User talk:LX/Archive/2013: April to June

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The following discussions from User talk:LX have been archived. Please do not change them. Any further comments, even if they deal with a matter discussed below, should be made at User talk:LX.

Hi LX. I've blocked this user for a week. Let me know if the issues continue when he comes back. INeverCry 00:35, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good. I'll try to remember to keep an eye out. LX (talk, contribs) 07:53, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS[edit]

Hi LX. I was wondering, since you had OTRS access in the past, why don't you request it again? It would certainly help us and you. :) Regards, Trijnsteltalk 13:28, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate that. The reasons are mainly that it makes a lot less sense without being an administrator and that it potentially comes with a lot of the same problems as long as Commons policy is to ignore key aspects of copyright law in the jurisdiction I'm in. LX (talk, contribs) 14:19, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

thanks[edit]

Thanks so much for the feedback on the Welcome to Commons draft! I've done a big set of revisions based on the feedback so far; if you have a chance, please take a look and let me know if you notice anything else that can be improved. We're hoping to have the text more or less set by a week from now, so that the designer can get started building the layout.--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 18:05, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The recent changes look good from a quick glance. Things are a bit busy at the moment, but I'll see if I get more time to have a closer look in the next few days. Thanks, LX (talk, contribs) 11:21, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

LX to answer your questions and concerns on the Killbot.jpg, Korn, 2013.jpg, and the J Devil (Jonathan Davis).jpg's from the OTRS Noticeboard. All 3 files are owned solely by Killbot, Jonathan Davis, and Korn. The photographers (Terrance Blanton, Deven Taylor, and Rick Wenner) were hired to take those photos but the copyrights are owned by each of the respective artists. Prospect Park, the manager for each of the artists, authorized me to release those photos to the Commons. As the emails indicate from Brian Simpson from Prospect Park. Sebastien Paquet is Korn's photographer and has sent OTRS an email authorizing me to release those photos for him and Korn. These are busy people and they have given me the permissions to post them for them so that Wikipedia has current photos of the artists. I am a close personal friend of Jonathan Davis' and try to help get things added to Wikipedia that normally never get updated due to the permissions needed to get them uploaded and released properly. Tell me what you need so I can provide OTRS with what is necessary to undelete the files and so they will not be deleted yet again. I have provided emails on all files directly from the proper releasing authorities so tell me what's needed to fix this and I'll get it done. Nbcwd (talk) 00:56, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I see that you've already received replies at Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard#Image:Killbot.jpg and Image:J Devil (Jonathan Davis).jpg and that the deleted files (except File:Korn NYC.jpg) have been restored. My main concern was some discrepancies with the file description pages, which have now been fixed. Basically, our file description pages should always credit the correct authors, and the author of a photograph is still the photographer even if they don't hold the copyright (which could happen if it's a work made for hire or a copyright transfer was made in writing). The OTRS folks should make sure that the information on the file description pages match the information they've received via e-mail when they mark a file for which the permission has been verified. When I asked them to do that, I guess some other issues turned up. Good to see that's now been resolved! LX (talk, contribs) 18:11, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thankfully it's all taken care of now...I think! ;) I decided not to provide more information for the Korn NYC.jpg as that photo was from 2011 and they have since taken a recent band photo which is the Korn, 2013.jpg. I will be uploading more photos of the members to use on their individual Wikipedia articles soon and HOPE I now have the right method to do it so that the photos are cleared for use on Wikipedia. I only upload ones that are owned by Korn and all of their members/projects as those are the only ones I'm authorized to upload per their management. Thank you again for all your help! Nbcwd (talk) 13:12, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Plcoopr[edit]

Thank you for the information I hope I got this right Yes...I think they are on there way to being deleted, rightfully so. I will read the polices again to see if i can get a deeper understanding. I am trying to become a responsible editor of Wikipedia.Plcoopr (talk) 18:51, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you think that Swedish FOP does not cover building interiors as in this case, please kindly file a deletion request. I ask you only because you are experienced in Swedish FOP matters, unlike me. Every country's FOP is different. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:02, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: On second thought, you can ignore my message. I did not know that the architect Gunnar Asplund died in 1940. So, images of the building would be in the public domain anyway. Sorry to disturb you. --Leoboudv (talk) 05:06, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. As for the general case, Swedish copyright law states that "buildings may be depicted freely." I don't see anything that limits it to building exteriors. I'd say the only potential complicating factor would be decorative elements that are not an inherent utilitarian part of the building, like gargoyles. LX (talk, contribs) 16:57, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Advocaat[edit]

Background: User talk:Howcheng#File mover rights (permanent link)

There is a significant difference between advocaat and Dick Advocaat: one is for drinking, and one is for hiring to run your football team. Having a photo called "advocaat.jpg" is stupid and wrong, because if an idiot wants to upload a photo of a glass of rich eggy liqueur, that idiot will call it "advocaat.jpg", and all the articles about the football coach will be altered, and many people will be upset. And there are many idiots who upload photos to Commons without taking the time to consider the possibility that a filename may already be in use - consider this list of the first thousand filenames that are used by multiple files and the only difference is capital letters, and of which there are over twenty thousand.

There are many files that I don't rename even though much superior filenames are possible, because I don't see any justification for renaming them other than "well, this name is better". Before I act, I must judge that there is an actual serious potential for confusion -- filenames that do not have actual meaning might as well be worthless garbage. Names should be meaningful and without ambiguity. Commons is not a museum exhibit where flaws and errors must be enshrined and preserved for all eternity. I rename files if they need to be renamed, because they are not properly distinguishable from other files. File:African Bush Elephant.jpg and File:African bush elephant.jpg are completely different, but I can't think of a reason to rename either of them, so I've left them untouched. On the other hand, I renamed "African Civet.JPG" to "Habitat range of the African civet.jpg" because, although it is indeed pertinent to the African civet, the filename implies that (like "African civet.jpg") it is a photo of an African civet, but it is not. It is a map. When people try to write articles, and they use filenames in wikicode, and they make tiny little mistakes by (for instance) using capital letters for file extensions... they freak out. They clutter the help channels and the help forums and the help e-mails and they even call people who edit Wikipedia and they say WHAT'S WRONG THIS ISN'T THE PICTURE IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE WHY IS IT DIFFERENT SOMEONE VANDALIZED IT I CAN'T FIGURE THIS OUT I QUIT and then they're gone.

I support making Commons more usable by humans. I am pro-human. Commons is meant to be used, not to be worshipped in eternal unchanging perfection glory hallelujah praise Jimbo.

What is the difference between "After.jpg" and "AFTER.jpg"? Don't look at them, just tell me. What about "Abies koreana 02.JPG" and "Abies Koreana 02.jpg"? Or "90 mile Beach.JPG" and "90 mile beach.jpg"? Now explain that to your grandmother over the phone while she's trying to edit a page and getting all flustered because it's the wrong picture.

"Aberdeen street.jpg" is a street in Aberdeen, Scotland. "Aberdeen Street.jpg" is a street named "Aberdeen Street" in Hong Kong. If you honestly believe that neither of these filenames should be changed -- or if you believe that they should be changed but that Policy Does Not Allow It -- then you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. If you have any questions about other specific filemoves I've made, feel free to ask, and I'll give you a more detailed explanation of why I did it. Otherwise... back off, leave me alone, and go do something productive. DS (talk) 20:54, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that filenames should be meaningful, unambiguous and useful to humans. Many of the original names of files that you have renamed would not be accepted for new uploads, and that's a good thing.
Our file renaming guidelines provide for moving files with completely meaningless or misleading names. The examples it gives for completely meaningless names are "22785u9ob807b3c4f4" and "DSC 1342", and misleading names are exemplified with "MY CUTE MOUSE" for something more aptly named "Dutch pet rabbit" and "1BIGGest nOSE everS33n" for something more appropriately described as "John Doe at concert." It explicitly states that files should not be renamed simply because the new name looks a bit better. A filename consisting only of the depicted person's surname (like File:Advocaat.jpg or File:Gusenbauer.jpg) is far from ideal, but it is neither misleading nor completely meaningless. Adding the person's given name is an example of "the new name looks a bit better."
Now, I don't believe in following guidelines blindly. There are exceptions to almost every rule, and there is nothing wrong with dealing with unusual cases with a bit of uncontroversial pragmatism. However, routinely deviating from agreed standards is not a good thing in a collaborative project. Doing so indicates that either the guidelines should be changed, or that what you're doing is against consensus. Indeed, renaming files on the basis that their names are too general has recently been proposed, and consensus is clearly unfavorable: Commons talk:File renaming#Too general names.
The reason that our guidelines for renaming files are this conservative is not to exhibit flaws, but that renaming files can cause problems which outweigh the benefits of a slightly better name. As far as I can see, the biggest such problems are bugs in the Mediawiki software, particularly bugzilla:35721 and bugzilla:22390. I would not be surprised if the guidelines are relaxed if/when those bugs are resolved.
Until that happens, I'd ask that you focus on uncontroversial examples (like File:22651715 b765764f49 b.jpg and File:P3240003.jpg) for a start and rely on the standard renaming rationales. You'd still have plenty of work to do for quite some time. LX (talk, contribs) 11:31, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help[edit]

Background: User talk:Martin H.#Questions (permanent link)

Hi Alex. Since you seem to be more interested in helping me than Martin I thought I'd come to you for help instead.

Ok, so it turns out I was mistaken, the person on the Russian Wikipedia never uploaded their pictures to Commons, just the Russian Wikipedia. But the pictures are the property of the user that uploaded them and they put them on free use. How can I put their pictures on Commons? --TheShadowCrow (talk) 01:15, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It would help greatly if you'd specify which files you're asking about. As for the general case, again, see Commons:Moving to Commons. LX (talk, contribs) 11:36, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I tried doing it myself, but couldn't. Here are the files.
I think the names should stay the same out of respect to the photographer. --TheShadowCrow (talk) 13:08, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, as long as the original filename is sensible, it's best to keep it the same when transferring to Commons. Then the local version can be deleted without needing to update articles where it's used.
You say that you weren't able to transfer the files. Which method did you use, and which problems did you encounter? I'd recommend Commons Helper or Commons Helper 2 after confirming your identity. LX (talk, contribs) 13:35, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My screen just crashed. I think it's working now, assuming I uploaded this file correctly. File:Robert Arzumanyan.jpg --TheShadowCrow (talk) 16:13, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, all the required information is there, but you should add some categories to the file – Category:Association football players from Armenia maybe and probably a few others. Sorry for the slow response; I'm on a business trip at the moment. LX (talk, contribs) 21:48, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Alright no problem and thank you. --TheShadowCrow (talk) 00:25, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help[edit]

Hello LX,

This User removes sana stop warning messages indicating that the page on which it was affixed does not contain enough information (like here: File:Ifni-Sahara Maritime Province Registration Ensign.gif and here: File:Tramway Casablanca Ligne 1.PNG.

In addition, it distorts the map loading Expre as their version (File:Morocco-Ottoman Empire relations.jpg, Release: October 16, 2010 at 23:59 and version: July 13, 2012 at 02:06 (mistakes on purpose)... and many others

Thank you.

--— Mouh2jijel [Talk] 08:22, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ifni-Sahara Maritime Province Registration Ensign.gif has a copyright tag, explaining that it is too simple to be protected by copyright, so I'm not sure why you think that it missing any information. I can't make sense of the speedy deletion rationale "load after a removing" that you've given for File:Tramway Casablanca Ligne 1.PNG, but obviously, it's being disputed, so instead of edit warring, I'd suggest you take it to a regular deletion discussion. In any case, I have no powers beyond your own, so I'm not sure what you want me to do. You'd be better off discussing it with Omar-toons directly, and if you need help from an administrator, use Commons:Administrators' noticeboard. LX (talk, contribs) 22:01, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you LX, I ask your help because I know you have the best experience as administrators. thank you too --— Mouh2jijel [Talk] 16:50, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Copyright Watcher Barnstar
For all the hard work you do on Commons. Thank you! Steinsplitter (talk) 17:15, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! LX (talk, contribs) 20:15, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for your detailed response to my query on the meaning of remix. I have added your comments to the relevant translation documentation files at translatewiki.net. Lloffiwr (talk) 17:24, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're most welcome. LX (talk, contribs) 18:07, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LX You can check the spelling of this card (Milk production and consumption.svg), is it contains errors in the words? thank you --— Mouh2jijel [Talk] 09:15, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The spelling is fine, but the grammar doesn't make much sense to me. I think "Country's balance" should be "Countries in balance" or "Balanced countries", which isn't the most elegant English, but I think the meaning is clear from the context. You could omit "The" in "The consumption of dairy products" and the second "per" in "kg per person and per year". The explanations of "Surplus countries" and "Deficit countries" need some work, but I don't know the underlying data well enough to make a recommendation. I'm guessing the explanation for "Surplus countries" would be something like "Production exceeds consumption by 2%", but the exact mathematics may depend on whether it's production or consumption that is used as a reference. From a data visualisation point of view, I'd also like to see bars for production expressed in the same unit next to each of the consumption bars. LX (talk, contribs) 18:58, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I made the changes on the grammar of the three images (1, 2 and 3).
These statistics were published in Ouest-France (May 22, 2013) (capture of the article).
I would like to have specific results on the production of milk in the country to add bars to the side of the consumer. But I do not know where I can find this kind of statistics. --— Mouh2jijel [Talk] 16:37, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
http://www.nddb.org/English/Statistics/Pages/Milk-Production-across-countries.aspx has statistics for 2010. Of course, to be able to compare the data, you'd need to know what year the production statistics is from, which is another thing that's missing. LX (talk, contribs) 16:54, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]