Template talk:Self/Archive 1

Archive 1

Author's Name in Template

There was some discussion at the village pump on Wikipedia English where it was suggested to insert the username in the template. Reason is that the upload history is not included when the image description is copied to a wikipedia, so the name of the user who created it will not show.

--Fred Chess 21:19, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Hm. Anyone who cares about that issue can simply write their name in the image description page (a good idea anyway, especially for the licenses that require attribution). And people who don't care won't be bothered to put their name as a parameter in a template. dbenbenn | talk 01:49, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Yea that's a good point I suppose. I have to argue though, that it didn't cross my mind though that the upload history of images wasn't copied along, so I have just written "self|cc-by-sa-all" on most of my images, to make the process go faster with the upload of my hundreds of maps and photos. But you are right -- the attribution doesn't matter so much to me. I just think that people who are looking at an image description page often wants to know who took an image or created a map. I have argued on wikipedia that the upload history should in fact be copied along with the other information to give the viewer this information. (Who suggested that the template should be modified instead).

Fred Chess 12:55, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

I guess we could modify the template, but we'd need a bot to go through and update all the pages that use it first. (Actually, perhaps we could use a new MediaWiki variable, {{ORIGINALUPLOADER}}?) I like the idea of showing the upload history on Wikipedia. Then reusers like Ask.com would automatically show the history, too. dbenbenn | talk 14:52, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

I submitted it to bugzilla, but since it may take some time I'd say we try this out once the variable gets activated... Or what do you think? Fred Chess 22:54, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

I added it, the syntaxe is :

{{Self|license|author=name of the author}}

The parameter author is optional, and without it the template looks the same as before. BenduKiwi [ | φ] - 23:40, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

author argument

The author argument does not link the author's user page or have correct grammar ("publish" should be "publishes"). No big deal, but would be nice. Thanks. Dcoetzee 02:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

You can linkify your own name by using wiki markup, i.e. use something like {{self|GFDL|author=[[User:Dcoetzee|Derrick Coetzee]]}}. I agree that that I'd be nice to fix the grammar. —RP88 00:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

This page is protected. In order to fix the grammar on this template, I request that the following line:

| <center>'''''{{{author|I, the author of this work}}},''' hereby publish it under the following license{{#if: {{{2|}}}|s|}}:''</center>

be replaced with:

| <center>'''''{{{author|I}}}, the author of this work,''' hereby publish{{#if: {{{author|}}}|es|}} it under the following license{{#if: {{{2|}}}|s|}}:''</center>

—RP88 00:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Agree with this change. However before making this change, I would like to wait to see if there is oppositio, and wait until the job queue is back at zero. -- Bryan (talk to me) 17:45, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Heh, I was about to make the same suggestion. It might need to say "hereby publishes or has in the past published" Yonatan ^talk 22:09, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, when you do that, please noinclude Template:Heavily used template. Yonatan ^talk 22:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Hehe, I got another one, change "I, the author of..." to "I, the copyright holder of..." as discussed on Template talk:PD-self Yonatan ^talk 23:20, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Done by Timichal. He did however not add the copyright holder stuff. Well... next revision then. -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:26, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi all- I came here to suggest the same template grammar fix, it seems. I used the license template {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-2.5|author=I, [[User:<user name|<user name>]]}} and got a first-person subject with a third-person verb form. It's here: Image:Chevaux2_GR76A.jpg (I don't know how to link to the image page instead of the image). Do we know if there's a legal need to keep the "I" in the statement? EHM02667 12:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

This new {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-2.5|author=I, [[User:<user name|<user name>]]}} was introduced by me on MediaWiki:Upload.js. I'm not native English, so I wouldn't know whether or not this is grammatically correct. -- Bryan (talk to me) 18:59, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Bryan- If the subject is always going to be "I" (first person singular), the line should read: I, <user name>, the copyright holder of this work, have published or hereby publish it under the following licenses:... EHM02667 00:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I've come here about the grammar as well. Since the name is Template:Self, this suggests the uploader is always the copyright holder, thus only the first person form of the verb is required. Ideally therefore 'I' should be included as part of the template, and the author parameter (if present) should additionally include the name of the user. However changing the template in this way would add an extra 'I' on all the existing pages which use the format |author=I, [[User:<user name|<user name>]].

To get the text that EHM02667 correctly suggests, the relevant line in the template should become

| <center>'''''{{{author|I}}}, the copyright holder of this work,''' have published or hereby publish it under the following license{{#if: {{{2|}}}|s|}}:''</center>

Of course this will cause any pages where the author parameter doesn't contain 'I' to be grammatically incorrect (i.e. User:Example, the copyright holder of this work, have published...), but I don't know of an easy way to check if there are any such pages. Dr pda 23:44, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Grammar

If there is an author included in the template, the grammar is "has / published". See for example Image:Warning - Wikis on toilet.svg. / Fred J 19:06, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeek. I wonder if there's a way to make it switch persons (grammatically speaking) when it says "I, <author>, ...". Looks really odd the way it is now. --SB_Johnny | ^PA! 00:02, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Well the template page does say that one shouldn't use "author" when it is oneself who is the author? / Fred J 10:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Category

It would be easier to find this license if it were in Category:License tags and Category:License tags attribution.

For items that have multiple authors, could this template support an author2, author3, etc. parameter? Lyrl 18:13, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

But it's not a license tag... Also why Category:License tags attribution? It can be used with license tags that don't have that restriction. For works with multiple authors, you can use author=Author1, Author2, Author3, etc., but it's not really "self" then, is it? Any technically, it's not authors, but copyright holders. Rocket000 (talk) 07:47, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Automatic categorization in Self-published work

All images that transclude this template are automatically categorized in Self-published work. I think it would be useful to be able to disable it, for example using an optionnal parameter nocat: {{self|GFDL}} would still work like now, but {{self|GFDL|nocat=1}} would not categorize the image.

Indeed, when one use this template whith the parameter author=, the actual copyright holder is much likely to be someone else (otherwise one would let the default "I, the copyright holder of this work..."), and thus the work cannot qualify as "self-published". A typical example would be a transfer from another project, let us say en.wikipedia: you have to use {{GFDL-user-en}} on Commons, which transcludes {{Self}}, and as a result the image will be categorized as a "self-published work", althought this is not one (you are the uploader but not the author, who is the original uploader at en.wikipedia). It would then be useful if {{GFDL-user-en}} could transclude {{Self}} with a nocat parameter, so as to avoid that.

Sorry for my bad english, I come from France. Hope you will yet be able to understand what I'm tring to say... Herr Satz (talk) 04:38, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Autotranslation

My plan is to convert this template in a autotranslated template quite soon. See {{Self/autotranslate}} for the code. Multichill (talk) 23:43, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

 Done. Multichill (talk) 13:54, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Additional parameters

This template should support pass-through of additional parameters. For an example, see the MIT License.   — C M B J   15:20, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Limited license tags

Can we expand the number of license tags allowed (Six is the maximum currently) to, let's say, 10 or so? I'm not so sure if a maximum of six is OK for all uploaders...--TUBS 09:16, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Do you know any example where six is not enough? --Slomox (talk) 11:11, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes. And gues what: I had this "problem". But this shouldn't be an argument. This was ment more like a hint to extend this limitation. I could change this template on my own but I wanted to ask hereby if there is any argument against extending the limt to let's say 10. I mean any other argument than doubts that there is an example that six is not enough ;-) --TUBS 20:22, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, there are arguments against. It adds additional loading time for example. Not that much, that it will be problematic, but it adds. So we have to weigh: how often do we need more than six licenses, is it worth the additional load etc. Therefore we need to know which files exactly need it.

At the moment I can't really think of any example where it is necessary to put more than six different licenses. --Slomox (talk) 22:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Even six is too much. Why would you ever have more than that? Actually, I never use this license because it's kinda pointless and I think we should do away with it. Just use the license(s) directly. Who is "I" anyway on non-user pages? Once someone uploads a new version it no longer makes sense... Rocket000 (talk) 23:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

This is not a license template, this is a helper template and it's certainly not pointless. "I" is the uploader or if the author is someone else use the "author" parameter to set it. This template is very useful because otherwise lot's of users and admins will start deleting images as "no source". Multichill (talk) 14:49, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Using {{Self}} counts as a source? Many admins would disagree. Self is used for works by others all the time. There's even a author parameter. Rocket000 (talk) 09:29, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Grammar

There's currently a problem with the grammar when the text includes both "I" and the username. It reads "I, xxx, has published or hereby publishes ..." This is ungrammatical: it needs to read "I, xxx, have published or hereby publish ..." Andrew Dalby (talk) 15:27, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Could you give an example? Multichill (talk) 16:26, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

migration

The migration parameter passed through to the components of {{Self}} is required for the proper functioning of {{License migration}} in the licensing update process. There are 1.7 million GFDL images to sort through, so unless you are planning to do all the self-tagged ones yourself, I'd suggest not blindly reverting the licensing update work. Dragons flight (talk) 09:38, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Template Self2

Hi everybody, there is Template:Self2 which is redirecting to Template:Self. I would recommend using a bot and changing all appearances of {{Self2}} to {{Self}} and then deleting Template:Self2. What is your opinion? --92.229.82.189 23:01, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I've already done the same for self3 and self4. Slobot can change self2 too, but I didn't do it then, cause the template is used on 295,731 pages. Doing almost 300,000 edits is a bit much for something that's not broken. --Slomox (talk) 10:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Slomox. Replacing it would be a waste of resources. Besides that the template is still used by Commonist and in move to Commons transfers. When I edit an image for Commons:License Migration Task Force/Migration I do replace self2 with self right away. Multichill (talk) 12:25, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

hereby

Can we skip world "hereby" in this template. It sounds very artificial. --Jarekt (talk) 03:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Correction in French

I read "Vous pouvez choisir la licence de votre choix." It is better to write "Vous pouvez appliquer la licence de votre choix."

Cantons-de-l'Est (talk) 01:57, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Change self to pass attribution

Hi guys, I was thinking about changing this template to pass attribution. The author= field could be passed to the Creative Commons attribution field to make it clearer. We could also add an additional field to this template called "attribution" to override it. Take for example File:Geglazuurde aardewerk.jpg

Soyer Isabelle at nl.wikipedia, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publishes it under the following license:

would look like

Soyer Isabelle at nl.wikipedia, the copyright holder of this work, has published or hereby publishes it under the following license :

Multichill (talk) 17:46, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

•  Support Reusing the data so we do not have to type it in twice sounds like a good idea to me. --MGA73 (talk) 17:49, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Sure, time-saver for future and backwards compatible. Why not ? Krinkle (talk) 18:06, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
  •  Done. Multichill (talk) 17:16, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

New implementation

See Template:Self/new. Multichill (talk) 17:18, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Anyone? I just converted {{Information}} and plan on doing this template in the next couple of days. Multichill (talk) 12:20, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Do it. Rocket000 (talk) 23:23, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Multichill (talk) 19:12, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh, now I understand what you're doing. Good idea. Could you do it to template:delete too perhaps? It would be useful for users to see an image is about to be deleted. / Fred J (talk) 18:58, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

And once again after a switch to the new system I have to report: 'nds' doesn't work any more. --Slomox (talk) 21:44, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

And once again I tell you to translate it at translatewiki. It's not possible for me to import the current translations. Takes about 2 hours to do all translations and if you already have something to work with, even less. Multichill (talk) 23:43, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

If you cannot import the translations, don't change the template. It's unacceptable to change a template to a state in which it doesn't work correctly and then tell other users to fix that. --Slomox (talk) 02:04, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

This is a perfectly acceptable trade off to me. You just have to translate [1] [2] [3] & [4]. Multichill (talk) 08:45, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Could you please explain why you reverted my edit? Multichill (talk) 23:04, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Before activating it, you should migrate any string present at Commons to translatewiki. -- User:Docu at 00:58, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

"This is a perfectly acceptable trade off to me" :) No, I agree, but was that worth reverting such a high use template? I hope there's more to it. Rocket000 (talk) 10:37, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Currently there are 54 language versions of this template. Translatewiki seems to have just around 30. This change makes us loose 1 third of the versions. -- User:Docu at 11:42, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

The "new implementation" is just that: a new implementation of the same thing done in a different way. The implementation does not provide any new features, is not superior. There is no advantage in the usefulness of the affected template for the reader, the template stays the same. It just changes some background processes. And it removes dozens of translations. So a major disadvantage for the reader. That's the reason for the revert.

The solution is easy. If Multichill or anybody else wants to change to the new implementation, just make sure translations are not lost. The texts are all available in the subtemplates. You just have to copy them over. I am a volunteer and I don't like being told (I being told and dozens of other people who translated this template): "Oh yeah, you already translated this template, but now do it a second time, cause I felt like 'the translations need to be done in a different place' but I didn't feel like importing existing ones". Actually I wasn't even told. The template was changed and if I hadn't checked it myself, I hadn't even noticed the loss and the translation would just be gone. --Slomox (talk) 12:02, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. I didn't know that many were lost in the transition. Rocket000 (talk) 12:08, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Change Norwegian (bokmål) text

Text for the {{Self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-3.0,2.5,2.0,1.0}}: Det tillates ikke at dette dokumentet kopieres, distribueres og/eller modifiseres under retningslinjene som beskrevet i GNU fri dokumentasjonslisens, versjon 1.2 eller hvilken som helst senere utgave utgitt av Free Software Foundation; med alle seksjoner, uten noen forsidetekster og baksidetekster

The text means that it's prohibited to copy, distribute or modify the document. Someone please remove the word "ikke". --Tannkrem (talk) 16:46, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

I reverted this edit. Multichill (talk) 17:25, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Endashes in share/remix/attribution/share alike text

In the examples on the template page only the first of the three shows the text in the share/remix/attribution/share alike text with endashes just after those bold words. Can the template be corrected so that endashes are used in all instances? Thanks Rjwilmsi 20:40, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

You mean at Template:Self/doc? It's not protected, feel free to improve the documentation. Multichill (talk) 20:45, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Grammar, redux

Could someone who's been working on this template please look in at Commons talk:Licensing#Grammatical error at GFDL-user-de? I'm very hesitant to wade in on something where others have obviously worked so hard. - Jmabel ! talk 23:54, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Mistake was fixed. We just have to wait for the code update. Multichill (talk) 08:08, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Multichill (talk) 11:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Correction in German

look here: [5]

wrong: "I, NobbiP, der Urheberrechtsinhaber dieses Werkes, veröffentlicht es hiermit unter der folgenden Lizenz:"

right: "Ich, NobbiP, der Urheberrechtsinhaber.........

--Molch-Entertainment 00:06, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

That's because someone set author I, NobbiP (check the source of the page). Multichill (talk) 21:51, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Derivative works

A derivative= parameter would make it easier to explain why the original image is free. Lophotrochozoa (talk) 00:36, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

There is also {{3-D in PD}}. If the original work is not PD, you have to list attribution, ... -- RE rillke questions? 13:53, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

PD

is it possible to add PD to the template? e.g. for File:DavidKadel.jpg -- Cherubino (talk) 12:50, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Migration

{{Edit protected}} Please replace the code with , so that the template will recognize Migration as a parameter. This does crop up from time to time (e.g., [6]). Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 21:06, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done thanks for the help. --PierreSelim (talk) 07:19, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this went well as I noticed several mistakes in the code which I fixed today ([7], [8], [9], [10]) with probably more to come. Trijnstel_talk 15:47, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

No, that's not because of the self template; it's because of an improper use of the OTRS tag as part of the template. OTRS tags need to be standalone and to tag a parameter giving the ID (a parameter which self does not pass, at least at this point). Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 23:57, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

PermissionOTRS is not a license. Below all templates, self is wrapped around, it states: “You may select the license of your choice.” Therefore it is inappropriate putting the OTRS tag into the self-wrapper and this should not be encouraged. Of course for larger batches, custom templates containing the OTRS tag could be created. -- Rillke^(q?) 12:50, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Template page breaks

The template page shows the Wiki markup break as below {| cellspacing="8" cellpadding="0" style="clear:both; margin:0.5em auto; background-color:#f0f0f0; border:2px solid #e0e0e0; direction: ltr; " class="licensetpl_wrapper" | I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following license: |}. This markup break should be fixed. --Jenith (talk) 03:01, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Suggestion to modify the template

Do we really need to duplicate the exact same terminology with multiple templates as was done in File:Durio kutej F 070203 ime.jpg. I see this a lot and never mentioned it but it seems like we can merge them into one by just adding the 3.0 version to the attribution template. and save some real estate on the page. KumiokoCleanStart (talk) 13:34, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

I think I fix it. Is that what you meant?--Jarekt (talk) 04:45, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Yep that's perfect thanks. Sorry I should have clarified. I would have just gone ahead and done it but I didn't have access. KumiokoCleanStart (talk) 05:10, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Format of the template

I noticed, that when using a double license, the outlook of the box nicely extends over the whole width of the page (see Example 1). However, as soon, as there is only one licence mentioned, the box in the licensing section is smaller and centered (see Example 2). It does not look good. Could we change the code to make it cover the whole width of the page? --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 17:34, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

CENTER tags

{{Editprotected}}

Please replace the obsolete <center> tags by CSS. Helder 16:15, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I am not sure what you mean. Can you make necessary changes to Template:Self/sandbox and me or other admin will update the live version. Thanks. --Jarekt (talk) 17:05, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

@Jarekt: something like this. Helder 02:15, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Or rather this ↔ User: Perhelion (Commons: = crap?) 12:27, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

 Done thanks --Jarekt (talk) 03:29, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

self-published

This template says hereby releases and categorises files into Self-published work. Therefore, I would like to change the template's description from "Template used to surround one or several license tags" to "Template used to surround self-choosen licenses". Objections?    FDMS  4    22:55, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

• No objection; but I think a better explanation is useful. Only copyright holder can choose a license till the copyright exists. So this template should not be used with tags like PD - license expired, PD - US Gov, PD - copyright ineligible, etc.?

I think the wording "Each work listed here was uploaded to the Commons by its creator." at Category:Self-published work is wrong since other too can use it with mentioning the author at author=. Or that category exempts works having that template with an author= parameter? Jee 03:12, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Currently, people use this template for two purposes:

1. Have "I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following license:" above their chosen license
2. Frame multiple licenses and have "You may select the license of your choice." below the licenses

However, as this template is called self and says that works got published under a free license by saving a revision with a {{Self}} template (hereby), I don't think it should be used for the second purpose (for example, if I upload a work that has been multi-licensed by someone else some time ago, the copyright holder would not hereby publish it under multiple licenses). Therefore, in my opinion, Category:Self-published work's description is actually correct, and providing an author parameter should indeed remove the category.    FDMS  4    18:54, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Template:Self and Template:Beerware

Can someone make it so that the author parameter gets passed through when this license is used to encompass Template:Beerware? Lemmens, Tom (talk) 12:22, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

It looks like {{Self}} is passing though the author/attribution to {{Beerware}}, but {{Beerware}} is ignoring it. I've updated {{Beerware}} to accept an attribution. Something like {{Self|Beerware|author=Adelbrecht}} should now work. However, if you are uploading your own works please seriously consider using CC-BY, CC0, or other standard license instead of Beerware. The CC licenses have received extensive legal review and are widely recognized and understood by potential re-users, the same can not be said for the Beerware license. —RP88 (talk) 12:44, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

I am considering dual-licensing CC-BY and Beerware, per the criticism here. The beerware license is rather prohibitive for print media, because the notice has to be included. This is feasible in the kind of technological restrictions CC-BY prohibits, however.

Newspapers have repeatedly used my files without attributing them, or attributing them to Wikimedia Commons/Creative Commons, so I personally am not quite happy with the level of recognition. Lemmens, Tom (talk) 12:59, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

I am sorry to hear that re-users of your works are failing to provide an accurate attribution, that is indeed unfortunate. I am afraid I can't really offer any practical advice on how to encourage re-users to credit you appropriately. —RP88 (talk) 13:19, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Author or copyright holder?

{{Self|cc-by-sa-3.0,2.5,2.0,1.0|author=Person}} creates template saying "Person, the copyright holder of this work". I think we should have alternative variable "copyright_holder" which could be used in case copyright holder is not an author. --Jarekt (talk) 02:35, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

@Jarekt: I'm not a big fan of the idea to add an alias for an existing parameter, but I don't feel strongly about it and certainly wouldn't object if you made the change. However, if you don't make the change, updating the documentation for the author parameter to clarify that is for either the author or the copyright holder would be a good idea, I think. —RP88 (talk) 16:29, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Invalid parameter detection

I've noticed that occasionally {{Self}} is used with a PD-old template, i.e. with something like {{Self|PD-old-100}}. This is not a valid use of the Self template since the phrase "I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following license" is very wrong when the embedded tag is a PD-old tag. It's wrong since you can't be the copyright holder for a work with an expired copyright. If the uploader is actually the copyright holder of a non-expired copyright, and they are using {{Self}} with a PD-old tag as a form of {{PD-self}}, this is also very wrong since the PD-old tags aren't actually copyright licenses and don't release a copyrighted work into the public domain like {{PD-self}} (or even better, {{Cc0}}) do.

I'd like to add an invalid parameter check that outputs a warning note and a tracking category if {{Self|common PD-old tags}} is used, almost the same way that the PD-Art template reports an invalid parameter if you attempt to do something invalid like {{PD-Art|cc-by-sa-3.0}}. Any thoughts or objections? —RP88 (talk) 16:48, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Seems a good idea. Jee 17:04, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

OK, I've created a proposed update at {{Self/sandbox}}. Example test cases are at Template:Self/testcases along with a comparison to an invalid PD-Art tag to compare styles. —RP88 (talk) 22:09, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. The testcases well explain the mistake currently we've. Jee 02:46, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

I noticed that a lot of {{Self|PD-old}} etc. were created by derivativeFX tool which I guess was not written to handle cropping of PD images etc. --Jarekt (talk) 03:35, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

I think you're correct Jarekt, that does seem like a common source of the problem. Hopefully a tracking category will facilitate cleaning these up eventually. Since {{Self}} is localized by utilizing MediaWiki namespace messages I've switched the English "Invalid parameter." to {{int:wm-license-self-invalid-parameter}} which is at MediaWiki:Wm-license-self-invalid-parameter. I've localized for a bunch of languages (see Special:PrefixIndex/MediaWiki:Wm-license-self-invalid-parameter/), but I'd appreciate it you'd consider adding a translation for "Invalid parameter." to MediaWiki:Wm-license-self-invalid-parameter/pl (I couldn't copy the translation from Template:PD-Art/pl since it is a bit out of date). —RP88 (talk) 03:02, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Template is now using version from sandbox. —RP88 (talk) 06:07, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

@Jarekt: I noticed that your bot JarektBot is replacing {{Self|PD-xxx}} with {{PD-xxx}}. It would be great if it could also replace the wacky {{self|Cc-pd-mark-footer|PD-xxx}} (which breaks page formatting) with {{PD-xxx}} which also appears to have been left behind by DerivativeFX (see Special:Diff/181584945). —RP88 (talk) 06:24, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

RP88, I was replacing {{self|Cc-pd-mark-footer|PD-xxx}} as well and yes those were strange. Pages created by DerivativeFX also have a lot of other issues, but those would be harder to fix. Also even after my run I assume there will be plenty of strange {{Self|...}} combinations to fix. --Jarekt (talk) 12:49, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Your recent huge batch of " {{Self|PD-xxx}} -> {{PD-xxx}}" edits did a really great job of fixing up a bunch of these files, although there are still lots remaining. —RP88 (talk) 22:42, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

I will do some more files from Category:Files with invalid parameter in Self template. --Jarekt (talk) 04:08, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps someone could teach me how to at least identify the location of all the invalid parameters I now seem to have on my files? Bit frustrating this never came up RP88 during a somewhat lengthy discussion on my talk page...--Godot13 (talk) 05:39, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I'll reply over on your talk page Godot13. —RP88 (talk) 05:48, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Number of licenses

So the number of allowed licenses is cut off at 6 licenses at the moment, I am thinking of expanding that to 7 (or while at it 12?). -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 16:47, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

I created a Lua module which can handle in theory infinite number of licenses. --Tacsipacsi (talk) 19:54, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Уточнение

• И как теперь редактировать оформление в переводе?
• Hello. How do I clarify the translation into my language (Russian)? — Google Translate.

С уважением, Иван Булкин — 12:02, 19 April 2017 (UTC).

These texts are translated on translatewiki.net, an independent project run by three volunteers. You have to sign up separately, or you can ask a Russian translator—there are many on the Russian portal. --Tacsipacsi (talk) 17:46, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Category:Tagged self

{{Editprotected}} Please replace Category:Self-published work with Category:Tagged self to better diffuse Category:Self-published work.   — Jeff G. ツ 07:13, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: Can't see the advantage. What's the improvement? -Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 22:06, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

@Hedwig in Washington: Category:Self-published work "contains 18,216,991 files which is 46.19% of all 39,440,424 files in Wikimedia Commons." https://tools.wmflabs.org/templatecount/?lang=commons&name=Self&namespace=10 shows that {{Self}} is transcluded by 16,958,669 files. That leaves ~1,258,322 files which are either direct members of Category:Self-published work or are members by some other method(s). I mean to find that/those other method(s) and diffuse it/them too, so that we have a much more limited set of direct members to analyze and possibly replace the direct membership with a tag for each, because Category:Self-published work should not have direct members for internationalization reasons. 1,234,257 files tagged {{PD-self}} and 272,369 files tagged {{PD-user}} have already been diffused into Category:PD-self and Category:PD-user respectively, but we already have a Category:Self with a different purpose.   — Jeff G. ツ 00:26, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: Having a ton of self created stuff is to be expected. Would be strange otherwise. TBH, I don't see the problem with internationalization. Anyway, changing meta categories around should be discussed at a larger venue. Would you mind posting this at the pump? --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 00:34, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

@Hedwig in Washington: So posted at Commons:Village pump#Category:Tagged_self.   — Jeff G. ツ 01:35, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Update for gerrit:396633

{{Edit request}}

Could someone please sync the sandbox of this template to update it to use the new messages introduced in gerrit:396633 (a change I did as a GCI task)? Pppery (talk) 20:24, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

@Pppery: Existing translations should be merged first (and then wait up to 24 hours until they actually work here). There are currently 12/11 instead of 105/102 for singular and 103/100 for plural. (I recommend you to do this by editing the JSON files and submitting it to Gerrit instead of creating 160 messages by hand on-wiki.) --Tacsipacsi (talk) 21:23, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

I am kind of lost here. What is the purpose of the proposed change? --Jarekt (talk) 13:34, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

I suppose it’s meant to ease the translators’ task (only two messages should be translated and kept up-to-date instead of four), but the change makes a lot of work. --Tacsipacsi (talk) 15:43, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Got it. Others can see proposed change here. Yes lets wait a bit for the new translations to accumulate. Feel free to ping me to do the change once we have enough. I noticed we have lost Template:Lang, Does anybody knows why we are using it now and why are we removing it. Also why do we need {{#if:{{{6|}}}|6|{{#if:{{{5|}}}|5|{{#if:{{{4|}}}|4|{{#if:{{{3|}}}|3|{{#if:{{{2|}}}|2|1}}}}}}}}}}, wouldn't {{#if:{{{2|}}}|2|1}} or {{#if:{{{2|}}}{{{3|}}}{{{4|}}}{{{5|}}}{{{6|}}}|2|1}} by sufficient? --Jarekt (talk) 17:44, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Maybe there are languages where there are several plural languages, i.e. “two licenses” are different from “three licenses”? (I don’t know, my native language is Hungarian, which even uses singular in many cases where English would use plural.) And I won’t watch the translation progress, it’s not my GCI task. However, it seems that it won’t happen tomorrow, so I inactivate the edit request template. --Tacsipacsi (talk) 19:31, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

I updated the Lua module I created last year (#licenses looks really much better than the line full of #switches). I think that once we can switch to the new messages, we should switch to the module. --Tacsipacsi (talk) 22:19, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@Jarekt: ... removing it because I made a mistake. Pppery (talk) 02:45, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Reducing Lint Errors

{{Edit request}} Could Template:Self/sandbox be copied over to Template:Self. The update adds a html comment around a line feed which will reduce some lint errors. diff. -- WOSlinker (talk) 13:07, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

•  Support  — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 14:53, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

 Done WOSlinker thanks for working on lint errors. --Jarekt (talk) 14:31, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Autorisation

Bonsoir J aimerais apporter une modification sur toutes mes publications. Je certifie être l.auteur de ces photos et qu'elles sont libres de droit. Comment dois je procéder? Par avance, merci. Manganice (talk) 17:51, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Autorisation Bonsoir J aimerais apporter une modification sur toutes mes publications. Je certifie être l.auteur de ces photos et qu'elles sont libres de droit. Comment dois je procéder? Par avance, merci.
 

translator: Google Translate via   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 11:39, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

@Manganice: Quel changement aimeriez-vous faire? What change would you like to make?   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 11:39, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Lua+SD integration?

Is there any discussion about making this reliant on Structured Data? At least for the part regarding the license? --Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 12:09, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

I guess the focus is currently to at least get the data in structured data. Using structured data is currently mainly done in templates like {{Artwork}} where we started using Wikidata before we had structured data here. The whole structured data thing might still be a bit scary for a lot of people so I don't want to go too fast. Multichill (talk) 17:30, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

template broken

@User:Jarekt, with the latest change the template is broken, e.g. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:12_yard_dumpster_rental_perfect_for_a_storage_unit_clean_out._Picture_taken_at_Devon_storage_in_Milwaukee_Wisconsin.jpg using this. {{Edit request}} 2A02:810D:13C0:672:C9EE:8E6C:A6E2:4474 09:11, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

 Done I thik it is fixed now Jarekt (talk) 13:28, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Problems with non-English

I tried {{self|cc-zero}} in Italian, French, Spanish, and all times I obtained a broken layout:

Screenshot:

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/F41739447

Here live:

I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following license:

Any idea? I cannot reproduce the problem with English. bozz (talk) 12:32, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Probably relevant to the kind @Jarekt: who is active in Module:Self bozz (talk) 12:33, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

bozz, Thank you for reporting this. I think I fixed the issue. Purging individual pages might be needed to see fixed version. --Jarekt (talk) 13:27, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Nice catch, thanks! bozz (talk) 13:35, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Typo in the module

@Jarekt: The first word of the comment in line 133 should be assemble, not assembly. Could you please fix it the next time you touch the module code? (I could do it myself, but I don’t want to trigger a re-parse on 1.5M pages just because of this.) —Tacsipacsi (talk) 08:31, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Tacsipacsi, thanks. I added it to the sandbox. Hopefully, we will include it if and when we need to update the code. --Jarekt (talk) 14:59, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Improvements

@RP88: thank you for improvements to the Module:Self. Good catch on the upper/lower case issue. As for {{Anonymous EU}}, I omitted it as no longer used template, after updating it in couple hundred files that were still using it. Jarekt (talk) 15:12, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Jarekt: Thanks. With regards to {{Anonymous-EU}}, the issue isn't which templates were calling {{Self}} with "Anonymous-EU", it's the fact that the redirect {{Anonymous-EU}} is still in use on more than 70k files. There are several tools on Commons that, when creating files that are derivatives of an original file, automatically wrap a {{Self}} around the original license. If I remember correctly, eight years ago when I created {{Self/is-pd-expired}} I did a bunch of DB queries to find the most used qualifying template names (whether canonical or redirect). I didn't try to make an exhaustive list (it likely would have been huge), just most likely to be wrapped by a {{Self}}. —RP88 (talk) 15:23, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

I see I got rid of all "Anonymous EU", and "Anonymous_EU" variants, but not "Anonymous-EU". My bad. --Jarekt (talk) 19:40, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

No problem. I notice that you're running an automated job to replace the Anonymous-EU tags. Excellent... —RP88 (talk) 22:30, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

I don’t think the check for {{Anonymous-EU}} should be removed: as long as this template exists, people can add it to new files, and that should be caught. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 13:23, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@Jarekt: I noticed that the code is erroneously generating an "Invalid parameter" error when one of the licenses is "PD-user" (or PD-user-w, etc.), presumably because it starts with "pd-us". I've updated Module:Self/sandbox to address this issue. —RP88 (talk) 00:44, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@RP88: Nice catch. So for I was mostly monitoring Category:Pages with script errors for files that had some nonsense parameters in the {{Self}} and fixing them before someone deletes them for lack of license. But I guess I should also look at Category:Files with invalid parameter in Self template for files with correct parameters. --Jarekt (talk) 03:24, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

I fixed a bunch from Category:Pages with script errors earlier today and one more just now. They're mostly files using {{Self}} with several licenses, one of which is non-existent. I assume they'll keep trickling in as old pages are edited or reparsed. To be honest, I'm actually a little worried about the potential size of the problem. If they'll mostly appear in the category and then get fixed in the next week or so that would be fine, but if they'll keep trickling in for months, I'm worried people will get erroneous "media without license" messages due to the failure of {{Self}}, which, if overlooked, may result in some files getting deleted. I wonder if it might be worth it to test to see if the license template exists before expanding it (and if it doesn't, skip the template expansion, and add the file to the invalid parameter tracking category). —RP88 (talk) 05:00, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

I believe checking the template for existence before transcluding it adds a row to the pagelinks table in addition to the templatelinks table, which would defeat the purpose of this module (reduce the number of database rows). Instead, the template call could be wrapped in a pcall() call, which doesn’t result in extra DB rows and may even be more performant (only one database query). —Tacsipacsi (talk) 13:23, 3 February 2024 (UTC)