF over DjVu exists, and unfortunately I don't know of a consensus, even a weak one, that states the reverse.

To summarize, I have asked for an undeletion and you have refused to do this. As far as policy and consensus can be produced, a speedy deletion action on this upload today was out of process, and deletions of this type should go to full deletion request in those circumstances. I'll take up UNDEL in order to establish a precedent because so many files many be affected in the long term, and to protect the harmonization that is normal for large collections. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 13:05, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

I don't see a valid reason for an undelete and a progression to an DR, so of course an UDR is the means to progress. I don't think that this is precedent setting space.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:32, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

file:SCP-173.jpg

I recently nominated File:SCP-173.jpg for speedy deletion on the grounds that both the photograph and pictured sculpture are demonstrably copyrighted works (go to the bottom of the page) and that there was zero evidence that the image is licensed under the Creative Commons as suggested by the uploader. You denied the request and told me to nominate for a standard deletion. Why? This seems like a textbook F1 criteria for speedy deletion and I’m quite frankly a bit worried that a Wikimedia project is telling people they are free to use a plainly copyrighted work. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 07:16, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

@Spirit of Eagle: The file had both a DR and Speedy tag, I just removed the speedy and said let the DR discussion take place. When both are in place, we tend to let the DR take precedence. 07:28, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Csd and Dr

Hello @Billinghurst: please have a look below on the list of files :-

• File:Navneet Chauhan.png
• File:Navneet.jpg

Thanks for your consideration. --C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 07:54, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

 Done thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:03, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Country of origin in copyright

Hey,

Following up the discussion here (and the more recent independent one that popped up at WS:S), I eventually had to go ask the grown-ups for help: COM:VP/C#Source country vs simultaneous publication.

The summary so far seems to be that while "country of origin is the US for policy purposes for simultaneously published works" is correct for some cases, the legal situation and how it applies to Commons policy is a little more complicated. In any case, I haven't yet gone back to look at the works we previously discussed in light of Clindberg's explanation, but thought you might be interested in the discussion. --Xover (talk) 05:43, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Reason for keeping Low res watermarked version

Hi, is it possible to know the reason why File:Maputo_Airport_VOA_Português.jpg and File:Avenida_Eduardo_Mondlane,_Maputo_(2).jpg have been marked as other versions rather than deleting the images in favor of File:Check-in_Counters_at_Maputo_Airport,_Mozambique,_VOA.jpg and File:Avenida_Eduardo_Mondlane_VOA_Português_2.jpg that doesn't have VOA watermark and are of higher quality?Remitamine (talk) 22:49, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

@Remitamine: They were not exact duplicates so they should not be speedy deleted. There is no issue with having variations of images.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:14, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: I think keeping variation of images can be considered when there is a value-added from having another variant(ex: cropping an image with multiple people).Remitamine (talk) 22:49, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

@Remitamine: Neither your nor my opinion is how it works for speedy deletions. You are talking about a DR which is then the consensus of the community, and a path which you are welcome to follow.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:56, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

IA books...

You've probably heard about User talk:Fæ/IA books.

I am also leaving a note here about Category:Public domain files with no author lifetime information.

You have excellent skills in finding often obscure biographical and biblographical sources, and so your efforts in reducing ambigutiy about the status of potential works for Wikisource would be greatly appreciated.

(Another useful area of expertise, is in identifying works that Commons already has as DJVU,(vs PDF), and for which the images in the various 'harmonized' categories could be used over those from the DJVU depending on quality.)

Thanks in advance. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:50, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

I have had a quick look, and that is a fair bit of work. The templates that are there need data fixes, and addition of templates and categories to by someone who has time. Of four fixes I found the authors in Wikidata and it just needed a little searching, and then updates, some category creations, or creator creations. I needed to create one author at WD.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:11, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Your words

(on my talk page) "The rules for scope just state in use at a wiki, and have nothing to do with whether the page in which the usage occurs failed a draft assessment or not, and that is even for a DR..." Would you mind closing the nonsense DRs about this and this? I am not asking a favour, I am just informing something that has not been done and disturbs me as I see this as disruptive editing. --E4024 (talk) 01:21, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

It is just their opinion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:44, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

File:The land of the New Guinea pygmies; an account of the story of a pioneer journey of exploration into the heart of New Guinea (IA landofnewguineap00rawl).pdf]

Thanks for adding the details, unfortunately owing to the lifetime of the authors identified this might not be compatible with Commons Licensing (London publication, and an author/contributor who died after 1950)

The next question would be if it can be rescued to English Wikisource for local hosting as a pre 1923 work from outside the US, (It's dated 1913) I am reasonably sure that there a number of other volumes uploaded as part of the IA books project that may be in the position of being okay in the US, but not in origin country like the UK. See

• Category:IA mirror related deletion requests/deleted‎
• Category:IA mirror related deletion requests
• Category:Internet Archive (potential copyvio)

If you wanted to review for 'localizable' files to rescue. Some may have already been deleted though.

@Fæ: , Billighurst is a senior admin on English Wikisource, They may be able to advise on what files that can't be on Commons, might be possible to put on English Wikisource locally. Appraising them of what's been happening with the IA Books upload project, ahead of any major announcement in January would also be advised. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:09, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

A bit of patience would be sensible. It's Christmas week, and with 'super Covid' putting my city in extreme lockdown, I'm sure folks are quite busy and stressed, not a good time to start complex discussions. --Fæ (talk) 11:15, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

@Fae: Your comments are understood, and will be noted. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:47, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00 and Fæ: He is not the author of the work, so I didn't nominate it. No idea why IA lists him, and you should explore that within the work prior to any nomination. The work if necessary does fit within enWS's scope as it is pre-1923 publication.

ShakespeareFan00: you don't need to tell Fæ who I am, we have both been around for years, interacted many times, even met in London years ago.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:33, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

(re Herbert Spencer Harrison ) See page 9 of the scans, The preface mentions a paper he wrote as being Chapter XIX of the book. I would suggest localisation.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:48, 21 December 2020 (UTC) (edited ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:31, 21 December 2020 (UTC))

Better to delete rather than localise unless we know that someone is going to work on it.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:02, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00: Are you thinking about what you are doing? Be more attuned to reality, please do not tag the files that are clearly out of copyright. I saw you tag a 1799 published work! Don't make unnecessary work for OTHERS. If you are going to do it, then different matter.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:39, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Noted, and reviewing uses, to remove "unjustifed" uses of {{Lifetime needed}} template or {{Checkauthors}} ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:47, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

An apology and a request...

Firstly, apologies about the issue you identified above. When asking other contributors for assistance by using tags like {{Lifetime needed}}, it's entirely reasonable to expect them not to have to do unnecessary work. So I am in the process of reviewing the uses of the templates concerned to remove "unecessary" usages.

I've also created a low-priority variant of {{Checkauthors}} that sets a different category,(see {{Listauthors}}) for the items that are sufficiently old that the author lifetime information isn't essential. (I still think it's useful to encourage users to add it, mostly to identify the works of prominent or important authors in a field, but it's clearly a much much lower priority task).

Your considerable expertise in finding biographical (and bibliographical) sources, and in evaluating the potential authorship issues with many many works at Wikisource and on Commons is appreciated. Would you be willing to leave some notes on an appropriate talk page, which could form the basis of a "draft" guide to determining authorship and status of works, a guide which could reasonably be linked from the templates concerned or their documentation? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:05, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Based on the recent discussion at VPC, I suggest an absolute terminus ante quem, for books, of 1869. Any copyright assertion before that would be extremely hypothetical in any country. Naturally there are lots of countries of publication (Russia, China, Japan, Australia) that a calculation of which year before which everything can be considered public domain would be much later, but unfortunately COM:CRT does not address this basic question consistently. --Fæ (talk) 11:14, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

@Fæ: Let's have this discussion at VPC. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:04, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

@Fæ: Absolutely a good heuristic.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:10, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Delete

@Billinghurst: Please delete it https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kantor_Bupati_Labuhan_Batu.jpg and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pemandian_Aek_Pala.jpg Cek Indra (talk) 03:09, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

@Cek Indra: They cannot be speedied per policy, please follow processes for deletion requests.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:26, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Because the two pictures (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kantor_Bupati_Labuhan_Batu.jpg and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pemandian_Aek_Pala.jpg) I found on the internet....Please delete it immediately--Cek Indra (talk) 13:38, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

 Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:42, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

deletion request

Hello, I hope you review the deletion request that you submitted on this file:

File:A Man Publicly Submits to a Life of Naked Service and Obedience.ogv

Since it is a file against the policy // موسى (talk) 14:52, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

@موسى: Deletion requests are for the discussion of all to reach a consensus on whether a file is to be kept or not. There is no need to come to my user talk page to further discuss, please make any comment you have about the file at its DR.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:51, 31 December 2020 (UTC)