Commons:Village pump

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

Shortcut: COM:VP

↓ Skip to table of contents ↓       ↓ Skip to discussions ↓       ↓ Skip to the last discussion ↓
COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES (index)
Welcome to the Village pump

This page is used for discussions of the operations, technical issues, and policies of Wikimedia Commons. Recent sections with no replies for 7 days and sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=--~~~~}} may be archived; for old discussions, see the archives; the latest archive is Commons:Village pump/Archive/2022/09.

Please note:


  1. If you want to ask why unfree/non-commercial material is not allowed at Wikimedia Commons or if you want to suggest that allowing it would be a good thing, please do not comment here. It is probably pointless. One of Wikimedia Commons’ core principles is: "Only free content is allowed." This is a basic rule of the place, as inherent as the NPOV requirement on all Wikipedias.
  2. Have you read our FAQ?
  3. For changing the name of a file, see Commons:File renaming.
  4. Any answers you receive here are not legal advice and the responder cannot be held liable for them. If you have legal questions, we can try to help but our answers cannot replace those of a qualified professional (i.e. a lawyer).
  5. Your question will be answered here; please check back regularly. Please do not leave your email address or other contact information, as this page is widely visible across the internet and you are liable to receive spam.

Purposes which do not meet the scope of this page:


Search archives:


   
 
# 💭 Title 💬 👥 🙋 Last editor 🕒 (UTC)
1 What is the difference between a Lido and an 'outdoor swimming pool'? 10 8 Oxyman 2022-09-07 02:20
2 Basel tram question 2 2 Oxyman 2022-09-05 14:51
3 not used Commons in a long time ... is this still something for here? 18 8 Walter 2022-09-08 22:31
4 Tineye Gadget doesn't work? 6 3 Tet 2022-09-07 12:47
5 Photo of mural depicting work of Le Corbusier in a cartoonesque style permitted? 5 2 MartinD 2022-09-07 11:17
6 Provisional rail tracks and construction railways 6 4 A.Savin 2022-09-07 09:16
7 Commons Anniversary 3 3 Guido den Broeder 2022-09-07 15:36
8 Graphs of Dutch public libraries statistics: what is a suitable category? 3 2 MartinD 2022-09-08 08:51
9 Procedure for Uploading an Image on Behalf of Another Person 3 2 Nolabob 2022-09-07 22:42
10 Copyright holder of a business letter from 1964 9 5 Nolabob 2022-09-08 20:57
11 Looking for Commons & Wikidata wizards! 1 1 Elitre (WMF) 2022-09-08 11:04
12 Revised Enforcement Draft Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct 1 1 Zuz (WMF) 2022-09-08 13:52
13 PD-Japan-exempt for emblems and flags 2 2 Magog the Ogre 2022-09-10 16:09
14 Freedom of panorama in Japan (outdoor memorials and indoor advertisement) 1 1 Henni147 2022-09-10 19:56
15 Maintenance of a category 2 1 Stilfehler 2022-09-12 15:49
16 Use of Template:Remove border in Category:SBB Historic photo collection railway stations of Switzerland 1 1 Enhancing999 2022-09-12 15:52
Legend
  • In the last hour
  • In the last day
  • In the last week
  • In the last month
  • More than one month
Manual settings
When exceptions occur,
please check the setting first.
People of Ngadisan (Java, Indonesia) are filling their cans at the village pump. The old well is defunct and replaced by a water tap. [add]
Centralized discussion
See also: Village pump/Proposals • Archive

Template: View • Discuss  • Edit • Watch
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 7 days.

August 29[edit]

View it! Tool
Upcoming View it! tool discussion - for those interested in Wikimedia Commons & structured data - August 31, 2022

A project has been funded by the Wikimedia Foundation as part of the Structured Data Across Wikimedia Work to create a tool called View it! The tool aims to increase the discoverability of images on Commons, give readers and editors access to more images, and encourage contributors to utilize Commons & structured data. Please visit the Meta page if you are interested in trying out the prototype. We are having a demo and feedback session on August 31st at 16:00 UTC, please join us if you wish!

We hope to see you there! Sincerely, Dominic, Kevin, & Jamie

September 03[edit]

not used Commons in a long time ... is this still something for here?[edit]

Hi, In Belgium there is supermarkt active w:en:Makro. It will most likely be closed very soon. Before it closes down I was thinking of making an extensive photo shoot of the inside of a Makro. - Will need permission of the director of that store, will be some work. - Because I have no been active here in a very long time I just wanted to ask of something like this is still welcome here. The idea is to upload a large collection of photos of the store, it's own brand products, to document what a Marko-store is/was in 2022 (before it is gone). - Just for illustration of the Wikipedia articles about Makro the current available photos are enough Category:Makro. The idea is just to document it for potential use later, to archive it. - I do not want to do all this effort if something like this is considered out of scope here. Walter (talk) 11:47, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is a general aversion to showing commercial products. (No Promotion is a strong feeling in the NL and B Wikimedia communities) No one wants to see supermarket selves. It has to be really specific to Makro. Wich uniforms are being used? I never visited the shops so I cant give you advise on what is typical 'Makro' and usefull to document.Smiley.toerist (talk) 13:27, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's been a while since I was in one. Inside there really isn't that much that is typical for Makro. Probably just the signs telling you which products are where and where the entrance, check out and exit is. LeeGer (talk) 13:41, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, that it is the Makro is more of a coincidence. That is just the chain that is now being sold in to its different business unites and as a result it is to be expected that soon 'Makro' will no longer exist. It has a few elements that are special but fundamentally, yes, it is just a supermarket. But that is not really the point. - The point would be to just document how 'a Makro' looked inside. Now is that not especially interesting but there is potential in the future it will be to some. But do document it that has to happen now. - I recently was in a heritage museum where a mock-up supermarket was build from around the 1950's and a bankoffice of a long closed bank. That did give me this idea. It seems to be a good idea. But maybe this is not the place for this, that is way I ask this. Walter (talk) 14:13, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The products I was thinking of photographing would be of their store brand. That most likely would no longer exist soon. Special for Makro is their huge package volume the sell products in. In a much larger volume package then any other Belgian supermarket open to end customers. Walter (talk) 14:24, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Photos that I think can be interesting are wide angle photos or 180 or 360° photos. This to reflect the "atmosphere" in the store. Wouter (talk) 14:47, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The issue is going to be to avoid too much that is images of copyrighted product packaging. But, for example, things like a meat or fish section will have much less of that issue; similarly the checkout area. - Jmabel ! talk 15:02, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In think I will continue with this idea. And maybe just upload a small sample now. Keep the rest and wait until 'Makro' does not exist anymore. That will probably make things more easy. Walter (talk) 15:34, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Walter: Waiting till they are gone will make it harder to get explicit permissions. - Jmabel ! talk 16:47, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I mean at the level of Wikimedia Commons. - At the level of Makro; the on-duty manager told me to call the store director to ask her permission for this. So if it happens I will have permission at the local store level (or maybe higher up) for an inside photo shoot. Will ask for written confirmation. That is not the issue. - My worries are at the Commons level of being accused to copyright claims or promotion or something like this. If the brand is defunct that risk should be lower. Walter (talk) 17:19, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Maybe keep the copyright of products and special promotional displays in mind. C.Suthorn (talk) 21:48, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Walter: The issue isn't "promotion." The issue is having the appropriate license for any of their branding/packaging material that is copyrighted. And that copyright will persist (and be assigned to some entity) after the company/brand is gone. So you want to clear those rights while it is still readily apparent who can license them. - Jmabel ! talk 04:58, 4 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think their branded stuff is probably worth documenting even if Commons isn't the place where you can upload it. Not everything valuable in this world belongs on Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 15:03, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just make all the photos you get a (documented) permission from Makro for. But do not ask at Commnons. Either upload, or upload everything to Flickr and wait for it to be imported to Commons by one of the mass flickr importers - the easier way for you. [it is only, that a direct upload to commons would be cc-by-sa-4.0, but flickr is 2.0] --C.Suthorn (talk) 16:04, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Smiley.toerist: I would not be some sure. It is surprisingly hard to find decent images of for example playground on Commons. The same goes for example for things like bollards, hampshire gates and so on. I just tried to replace this one and failed. And maybe also for supermarket interiors we miss things? That can be useful in 10, 20 or 30 years. Maybe even later for some historians? @Walter: - for me high-quality images of supermarket interior are welcome Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:27, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agreed, decent shots of places like this are difficult to come by, for a multitude of reasons. There's plenty of room for improvement in Category:Interiors of supermarkets in general and Category:Interiors of supermarkets in Belgium in particular. If you can get permission, go for it! Focus on wide shots rather than individual products and copyright shouldn't be much of an issue (see COM:DM). --El Grafo (talk) 08:34, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You know what? On next shopping I will try to take some pictures and upload them. @Walter: - thanks for inspiration! Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:25, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have asked Makro Belgium for permission & explained the idea. The main focus would be the general look, setup of the store. The different departments. - And also to try to get few things take make Makro special captured. Like that you need a Makro card to be able to enter the store. Originally the where for businesses to buy products, not end customers. The still sell under there own brands products in very large containers. Like a 5 liter bucket of mayonaise. In that I am also interested. That is also special for Belgium. - Makro is just being sold to new owners and the are braking up Makro to sell it in parts. So it is a tricky periode for the current management. Walter (talk) 22:31, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tineye Gadget doesn't work?[edit]

I tried enabling MediaWiki:Gadget-GoogleImagesTineye, and it simply doesn't not show in my browser. For reference, I'm using Mozilla Firefox on a Windows desktop, and I'm using the old 2010 Vector interface. Actually, most gadgets don't seem to work. I have the same issue with the QI gadget, I had to manually write my candidates (no votes :() there. Tet (talk) 14:40, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tet: It works for me in Monobook in multiple browsers on multiple devices.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 14:46, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is it somewhere not so obvious? Do I need to click on a button? Tet (talk) 14:49, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Tet: In Monobook, these are tabs along the top of a file description page, like the stock view, edit, and history tabs.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 15:00, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Tet In vector, you need to click the "more" button at the top right, to the right of the View/Edit/History tabs. The TinEye gadget should show up there. But if the QI gadget does not work either, you might want to check if your browser is blocking them somehow. --El Grafo (talk) 08:18, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yea, I found it when Jeff mentioned it where to find it in Monobook styles! Tet (talk) 12:47, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 05[edit]

Photo of mural depicting work of Le Corbusier in a cartoonesque style permitted?[edit]

I am aware that photos of works by Le Corbusier are not permitted on Commons. But when visiting Ronchamp (the location of Le Corbusier's famous chapel) I saw a mural in the Rue de la Chapelle (just off the Rue Le Corbusier) in Ronchamp. I think it's rather a nice "cartoon" of this building. It is shown on Google Street View, the geolocation is 47.70032, 6.63059, so please have a look. I took a photo of it. Would it be permissible to upload this to Commons, so that readers of the article about this chapel (on 28 Wikipedias) at least have some idea how it looks? Kind regards, MartinD (talk) 15:32, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @MartinD: c - Jmabel ! talk 15:35, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I'm sorry, I can't find your message - unless "c" means something like "correct". ;) MartinD (talk) 17:56, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      @MartinD: I'm so sorry! I meant to use CTRL-C to copy-paste to the edit summary & instead annihilated my content.
      I don't see any way that mural could fail to be copyrighted, and there is no Freedom of Panorama in France, so I think unfortunately we cannot have it on Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 20:00, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Hi Jmabel, thank you for your clarification. Well, that's clear, we will have to do without a picture then. A pity, as I rather liked this mural.;) Kind regards, MartinD (talk) 11:17, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 06[edit]

Provisional rail tracks and construction railways[edit]

We have Category:Provisional rail tracks and Category:Construction railways. They seem to cover pretty much the same terrain (in some cases, the same subject matter is partly in one and partly in the other), but they are not even close together in the category hierarchy. Does someone have a suggestion how this would best be sorted out? - Jmabel ! talk 20:00, 6 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Isn't a construction rail track just a possible example of a provisional rail track? Regards --A.Savin 20:18, 6 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@A.Savin: I would think so, but they are currently unrelated in the hierarchy. Of course (pace Oxyman), the emphasis on track in the former makes this a little tricker. - Jmabel ! talk 00:30, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Provisional rail tracks" implies a track constructed for some test purpose, involving an eventual railway line. "Construction railways" are quite distinct: they're railways (probably temporary) built to support the construction of something, probably not railway related at all. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:34, 6 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well Category:Trench railways and demonstration railways such as Category:Decauville Railway Tien-Tsin–Tshing-Yang would be examples of temporary railways. But the problem here seems to be that one category focuses on the tracks, the other about the whole railway including rail vehicles, bridges earth works etc. A possible way to bring the two together would be to create a subcat of both the categories called something like Category:Construction railway tracks. I find the use of the word Provisional here confusing as it could mean laid tentatively, conditionally or probationary with a view to becoming permanent, but the category description states it means temporarily Oxyman (talk) 23:57, 6 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, that is what I actually thought of. Creating Category:Construction railway tracks as a subcat of both Category:Provisional rail tracks and Category:Construction railways would solve this. Regards --A.Savin 09:16, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 07[edit]

Commons Anniversary[edit]

Rose de Damas Brussels.jpg

Commons turned 18 today, so some sweets for the occasion. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:11, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Congratulations, and thank you for the sweets! MartinD (talk) 15:15, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nice! And still going strong. Guido den Broeder (talk) 15:36, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Graphs of Dutch public libraries statistics: what is a suitable category?[edit]

I've made some graphs of statistics concerning Dutch public libraries, not specific ones but aggregated national numbers. What would be a suitable subcategory? I'm thinking of "Statistics of libraries in the Netherlands", would that be OK? Kind regards, MartinD (talk) 14:51, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Statistics of libraries in the Netherlands looks like a valid name. It could have Category:Economic statistics for the Netherlands and Category:Libraries in the Netherlands as parent categories. De728631 (talk) 22:48, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks a lot, will do! KInd regards, MartinD (talk) 08:51, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Procedure for Uploading an Image on Behalf of Another Person[edit]

Someone I know would like me to upload an image to the Commons on her behalf. She is the copyright holder for the image. Isn't there some way to do this whereby I upload the image and the copyright holder submits a proper copyright release form to the Commons? Can someone point me to the legally correct way of handling this situation? Thanks! Nolabob (talk) 21:30, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The way to go is described on VRT. I hope you will succeed. Ellywa (talk) 21:38, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for the information. Nolabob (talk) 22:42, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Copyright holder of a business letter from 1964[edit]

Is the recipient of a business letter from 1964 the copyright holder of that letter? I realize the recipient is the owner of the physical copy of the letter, but it is not clear to me that this is the same as being the copyright holder. This is in the United States. Thanks in advance for the clarification on this. Nolabob (talk) 22:25, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Nolabob: In this case, the copyright holder is either the company that employed the person that wrote the letter at the time, or the writer themselves if they were a freelancer or the business owner. By any means, the recipient is never the copyright holder of a letter. Anyhow, since this is from the US, the letter is in the public domain unless it includes an explicit copyright notice (which is most likely not the case). So you could use {{PD-US-no notice}} as a licence for uploading a scan or faithful photo of the letter. De728631 (talk) 22:36, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If I am understanding correctly, in the United States, the letter is in the public domain (and therefore can be uploaded to the Commons) unless it is has an explicit copyright notice. Correct? Thank you! Nolabob (talk) 22:44, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, that's it. Unless there is a notice like "Copyright Foo Inc., 1964" or something similar included, you can upload it here. De728631 (talk) 22:50, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Nolabob: that would not be true for a letter written now, but it was for one written in 1964. See Commons:Hirtle chart. - Jmabel ! talk 00:06, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you to you both for the clarification. Nolabob (talk) 01:42, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Nolabob one thing to keep in mind, though, is that the above only applies to published (or registered) works. As far as I understand Commons:Publication#United_States, merely sending a letter would not be considered publication. Date of publication matters here, not date of creation. If the work letter was never published, suddenly the author's year of death becomes important (to row of the Hirtle chart). El Grafo (talk) 14:19, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't see why it necessarily need a copyright notice. In w:Salinger v. Random House, Inc., there doesn't seem to have been even an attempt to claim that Salinger's letters to his publishers needed a copyright notice. Letters would generally be unpublished and not needing a copyright notice until if and when they were published, a requirement that stopped being needed in 1989.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:31, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It now seems that the letter in question can NOT be uploaded to the Commons because it was not actually published but merely sent and received. So, unless I hear otherwise, I will not upload the letter. I appreciate the continuing discussion of this matter. Nolabob (talk) 20:57, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 08[edit]

Looking for Commons & Wikidata wizards![edit]

Apologies if this message isn't in your native language and/or you've seen it somewhere else. Feel free to translate, distribute further, etc.

Hey all. I need to hire soon a contractor who is knowledgeable about these 2 beloved projects, which as you may recall are pretty high on the list of Foundation's priorities for this fiscal year. To be clear: you don't have to have, like, millions of contributions across both of them: we do need you to know a fair bit about the projects and their communities, and how they work. (This means that people who do not necessarily consider themselves Wikimedians, but do have GLAM or research experience on these 2 projects, may also apply.) Please see details on Greenhouse. If this message isn't for you, maybe you do know someone who would be a great fit! I think we may close our call in a week or so, FYI. Thanks for reading. Have a lovely rest of your week. --Elitre (WMF) (talk) 11:04, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PS: Bonus link about getting a job at WMF generally speaking, one never knows...

Revised Enforcement Draft Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct[edit]

Hello everyone,

The Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines Revisions committee is requesting comments regarding the Revised Enforcement Draft Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC). This review period will be open from 8 September 2022 until 8 October 2022.

The Committee collaborated to revise these draft guidelines based on input gathered from the community discussion period from May through July, as well as the community vote that concluded in March 2022. The revisions are focused on the following four areas:

  1. To identify the type, purpose, and applicability of the UCoC training;
  2. To simplify the language for more accessible translation and comprehension by non-experts;
  3. To explore the concept of affirmation, including its pros and cons;
  4. To review the balancing of the privacy of the accuser and the accused

The Committee requests comments and suggestions about these revisions by 8 October 2022. From there, the Revisions Committee anticipates further revising the guidelines based on community input.

Find the Revised Guidelines on Meta, and a comparison page in some languages.

Everyone may share comments in a number of places. Facilitators welcome comments in any language on the Revisions Guideline Talk Page. Comments can also be shared on talk pages of translations, at local discussions, or during conversation hours. There are planned live discussions about the UCoC enforcement draft guidelines; please see Meta times and details: Conversation hours

The facilitation team supporting this review period hopes to reach a large number of communities. If you do not see a conversation happening in your community, please organize a discussion. Facilitators can assist you in setting up the conversations. Discussions will be summarized and presented to the drafting committee every two weeks. The summaries will be published here.

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 13:52, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 10[edit]

PD-Japan-exempt for emblems and flags[edit]

We have Category:PD-Japan-exempt (flags) and Category:PD-Japan-exempt (logos and emblems), each with ~700 flags/emblems, seemingly mostly for cities, prefectures, and/or other local governments. However, the text in Template:PD-Japan-exempt doesn't seem to indicate that such would be in the public domain, as I don't think they would count as "notifications, instructions, circular notices and the like" (which pretty clearly, to me at least, seems to only encompass textual works). However, I don't know much about Japanese law, and since it's translated from Japanese there may be some mistranslation. Does the Japanese Copyright Act actually enable us to use such emblems produced by local governments? Eiim (talk) 15:40, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's iffy. When you have a logo and emblem, you have two different copyrights: the definition and the representation. You can read more here: Commons:Coats of arms.
There is a good argument that the definition is not copyrightable, but the representation is. So if uploaders drew their own...
This is all speculation, though. In reality we probably need someone familiar with Japanese copyright law. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 16:09, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Freedom of panorama in Japan (outdoor memorials and indoor advertisement)[edit]

Hello everyone. I'm currently working with fellow authors on the page series of Japanese figure skater Yuzuru Hanyu on English Wikipedia, and we'd like to get it to a featured topic. In that context, I have questions regarding copyright and licensing of some self-taken pictures in Japan that we'd like to add to those articles.

On the sub-page about Hanyu's Olympic seasons (currently nominated for FAC), we've already included images of his two monuments and handprint memorial (outdoor) at the International Center Station in Sendai. These memorials are permanent installations in 2D, presented in 2017/19, and show drawings of Hanyu at the 2014 and 2018 Winter Olympics. We were told to add a fitting FoP tag to these images, but it seems that we used the wrong template (as these pictures are not about architecture in the first place). I am not familiar with copyright tags and templates at all, so I'd be very happy about help here.

Update: According to the city's sports promotion division, the designer of the monuments has never been announced, and it's not planned to reveal any illustrations for the designs in the future (see Q&A #6). Henni147 (talk) 09:22, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On Hanyu's main bios page, we'd like to show his public presence (which is unusually large for an amateur athlete) in a visual form. For that, we took pictures of indoor advertisements, which had made the national news. Two photos were taken at Tokyo International Airport (1, 2) and another two at JR Central Tokyo Station (1, 2). I want to know if these images violate any copyright rules in terms of permanent/temporary installment, 2D artwork, FoP or whatever. We would like to use one or two of them for the article.

Addition: I found comparable images to the pillars photographed at Tokyo Station in the categories wrap advertising and advertising columns in Japan. This might be of help. Henni147 (talk) 10:39, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is no ill intention behind these uploads. If there is any issue with the pictures, they can be deleted immediately, of course. I just want to make sure that we are allowed to use them on Wikipedia for encyclopedic purposes, especially now in the course of FAC nominations. Thank you very much in advance. Henni147 (talk) 10:39, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 11[edit]

Maintenance of a category[edit]

Category:Churches in Lviv Oblast by raion is populated with raions that mostly ceased to exist as part of a reform of administrative divisions in 2020, so the category probably requires a considerable amount of maintenance. In my home Wikipedia, I would add a maintenance template. What do we do here? (Unfortunately, this seems to not have been [fully] updated yet in Wikidata either.) Stilfehler (talk) 23:41, 11 September 2022 (UTC) I just got a feedback from Wikidata: a revision is planned there but (obviously for lack of manpower) not started yet. I also learned that the reform was not only in Lviv Oblast but nationwide. Stilfehler (talk) 15:49, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 12[edit]

Use of Template:Remove border in Category:SBB Historic photo collection railway stations of Switzerland[edit]

All of the >500 images in Category:SBB Historic photo collection railway stations of Switzerland had black borders that took up ca 5% (sometimes 10%) of the image.

To simplify reuse of the images, I added {{Remove border}} to all of them. Thanks to its tracking category, a few of us removed them and the category is now mostly clean.

However, one a few of these templates were removed, resulting in not all images being cropped. One of the edit summaries I found (when there was one), was:

  • "Removed pointless template. The image can be cropped without it or just not cropped in the first place" [1]

As I didn't find the discussion with that user particularly constructive and they have already been reported on Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems/Archive_99#User:Adamant1, I thought it may be preferable to seek input from others. The options for the remaining images are:

  • A. restore the template and eventually overwrite the files with cropped versions
  • B. upload the few remaining ones separately.
  • C. revise our general "no borders" approach.

Enhancing999 (talk) 15:52, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Enhancing999: The polite thing to do is D. ask @Adamant1 to talk about the situation.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 23:42, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think you misread my comment above, I'm not interested in more of Adamant1 comments. I don't see how "The image can be cropped without it or just not cropped in the first place" is helpful. Enhancing999 (talk) 09:27, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If the comment was helpful or not, I don't think using this discussion as a shoe in to continue taking personal swipes at me is helpful either. Personally, I don't really care if your interested in my comments or not.
I'll agree that the comment you cited could have been clearer. That said, I don't really see why it matters since I more then clarified why I removed the templates in other discussions that you were involved in. Plus, the purpose of this discussion isn't "lets review irrelevant random comments made by Adamant1" either. Look, we both could have handled the situation better. No harm, no foul. We have a chance to work it out now though. So lets just do that. Would you rather figure out what the best way forward here is or waste everyone's time re-litigating the original disagreement? Personally, I rather do the former. I could just as easily drag you through the dirt to prove a point if I wanted to since your behavior was less then amicable, but I rather just figure out what the best option here is instead of going there. --Adamant1 (talk) 21:48, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the ping. As far as I aware this was already settled when Enhancing999 and I discussed it on their talk page and the talk page for the template. I had made it extremely clear at the time in both places that I didn't have an issue with them cropping the borders, as long as none of the actual images were cropped in the process. Unfortunately the last message I received from Enhancing999 about it was them accusing me of harassment. So I thought the best thing to do would be to not have anything further to do with them or the files that I removed the templates from. Otherwise, I probably would have reverted some of them. Unfortunately some of the images clearly can't be cropped without removing some of the image. So I don't think the template should be restored in those cases. Either way though, I guess that's on Enhancing999 for accusing me of crap. It's ridiculous to accuse someone of harassment and then expect them to edit the files your accusing them of harassment over.
Outside of that, my preferred option for how to deal with would be either B or C (probably C) since parts of images get cropped out all the time, not just when Enhancing999 does it. Plus some Wikiprojects (like Wikiproject Postcards for instance) prefers images to have the borders. So this is something that IMO should be dealt with regardless of the images of the train stations that Enhancing999 wants to crop. That said, there's zero reason they can't just upload new versions either, but I'm willing to defer to other people about it. --Adamant1 (talk) 03:21, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 13[edit]

I request you that added the Santali Language in Template:Lang-mp on Wikimedia Commons.[edit]

I request you added this Santali Wikimedia Commons Main Page in Template:Lang-mp.This is Santali Template Main Page and This is Santali Wikimedia Commons main page is ᱢᱩᱬᱩᱛ ᱥᱟᱦᱴᱟ. Santali Wikimedia Commons add this other languages Template. ᱵᱤᱨᱢᱚᱞ (talk) 03:56, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 14[edit]