View source for Testwiki:Village pump

<!-- ASK YOUR QUESTION AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE --> {{protected}}
{{/Header}}
{{autoarchive resolved section|age=1|timeout=7|archive=((FULLPAGENAME))/Archive/((year))/((month:##))|show=no}}
<!-- APPEND {{Section resolved|1=--~~~~}} TO MARK RESOLVED SECTIONS FOR ARCHIVE -->
<!-- ONLY ARCHIVE AFTER THIS LINE! -->

= January 24 =

== Vector 2022 will be the default skin ==

[[File:Vector_2022_video-en.webm|thumb|A two-minute video about Vector 2022]]
Hello. We are the Wikimedia Foundation [[mw:Reading/Web|Web]] team. We are here to announce that '''the Vector 2022 skin will become the default desktop skin here on 10 February.''' We will gladly answer your questions, concerns, or additional thoughts! We will also help you adjust things which Vector 2022 may not be compatible with. Check out [[mw:Special:MyLanguage/Reading/Web/Desktop_Improvements/Frequently_asked_questions|our FAQ]] – you will find many useful answers there.

If you are using Vector legacy skin, you may find yourself receiving the Vector 2022 skin. You may select Vector legacy as your [[Special:GlobalPreferences#mw-prefsection-rendering|global preference]] to avoid seeing the change. Logged-in users can at any time switch to any other available skins, or stay with Vector 2022 and enjoy choosing between its light and dark mode. Users of other skins will not see any changes.

'''Why are we changing the skin now'''

For technical reasons (listed below), we need to deploy the skin soon. After deployment, we will continue discussing issues and questions about the interface, and we'll be ready to work with you on various issues like gadget compatibility.

{{Hidden| header =More details on why we need to deploy the skin now| bg1 = #eaecf0}}
* Due to releases of new features only available in the Vector 2022 skin, our technical ability to support both skins as the default is coming to an end.  Keeping more than one skin as the default across different wikis indefinitely is impossible. This is about the architecture of our skins. As the Foundation or the movement in general, we don't have the capability to develop and maintain software working with different skins as default. This means that the longer we keep multiple skins as the default, the higher the likelihood of bugs, regressions, and other things breaking that we do not have the resources to support or fix.  
* Vector 2022 has been the default on almost all wikis for more than a year. In this time, the skin was proven to provide improvements to readers while also evolving. After we built and deployed on most wikis, we added new features, such as the Appearance menu with the dark mode functionality. We will keep working on this skin, and deployment doesn't mean that existing issues will not be addressed. For example, as part of our work on the [[mw:Reading/Web/Accessibility_for_reading|Accessibility for Reading]] project, we built out dark mode, changed the width of the main page back to full ([[phab:T357706|T357706]]), and solved issues of wide tables overlapping the right-column menus ([[phab:T330527|T330527]]).
* Vector legacy's code is not compatible with some of the existing, coming, or future software. Keeping this skin as the default would exclude most users from these improvements. Important examples of features not supported by Vector legacy are: the enriched table of contents on talk pages, dark mode, and also [[mw:Trust_and_Safety_Product/Temporary_Accounts|temporary account]] holder experience which, due to legal reasons, we will have to enable. In other words, the only skin supporting features for temporary account holders (like banners informing "hey, you're using a temp account") is Vector 2022.
{{Hidden|end}}

'''How to request changes to the skin'''

We are guessing that some of you may want to see some changes to the skin. We are still improving Vector 2022 and the overall reading experience. If you have a feature request or a bug report, we encourage you to comment here or open a ticket in Phabricator. We will decide on the priority of these requests alongside our regular processes after deployment. Some fixes may be done via gadgets or user scripts, too.

'''About the skin'''
[[File:Desktop Improvements - how to enable globally.png|thumb|[[Special:GlobalPreferences#mw-prefsection-rendering|Global preferences]]]]

We encourage you to try out Vector 2022 by going to the [[Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering|Appearance tab in your preferences]] and selecting it from the list of skins. Getting used to it may take a few days, and that's the standard for interface changes.

{{Hidden| header = Details about the skin| bg1 = #eaecf0}}
Vector 2022 is the modernized version of the currently default skin Vector legacy. It is the default on almost all Wikimedia wikis (there are about 10 left now). Most of the active editors use it and do not opt out of the skin at statistically noticeable rates despite easy access to the opt-out link. ([[phab:T361638#9723961|Check the source here]].)

'''[Our 2022 answer to why is a change necessary]''' When the current default skin was created, it reflected the needs of the readers and editors as these were in 2010. Since then, new users have begun using the Internet and Wikimedia projects in different ways. Although there were changes to features the skin supported, the structure, navigation, visual layout, and overall readability of the skin did not change. [[mw:Reading/Web/Desktop_Improvements#Before,_the_interface%E2%80%A6|The old Vector does not meet the current users' needs]].

'''[Objective]''' The objective for the Vector 2022 skin is to make the interface more welcoming and comfortable for readers and useful for advanced users. It introduces a series of changes that aim to improve problems new and existing readers and editors were having with the old skin. It draws inspiration from previous user requests, the [[m:Special:MyLanguage/Community_Wishlist_Survey|Community Wishlist Surveys]], and gadgets and scripts. The work helped our code follow the standards and improve all other skins. [[phab:phame/post/view/290/how_and_why_we_moved_our_skins_to_mustache/|We reduced PHP code in the other available skins by 75%]]. The project has also focused on making it easier to support gadgets and use APIs.

'''[Changes in a nutshell]''' The skin introduces changes to the navigation and layout of the site. It adds persistent elements such as a sticky header and table of contents to make frequently-used actions easier to access. It also makes some changes to the overall styling of the page. The analysis of the data collected concluded that these changes improve readability and usability, and save time currently spent in scrolling, searching, and navigating – all of which can be interpreted to create an easier reading experience. The new skin does not remove any functionality currently available on the old Vector skin. On wikis with this skin as the default, there are no negative effects to page views, account creation, or edit rates. On our project pages you will find [[mw:Reading/Web/Desktop_Improvements/Features|findings and results in a nutshell]].

'''A summary of findings and results'''

* On average, 87% of logged-in users on our early adopter wikis (incl. French Wikipedia) continue to use the new skin once they try it.
* The sticky header makes it easier to find tools that editors use often. It decreases scrolling to the top of the page by 16%.
* The new table of contents makes it easier to navigate to different sections. Readers and editors jumped to different sections of the page 50% more than with the old table of contents.
* The new search bar is easier to find and makes it easier to find the correct search result from the list. This increased the amount of searches started by 30% on the wikis we tested on.
* The skin does not negatively affect page views, edit rates, or account creation. In fact, there is observational evidence of increases in page views and account creation across partner communities.

'''How can editors change and customize this skin?'''

* We make it possible to configure and personalize our changes. We are happy to work with volunteers with technical skills who would like to create new gadgets and user scripts. So far, many gadgets and user scripts have been built by volunteer developers. These aspects include making the background gray, turning off sticky elements, bringing back the old table of contents, and more. We encourage you to check out [[mw:Special:MyLanguage/Reading/Web/Desktop_Improvements/Repository|our repository]] for a list of currently available customizations and changes, or to add your own.
* In Vector 2022, logged-in and logged-out users can change the font size and color scheme based on their individual needs. Dark mode is now available for logged-in users of Vector 2022, and we would like to make it available to logged-out users as soon as most articles are dark-mode friendly.
{{Hidden|end}}

'''How will we go through the change'''

* Wiki page: we would like to kindly suggest creating a page similar to English Wikipedia's [[w:WP:V22]]. It may explain the basics like how to opt-out or customize the skin.
* CentralNotice banner for logged-in users: before and shortly after deployment, we will display a banner announcing the change. It will be linking to [[Commons:Vector 2022]] if you decide to create such a page. Otherwise, it will be linking to this announcement. This should limit the confusion and the number of repetitive questions about the change.

If you think there are any significant technical issues, let us know – perhaps we've missed something. We're looking forward to your comments and reactions from readers after deployment. Thank you! [[User:OVasileva_(WMF)|OVasileva (WMF)]] and [[User:SGrabarczuk (WMF)|SGrabarczuk (WMF)]] ([[User talk:SGrabarczuk (WMF)|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 01:06, 24 January; Unarchiving to keep this here [[User:SGrabarczuk (WMF)|SGrabarczuk (WMF)]] ([[User talk:SGrabarczuk (WMF)|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 19:20, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
: This is great news! I've been using Vector 2022 here for over a year now without issue, and it's important that Commons looks the same to users as the other Wikimedia projects. Thanks. [[User:Mike Peel|Mike Peel]] ([[User talk:Mike Peel|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 19:25, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
:Personally I'm hating it.[[User:StarTrekker|StarTrekker]] ([[User talk:StarTrekker|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 07:06, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
::I think I don't like some things either. However, it takes some time to get used to it and afterwards one likes it more than the prior skin. It would be good to name some things that may be problematic if there are any so it could get improved upon. For example, I think it may make the links to the Welcome and Community portal pages and possibly a few other things like the link to the page information page with the Pageviews link too hard to find. [[User:Prototyperspective|Prototyperspective]] ([[User talk:Prototyperspective|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 13:18, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
:::I think the links to the Wikipedia articles are now too hidden, especially for users not very familiar with the site. I think the Wikipedia article of the language the user has configured with a fallback to the English article if there's no article in that language should be linked well-visibly, for example right before the category description at the top of the page. [[User:Prototyperspective|Prototyperspective]] ([[User talk:Prototyperspective|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 18:14, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
::It has been around for a quite long time in Wikipedia and other wikis. Software changes are often disruptive at first, but once you get used to them, you don't want to go back. [[User:MGeog2022|MGeog2022]] ([[User talk:MGeog2022|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 18:30, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
:Amazingǃ Comfortable visual consistent across the projects. Thanks. [[User:Ong Kai Jin|Ong Kai Jin]] ([[User talk:Ong Kai Jin|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 13:02, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
:@[[User:OVasileva (WMF)|OVasileva (WMF)]] @[[User:SGrabarczuk (WMF)|SGrabarczuk (WMF)]]: I think it makes sense as a whole. But there are a couple of things that I don't understand and that I think are relevant to all readers and users. I suppose this has been discussed before.
:* I don't really see how other Wikimedia projects are "Tools." I doubt readers will look for them there. It also doesn't seem ideal to have to scroll in a drop-down menu, in a lot of cases. Why not a separate "In other projects" tab?
:* In the file namespace, perhaps the "Download," "Use this file" etc menu shouldn't be to the right of the previewed filed, since it can overlap awkwardly with the default position of the "Appearance" settings. Or is it an intentional choice that "Appearance" can overlap with other elements?
:[[User:Sinigh|Sinigh]] ([[User talk:Sinigh|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 14:18, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
::Tracked in [[MediaWiki talk:Gadget-Stockphoto.js#Vector 2022 vertical support]] <i>[[User:Jon (WMF)|Jon Robson, WMF]]</i> 20:37, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

I've seen Appearance panel was overlapped on right side. [https://imgur.com/a/cakUpfM] -- [[User:Great Brightstar|Great Brightstar]] ([[User talk:Great Brightstar|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 05:39, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
* I've just [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:File_renaming&diff=prev&oldid=999002682 edited Commons:File_renaming] to match the new skin. Is the "More" menu completely replaced by "Tools"? [[User:Chipmunkdavis|CMD]] ([[User talk:Chipmunkdavis|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 08:28, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
*:Yes, I can see the "Rename" link in the "Tools" menu after logged in. -- [[User:Great Brightstar|Great Brightstar]] ([[User talk:Great Brightstar|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 17:43, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

= February 03 =

== Brunei Darussalam Newsletter ==

Hello! I came across the [https://www.information.gov.bn/SitePages/Brunei%20Darussalam%20Newsletter.aspx Brunei Darussalam Newsletter], where some of the older issues contain a sidebar on the left side of page 2 that states: "Brunei Darussalam Newsletter is published fortnightly by the Department of Information. It reports on government, social and business events in the country. All money values are expressed in Brunei dollars $, unless otherwise stated. Any information in this newsletter may be reproduced; a clipping of the publication would be appreciated. For free subscription (Excluding postage) write to Information Department, Jalan Stoney, Bandar Seri Begawan 2041, Brunei Darussalam." An example would be [https://www.information.gov.bn/English%20Publication%20PDF/BD%2031%20Aug%2093.pdf here]. So my question is whether the term "information" in that specific issue could also apply to images. 

This has been previously used in "Category:Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Brunei) News Digest issues". {{unsigned|Pangalau|13:52, 3 February 2025}}

= February 04 =

== Discussion of sockpuppetry issue for Anonymous Hong Kong Photographer 1 on Meta ==

Hello. I recently opened a request for comment on Meta regarding sockpuppetry issue of {{Green|User:Anonymous Hong Kong Photographer 1}}. You can join the discussion [[m:Requests for comment/Blatant sockpuppetry in good faith|here]]. <span style="font-family:SimSun; color:#000000;">〈[[User:HingWahStreet|興]][[User_talk:HingWahStreet|華]][[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|街]]〉</span>[[c:User:HingWahStreet/Contributed projects|📅]][[c:User:HingWahStreet/Signatures|❓]] 13:48, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

:@[[User:HingWahStreet|HingWahStreet]]: I opined there, thanks! &nbsp; — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 14:29, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
:I reiterate: users should stop being hostile to other users because of their unusual working styles. [[User:RoyZuo|RoyZuo]] ([[User talk:RoyZuo|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 15:06, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
:A sockpuppet account again: {{User|ApMalResbmou Tonuyz}}<span style="font-family:SimSun; color:#000000;">〈[[User:HingWahStreet|興]][[User_talk:HingWahStreet|華]][[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|街]]〉</span>[[c:User:HingWahStreet/Contributed projects|📅]][[c:User:HingWahStreet/Signatures|❓]] 06:24, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
:A sockpuppet account again: {{User|Safoule 2558 LausldM}} <span style="font-family:SimSun; color:#000000;">〈[[User:HingWahStreet|興]][[User_talk:HingWahStreet|華]][[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|街]]〉</span>[[c:User:HingWahStreet/Contributed projects|📅]][[c:User:HingWahStreet/Signatures|❓]] 07:15, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
:As this is primarily an issue on Commons (if it is really an issue at all), [[:Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#User uploading own pictures over multiple usernames]] should be sufficient. I have no idea why this discussion had to be moved to Meta. By the way, I also agree with [[:User:RoyZuo|RoyZuo]]. --[[User:Robert Flogaus-Faust|Robert Flogaus-Faust]] ([[User talk:Robert Flogaus-Faust|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 14:34, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
::@[[User:Robert Flogaus-Faust|Robert Flogaus-Faust]] As I know someone did mentioned this problem long ago but ended up with no actions to block the user. Even if someone mentioned this problem in the future, I think solving this in Commons alone would only do '''zero''' effort to stop this up. And also, @[[User:RoyZuo|RoyZuo]], as the user did not mention any reason (by now) to create sockpuppets for just uploading photos, the prediction of that user whether it was doing malicious actions is currently unknown. But the only prediction is that the user would not like to be disturbed or informed by any communities here on Commons. For me, in particular, strange names are already suspicious to represent a user given that multiple strange usernames were used over the past few years (over 600). <span style="font-family:SimSun; color:#000000;">〈[[User:HingWahStreet|興]][[User_talk:HingWahStreet|華]][[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|街]]〉</span>[[c:User:HingWahStreet/Contributed projects|📅]][[c:User:HingWahStreet/Signatures|❓]] 10:58, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
::: So there is still no proof at all, just a ton of suspicion. The admins on Commons have not taken any action against the user so far in spite of at least two attempts from you to get this user blocked. So your idea is very recent and IMO wrong that solving this on Commons would not help. Tracking the accounts in the sockpuppet category is sufficient. I suggest that you prove that the user is malevolent or a vandal before taking any further actions. And I also suggest that no admin action is required at the moment (as discussed on Commons). Sorry. --[[User:Robert Flogaus-Faust|Robert Flogaus-Faust]] ([[User talk:Robert Flogaus-Faust|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 11:26, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
::::So I just have to convince [[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]] to change his mind (he, just like mine originally, is sceptical of what this user is doing and want it to be blocked). <span style="font-family:SimSun; color:#000000;">〈[[User:HingWahStreet|興]][[User_talk:HingWahStreet|華]][[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|街]]〉</span>[[c:User:HingWahStreet/Contributed projects|📅]][[c:User:HingWahStreet/Signatures|❓]] 05:44, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
:::::@[[User:HingWahStreet|HingWahStreet]]: I posted to [[m:Requests for comment/Blatant sockpuppetry in good faith]] again. &nbsp; — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 11:36, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
:A sockpuppet account again: {{User|ALB 302 AOE woapsing}} <span style="font-family:SimSun; color:#000000;">〈[[User:HingWahStreet|興]][[User_talk:HingWahStreet|華]][[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|街]]〉</span>[[c:User:HingWahStreet/Contributed projects|📅]][[c:User:HingWahStreet/Signatures|❓]] 14:46, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
:A sockpuppet account again: {{User|Deunm Sehhopa 8832}} <span style="font-family:SimSun; color:#000000;">〈[[User:HingWahStreet|興]][[User_talk:HingWahStreet|華]][[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|街]]〉</span>[[c:User:HingWahStreet/Contributed projects|📅]][[c:User:HingWahStreet/Signatures|❓]] 11:44, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
:New evidence of abuse: I've found some of the accounts uploading tons of photos violating [[Commons:Freedom of panorama|FoP]] in Mainland China and Macau: [[User:ALB 302 AOE woapsing|ALB 302 AOE woapsing]] contained large number of photos which are artworks photographed in Shenzhen directly in front ('''NO''' FoP in China for <u>2D artworks and texts</u>), and [[User:JohnLEE Brothers|JohnLEE Brothers]] have a lot of photos which are interiors of hotels, shopping malls etc. in Macau ('''NO''' FoP in Macau for <u>public interiors</u>). Also numerous accounts contained photos which matched [[Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter#Product packaging|COM:PACKAGING]]. I've nominated most of these files for deletion, and overall, only one was [[Commons:Deletion requests/File:SZ 深圳 Shenzhen 龍華 Longhua 旺民街 Wangmin Street 深圳美術館 Shenzhen Art Museum exhibition 宋文治 Song WenZhi February 2025 R12S 308.jpg|successfully deleted]]. '''Everybody please keep an eye as this user uploads every detail he covers regardless of FoP.''' <span style="font-family:SimSun; color:#000000;">〈[[User:HingWahStreet|興]][[User_talk:HingWahStreet|華]][[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|街]]〉</span>[[c:User:HingWahStreet/Contributed projects|📅]][[c:User:HingWahStreet/Signatures|❓]] 14:24, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
::Also refer to [[c:File:MC 澳門 Macau Cotai 上蒲京 Grand Lisboa Palace 酒店 hotel living room November 2024 R12S 09.jpg|this photo]] ([https://web.archive.org/web/20250226144232/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/be/MC_%E6%BE%B3%E9%96%80_Macau_Cotai_%E4%B8%8A%E8%92%B2%E4%BA%AC_Grand_Lisboa_Palace_%E9%85%92%E5%BA%97_hotel_living_room_November_2024_R12S_09.jpg archived file]), as the TV screen suggests that the anonymous Hong Kong photographer's surname is Leung, and multiple sockpuppets that started between 2020 and 2022 suggested that he mainly lived in [[c:Category:LOHAS Park|LOHAS Park]], [[c:Category:Tseung Kwan O|Tseung Kwan O]] ''(Other than that I don't want to disclose more of his personal information, but the photo's location data suggest that)''. He now gave out some of his critical personal information except his real full name, which for me, completely not acceptable. <span style="font-family:SimSun; color:#000000;">〈[[User:HingWahStreet|興]][[User_talk:HingWahStreet|華]][[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|街]]〉</span>[[c:User:HingWahStreet/Contributed projects|📅]][[c:User:HingWahStreet/Signatures|❓]] 14:45, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
:::#What is not acceptable is compilation of a person's personal data without that person's consent.<p>Users can at their own discretion upload whatever belongs to them.
:::#[[Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2024/11#c-RoyZuo-20241101192400-Derivative_works_(FOP_etc.)]].
:::[[User:RoyZuo|RoyZuo]] ([[User talk:RoyZuo|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 14:50, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
::::@[[User:RoyZuo|RoyZuo]] From your cited link, this would be applicable to artworks such as paintings; however for public interiors in Macau this is currently unknown. Also you've tried to change the category name to {{green|Category:Accounts of Anonymous Hong Kong Photographer 1}}, but have you read [[User:LuciferianThomas|LuciferianThomas]]'s [[Special:Diff/845310369|edit]] of why having your renaming request declined? And in [[w:Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry|Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry]] it clearly states, {{tq|To maintain accountability and increase community trust, editors are generally expected to use only one account}}; and {{tq|it is improper to use multiple accounts to deceive or mislead other editors, disrupt discussions, distort consensus, avoid sanctions, evade blocks, or otherwise violate community standards and policies.}} The user in fact did clearly {{tq|deceive or mislead other editors}} by creating multiple accounts, which is a kind of abuse. (The personal information [[#c-HingWahStreet-20250226144500-HingWahStreet-20250226142400|above]] is just based on files found in the socks of this user but not elsewhere from other sources, including the web.) <span style="font-family:SimSun; color:#000000;">〈[[User:HingWahStreet|興]][[User_talk:HingWahStreet|華]][[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|街]]〉</span>[[c:User:HingWahStreet/Contributed projects|📅]][[c:User:HingWahStreet/Signatures|❓]] 16:48, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
::And this user [[Special:Diff/1001594813|''intentionally'' removed the sockpuppet tag I added]] when he added more photos to the "gallery" four days ago. This is exactly what I mean abuse. <span style="font-family:SimSun; color:#000000;">〈[[User:HingWahStreet|興]][[User_talk:HingWahStreet|華]][[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|街]]〉</span>[[c:User:HingWahStreet/Contributed projects|📅]][[c:User:HingWahStreet/Signatures|❓]] 15:07, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
:A sockpuppet account again: {{user|Ha Lunm Yutmncsoe}} <span style="font-family:SimSun; color:#000000;">〈[[User:HingWahStreet|興]][[User_talk:HingWahStreet|華]][[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|街]]〉</span>[[c:User:HingWahStreet/Contributed projects|📅]][[c:User:HingWahStreet/Signatures|❓]] 07:18, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
::This crusade seems out of time at a time when the WMF is introducing temporary accounts in Wikipedia to protect the anonymity of users who are constantly being assigned new usernames and when the Heritage Foundation is actively working to damage or make impossible the work of Wikipedia by doxxing important users. [[User:C.Suthorn|C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm - p7.ee/p)]] ([[User talk:C.Suthorn|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 11:44, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
:::@[[User:C.Suthorn|C.Suthorn]] There are no temporary accounts here in Commons. The user created socks for no reason given, and you should not make any assumptions with no evidence to prove it. <span style="font-family:SimSun; color:#000000;">〈[[User:HingWahStreet|興]][[User_talk:HingWahStreet|華]][[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|街]]〉</span>[[c:User:HingWahStreet/Contributed projects|📅]][[c:User:HingWahStreet/Signatures|❓]] 12:30, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
:::: There may no officially be temporary accounts, but clearly these are ''de facto'' temporary accounts. We don't have a rule against that. If the user's uploads were generally bad, or if they were operating multiple accounts ''at the same time'' and using those for things like supporting themself in an argument, that would be a problem.
:::: {{ping|HingWahStreet}} you seem to me to be basically saying the same thing over and over. The fact that there are more of these accounts does not change the picture. I see no sign you are convincing others that there is a problem here, and this has now gone on at some length. If there is something you think is specifically problematic about this, spell it out. (Might even be somewhere above, lost in this wall of text.) And then ''please'' stop coming to the Village pump to report every additional time you see essentially the same thing. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 17:16, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
:::::If I do this, then Anonymous Hong Kong Photographer 1 is the only allowed sock on Commons, and having other socks created by other users banned. '''This is unfair.''' I have talked about the reasons why having the user banned in this [[Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Anonymous Hong Kong Photographer 1#c-HingWahStreet-20250227153300-HingWahStreet-20250224094300|comment]], and I have already said [[m:Requests for comment/Blatant sockpuppetry in good faith#c-HingWahStreet-20250219072500-RoyZuo-20250211120400|{{tq|if this culture continues then this may be a bad example for the entire Commons community}}]]. And because of the inability to deal with it here with the current mechanisms of Commons, I created [[m:Requests for comment/Blatant sockpuppetry in good faith|this RfC]] on Meta. <span style="font-family:SimSun; color:#000000;">〈[[User:HingWahStreet|興]][[User_talk:HingWahStreet|華]][[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|街]]〉</span>[[c:User:HingWahStreet/Contributed projects|📅]][[c:User:HingWahStreet/Signatures|❓]] 17:39, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
::::@[[User:HingWahStreet|HingWahStreet]] If you had looked at the topic Temporary Accounts, you would have known that there are no temporary accounts '''yet''' but there will be '''soon''' and you could have replied that temporary accounts cannot upload files. You are a man on a mission, you are climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spiderman. [[User:C.Suthorn|C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm - p7.ee/p)]] ([[User talk:C.Suthorn|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 18:01, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
:::::'''No assumptions please.''' The so-called "Temporary accounts" newly created here in Commons were already locked by bots shortly after they were created. <span style="font-family:SimSun; color:#000000;">〈[[User:HingWahStreet|興]][[User_talk:HingWahStreet|華]][[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|街]]〉</span>[[c:User:HingWahStreet/Contributed projects|📅]][[c:User:HingWahStreet/Signatures|❓]] 18:11, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
:A sockpuppet account again: {{user|Shwim WIAIOP 226}} <span style="font-family:SimSun; color:#000000;">〈[[User:HingWahStreet|興]][[User_talk:HingWahStreet|華]][[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|街]]〉</span>[[c:User:HingWahStreet/Contributed projects|📅]][[c:User:HingWahStreet/Signatures|❓]] 08:15, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
::My current action: I would replace all user pages (galleries) of created accounts with the following until further decisions are made:
::<table class="plainlinks messagebox mbox-issue" role="presentation"><tr><td class="mbox-image">[[File:Puppeter template.svg|50px|Sockpuppeteer|link=]]</td><td class="mbox-text">__NOINDEX__<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="description en" style="display:inline;">'''This user is a suspected [[w:Wikipedia:Sock puppetry|sockpuppet]] of [[User:Anonymous Hong Kong Photographer 1|Anonymous Hong Kong Photographer 1]].'''<br />Please refer to [[Special:Log/Village pump|logs]] and [[Special:Contributions/Village pump|contribs]] for evidence. <small><span class="plainlinks">See [//commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User:Village_pump block log] and [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:AutoblockList current autoblocks].</span></small></div></td></tr></table><span class="layouttemplateargs" style="display:none;speak:none;" title="template=Sockpuppet 1%3DAnonymous+Hong+Kong+Photographer+1 2%3D 3%3D"> </span>
::The reason is to prevent visiting users from being misled by the user name as another user.
::Any objections? <span style="font-family:SimSun; color:#000000;">〈[[User:HingWahStreet|興]][[User_talk:HingWahStreet|華]][[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|街]]〉</span>[[c:User:HingWahStreet/Contributed projects|📅]][[c:User:HingWahStreet/Signatures|❓]] 14:56, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

= February 15 =

== Category for passage from street to courtyard ==
[[File:(20250214) Berlin 06.jpg|thumb|]]
[[File:Seattle U - Engineering Building breezeway, looking south 03.jpg|thumb|At about this width, it becomes a ''breezeway''.]]
looking for the commons cat for the thing discussed in https://www.reddit.com/r/architecture/comments/9bxcqd/ask_what_is_such_a_passage_called_that_connects/ , which is said to be "[[:de:wikt:Hauseinfahrt]]" in german.

also, this pic shows tracks laid with steel plates. any jargon for this?--[[User:RoyZuo|RoyZuo]] ([[User talk:RoyZuo|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 08:03, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

:[[:Category:Passageways]]? (The steel plates are probably just for underground water runoff). --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 08:12, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
::The steel plates are for the wheels of motor vehicles or carriages to avoid damage to the tiles on the floor. They are very common in older German mixed residential and industrial/workshop buildings. I do not know if there is a special term for these but something like "Building passageway carriage tracks" could be a reasonable name. I would not use only "tracks" to not mix them with railway tracks. [[User:GPSLeo|GPSLeo]] ([[User talk:GPSLeo|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 09:50, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
::@[[User:RoyZuo|RoyZuo]] and [[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]]: See also [[Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/02/Category:Passages (architecture)]]. &nbsp; — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 14:35, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
::: Also, if it's wider, it's a ''breezeway'', but I see [[:Category:Breezeways]] has some that are far narrower than where I think a native speaker would use that term, and should be recategorized as passageways. [[:File:Seattle U - Engineering Building breezeway, looking south 03.jpg]] (at right) is close to the minimum to be properly a breezeway. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 19:32, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
::::{{ping|Jmabel}} Can you change the size of your image so it's not a part of my post? I tried to resize it but nothing happened. Thanks. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 04:36, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
:[[:Category:Driveways in Germany]]? That's what Wiktionary suggests[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Hauseinfahrt#Noun]. And there are some images that are similar[https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2010-04-28_Gut_B%C3%B6ckel,_R%C3%B6dinghausen_024.jpg][https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gehweg%C3%BCberfahrt-Geb%C3%A4udedurchfahrt.jpg][https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Funerarii_Regina.jpg]. Or [[:Category:Carriageways]] (which seems to be an even better fit). Or [[:Category:Roadways through buildings]]. [[User:Nakonana|Nakonana]] ([[User talk:Nakonana|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 18:49, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
:: I think clearly ''not''  [[:Category:Roadways through buildings]], because it seems to be for when an actual road passes right through the building, not a route into the courtyard. I suppose they are in some sense driveways, passageways, and carriageways. I'm guessing that if GPSLeo doesn't know a name for these as such, we have actually hit the rare case where even the German language lacks a specific word. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 21:46, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
:::If it was just about a German word, then there's also "Gebäudedurchfahrt" (e.g. used in a court decision by the Higher Regional Court Hamm: [https://openjur.de/u/115362.html]). But of course there's no Commons category with that name. [[User:Nakonana|Nakonana]] ([[User talk:Nakonana|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 22:09, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
:::: Certainly a reasonable word, though, with an obvious etymology for anyone who knows German. Possibly what we should use, though I see it only gets 2180 Google hits, so even in German it must be a pretty obscure word. I presume the plural would be ''Gebäudedurchfahrten''. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 00:42, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
:::::@[[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]]: Google Translate says that would be "Building passages" in English. How about "Building entry passages," as connected to the road and distinguished from the 3! similar twisty little passages one would find in the original Adventure text game? &nbsp; — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 02:05, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
{{clear|both}}
::::::: {{ping|Jeff G.}} that's just a straight etymological translation, though; not sure there is any evidence that it is used. A Google search on "building passages" turns up nothing with this meaning in the first 30 hits. Instead, it's things like "Sailing Trips & Mile-Building passages". "Building entry passages" gets one Google hit; I guess this discussion will make it two. So no evidence for this expression with this meaning in English, and we are not supposed to make up arbitrary English names for things that have a solid name in another language; the question would seem to be whether ''Gebäudedurchfahrten'' is even at all common in German (2180 Google hits is not very encouraging, but they do seem to be relevant Google hits, unlike the English). - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 04:49, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
::::::::There's the Scottish equivalent: {{w|Pend}}. As for Germany, while people might not know the word for those passages, they are definitely a common architectural feature in Germany. I know several such residential buildings in different cities in Germany. [[User:Nakonana|Nakonana]] ([[User talk:Nakonana|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 18:31, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
::::::::: {{color|green|"they are definitely a common architectural feature in Germany"}}: Absolutely, and in much of Central and Eastern Europe. That's why I want to set up a category.
::::::::: For now, I'm going to make this [[:Category:Gebäudedurchfahrten]]. If someone thinks there is a better name, renaming categories is not all that difficult. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 20:23, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::{{ping|Nakonana}} could you explain further on "pends"? [[:Category:The Radical Pend]], for example, does not look like it leads to a courtyard. Ditto for [[:Category:The Pends]]. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 20:34, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::I'm definitely no expert on this stuff. The Pends seem to be the remnants of what would have qualified as Gebäudedurchfahrt in the past but is now in ruins. "Ruins of Gebäudedurchfahrten" so to speak. From [https://openvirtualworlds.org/omeka/exhibits/show/a-virtual-exhibition-of-mediev/the-pends this website]: "At the east end of South Street there is a pair of fourteenth-century arches known as "the Pends". These were part of a gateway to the walled enclosure surrounding St Andrews Cathedral. During the Middle Ages many cathedrals and monasteries had impressive gatehouses controlling access to and from the religious community. The Pends were originally covered by stone vaults (the supports for which can still be seen)." So, there were archs, and they led to a courtyard. 
::::::::::As for the Radical Pends, it sounds more like a tunnel, but maybe short tunnels have been called pends? Or pends aren't exclusively about passageways to courtyards. But I don't know tbh. [[User:Nakonana|Nakonana]] ([[User talk:Nakonana|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 20:55, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
:::Just a small correction: My comment that I do not know a word for this was about the metal tracks on the floor. The term "Gebäudedurchfahrt" for such passages is a quiet commons word at least in Berlin. [[User:GPSLeo|GPSLeo]] ([[User talk:GPSLeo|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 17:42, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
:::: {{ping|GPSLeo}} perfect! - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 20:43, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

= February 16 =

== Duplicate Sanborn maps ==

What should be done with [[:Category:Sanborn Fire Insurance Map from Middletown, Butler County, Ohio, 1901]] and [[:Category:1901 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map from Middletown, Butler County, Ohio]]?  I don't have any issues with the images which seem to be from separate sources but I assume to merge the categories.  There has been numerous categories organized with either naming convention but rather than a single vote, just a general poll of (a) keep separate; (b) Sanborn first; or (c) 1901 first or (d) something else. {{unsigned|Ricky81682|08:40, 16 February 2025 (UTC)}}

:If they are the "same" images, just from different sources/scans, I think it is useful to (a) keep them separate so we don't just have two slightly different duplicate sets mashed together. But in that case the categories should be renamed to clarify the actual difference between them. – [[User:BMacZero|BMacZero]] ([[User talk:BMacZero#top|🗩]]) 01:03, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
::They are often two or maybe three different versions of the same scans. You can see that they are page-by-page duplicates with different levels of lighting.   One is directly from the Library of Congress while the other is from Kent State from the Library of Congress.  The naming conventions won't cause a mash up.  There is literally no actual difference as both are Sanborn Fire Insurance maps for the city of Middletown, Ohio for the year 1901. --  [[User:Ricky81682|Ricky81682]] ([[User talk:Ricky81682|talk]]) 05:19, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
::I've found that with postcards sometimes there will be three or four different images of the same postcard essentirally from the same original source but with slightly different file sizes and imported from different websites. Like So and so historical society will have the full size original image on their site, the Library of Congress has a slightly smaller sized one on theirs, then the LOC's Flickr account has the same image but slightly adjusted somehow. So all three of them get imported because there isn't clear standards or guidelines about how to deal with duplicate images on here. Practically though its just a needless hassle to deal with. I don't think most people care which archive a file comes from. Its mostly meaningless trivia on our end. I certainly don't think its worth creating multiple directories for duplicate images based on the source. There's to many uber pedantic "1964 black and white photographs of men wearing hats at half length in the Rijksmuseum" categories as it is. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 05:55, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

= February 20 =

== Help for uploading works by a third party ==

I've written a draft of a help document [[Commons:Uploading works by a third party]], largely inspired by the difficulties that {{U|Bloomagiliw}} experienced trying to do this as a new user. I suspect that their experiences were reasonably typical; all that was unusual was that they articulated more clearly than most the difficulties, frustration, and even near-trauma they encountered.

I'd appreciate further contributions to this new page on two fronts:
# It's a wiki. Have at it. I'm sure I've overlooked at least one thing that is pretty important: there are so many issues involved, that there is no way I've thought of everything, especially because this is not something I often do.
# There are two places where we should lay out step-by-step approaches using [[Commons:UploadWizard]]. I pretty much never use the wizard myself (I tried it a couple of times, which just confirmed that as an experienced user I'm better off with [[Commons:Upload]]), so I'm not the one to guide anyone through it. I would greatly appreciate if someone would flesh out those two sections, currently both marked with ">>>" in the draft document.
[[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 22:26, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
:Thanks for this, it will certainly be useful. I already made some edits. See also the talk page.
:IMHO this is already too complex. I don't think we should mention FoP or TOO in this page. We should just use simple cases: a picture of a person by another photographer, or getting permission for an artwork from the artist. For cases more complex, send them to the general policies. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 23:16, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
:: To be honest, I'm not at all unhappy with scaring people off of trying to make this very difficult task the first thing they do. Right now, we have a lot of people who wade in, fail, and then get angry. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 02:40, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
=== Further help/review requested ===
I've added the section [[Commons:Uploading works by a third party#To upload content that is already free-licensed or in the public domain]]. As I mentioned above, I never normally use the Upload Wizard, so I may not know all of the possible cases here, or how people deal with edge cases. '''It would be great if someone who has experience using the Upload Wizard to upload a third-party file would review what I wrote.''' {{unsigned|Jmabel}}
:Admittedly I didn't read through every last bit of the essay so maybe I missed it but a problem I see all the time is people attributing themselves as the author of someone else's work purely because they scanned it or uploaded it to Commons. I guess it's inherent to the essay that the uploader isn't the author of someone elses work. It should really be explicit though. Especially with things like scans of old documents. The Upload Wizard doesn't seem to make it clear who exactly the is should be with any given scenario either. There really should be a warning on it's end though saying that the uploader isn't the author if they are uploading someone else's work, be that a scan of a document or whatever. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 08:09, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
:: {{ping|Adamant1}} you can search the page for the various places I use the word "author"; I think it's pretty clear. Also in the instructions about uploading {{color|green|"Indicate, to the best of your ability the name of the author. If may be that the best you can do is a company, or a website, or "found in a book authored by XX" Do the best you can. In the worst case, there is a box to check for "unknown"."}} Do you think that also needs an explicit "You are not the author"? I can't see how anyone could misunderstand it that way. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 21:51, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
'''Still needing review as to whether I am missing anything about the Wizard interaction.''' - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 21:51, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

= February 21 =

== Mass-archiving of endangered US-government datasets ==

Hi!

The topic was raised in similar circumstances already, but I stumbled across a reddit thread that might be worth discussing: https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/1iuhcu8/save_the_maps/.

As the government restructuring and reduction under the Trump presidency progresses, many datasets (up to many terabytes) are at risk. A user commented while adding some useful links to some resources. Several of them should be in public domain as they are created by federal agencies. 

How should we deal with the part that is relevant for us?

(Mentioned in this subreddit:
* https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/data/
* https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/pub/data/cirs/climdiv/
* https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/DmData/GISData.aspx
* https://www.nass.usda.gov/Data_and_Statistics/index.php
* https://search.earthdata.nasa.gov/)
Thanks! --[[User:PantheraLeo1359531|PantheraLeo1359531 😺]] ([[User talk:PantheraLeo1359531|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 08:47, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

:I wonder what the cost of merely keeping (not producing) those datasets is. The cost of storing that data should be almost negligible for US Federal Government (even after strong budget cuts), so it's striking that public data is being mass deleted. [[User:MGeog2022|MGeog2022]] ([[User talk:MGeog2022|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 16:32, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
::Sure that is striking. It's totally not my own priority on Commons, but I do hope that US contributors to the platform will try to archive that stuff either on other platforms where we will have access, or directly here on Commons.
::Also, I do hope that WMF is quickly enough in relocating all Wikimedia datacenters to safe places in Europe before they are nationalized or switched off. --[[User:Enyavar|Enyavar]] ([[User talk:Enyavar|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
:::I agree that keeping those would not cost that much. But I think that many people don't recognise how important it is to archive and preserve files (how much images are flushed into the net, and the uploaders don't think far into the future how to handle historical files). Any some may have concerns that the data could be used against them someday (especially when making dubious claims). And yes, I hope WMF has sufficient backups and copies in the whole world. --[[User:PantheraLeo1359531|PantheraLeo1359531 😺]] ([[User talk:PantheraLeo1359531|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 17:45, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
::::''I hope WMF has sufficient backups and copies in the whole world'': all text content (including full history) from all WMF wikis (Commons included) is periodically dumped to [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mirroring%20Wikimedia%20project%20XML%20dumps several mirrors worldwide], but most of them are also in the USA, and one of them is in Russia, which doesn't exactly give too many guarantees either. Out of the USA and Russia, there are only 2 mirrors: 1 in Brazil and 1 in Sweden. If we talk about media files in Commons, things look worse: there are no copies out of the 2 main WMF datacenters, both of them located in the USA (see [[Commons:Dumps and backups|here]] and the references section at the bottom of that page).
::::I think that wiki texts can generally be considered at safe (dumps are continuously downloaded here and there all over the world, at least for Commons, for Wikipedia in the major world languages, and many other specially notable wikis). As for the media files in Commons, [[phab:T298394|this ticket]] has been waiting for years, with with very little progress. 
::::In the meantime, it seems that Internet Archive continues to host the vast majority of its contents in a few rack cabinets in 2 places in the same seismic area (at least, there is no public information saying otherwise). After the first election of Donald Trump, they proposed to create a full copy of the Archive in Canada: there was no more news about it. After his second election, when it would seem that there should be more serious reasons for concern, there is no news about it either. The risk of earthquakes does not seem to be causing any major concern either. 
::::Returning to Commons, let's hope that nothing happens, but I think more copies around the world would be highly recommended. Human beings usually only learn by making mistakes: I'd say that, if nothing changes, most of Internet Archive is very likely to be lost at some point in this century, since earthquakes will not stop hitting San Francisco, as they have for centuries, and a small fire destroying a group of 4 cabinets is something that can easily happen with or without an earthquake. At that (really sad) moment, a more resilient Archive would likely be built. Commons, having several copies in 2 distant datacenters in safe areas, is very likely to be in place by then, and to contribute many media content to the new archive. And, after that hypothetical catastrophe for the preservation of human knowledge, it's also likely that Commons itself will be mirrored in several more places, for greater security. [[User:MGeog2022|MGeog2022]] ([[User talk:MGeog2022|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 20:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
:::::By the way, if you think that things are bad now, about 5 years ago there were no true backups at all of Commons media files. Files were often lost simply due to bugs in MediaWiki software: no need for earthquakes or totalitarian governments. [[User:MGeog2022|MGeog2022]] ([[User talk:MGeog2022|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 20:39, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
:Just my two cents; I don't think that Commons with its ultra-strict adherence to copyright is really suited to reliably "archive" stuff. We regularly delete media for reasons such as "this 1939 nazi propaganda poster's author is unknown" or "this high quality photo of some building is very good, but some law does not allow commercial use of it". Only one law needs to change that might affect copyright status retroactively and we would be sitting here deleting stuff en masse. I think that the Internet Archive is a lot better for such archiving. ~[[User:TheImaCow|TheImaCow]] ([[User talk:TheImaCow|<span class="signature-talk">talk</span>]]) 20:57, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
::@[[User:TheImaCow|TheImaCow]], files deleted from Commons are not actually removed from WMF servers. They are taken in consideration even for backups, as if they were regular files. Copyvio files are often marked with a future undeletion date when they enter public domain (for example, 2072 or the like). Considering the problems facing Internet Archive, that I exposed above, I think that, for very long term preservation, Commons is far more reliable than Archive is, indeed (unless Archive starts taking backups seriously enough). [[User:MGeog2022|MGeog2022]] ([[User talk:MGeog2022|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 21:08, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
:::If I remember correctly, there is also some effort by voluntaries to make decentralized copies of Internet Archive content (e.g. if there are 100 PB of data, then it could be backed up by 1,000 people á 100 TB. Maybe something similar could be done to Commons, where the amount of data is much smaller. --[[User:PantheraLeo1359531|PantheraLeo1359531 😺]] ([[User talk:PantheraLeo1359531|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 15:08, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
::::But yes, the awareness of data conservation should be much more strongly represented in society. I work on setting up a free media database of my hometown, and am still surprised how much coverage is lacking --[[User:PantheraLeo1359531|PantheraLeo1359531 😺]] ([[User talk:PantheraLeo1359531|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 15:10, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
::::Yes, even if Commons reaches 1 PB, only 10 institutions (such as universities or libraries) donating 100 TB each would be needed for each copy. If we compare it with the [https://www.debian.org/mirror/list list of Debian Linux mirrors] and the total storage space used on them, it seems really easy. For Archive's 100 PB it isn't so easy, but at least 1 full copy might not be so difficult (specially given what is at risk, and the total absence of true backups for the vast majority of its content). I think that such efforts should always be made through institutions, not individuals. If data is in the computers of 1,000 different people, if the full collection is to be rebuilt 20 years later, some parts are highly likely to be lost, and collecting the parts that aren't lost would be like a nightmare anyway. [[User:MGeog2022|MGeog2022]] ([[User talk:MGeog2022|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 15:45, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
:::::+1, the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg for example [https://ftp.fau.de/ hosts a huge bunch of Linux distribs]; something similar would be fantastic --[[User:PantheraLeo1359531|PantheraLeo1359531 😺]] ([[User talk:PantheraLeo1359531|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 14:09, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

== AI-generated uploader ==

All of [[Special:ListFiles/Muskygirl]] appears to be AI-generated. Could someone tag all the images that violate personality rights for deletion? I'm a bit too lazy right now. Not sure what to do with the other images. [[User:Aaron Liu|Aaron Liu]] ([[User talk:Aaron Liu|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 20:24, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

:They got speedily deleted. Regards, [[User:Grand-Duc|Grand-Duc]] ([[User talk:Grand-Duc|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 21:29, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
:: @[[User:Grand-Duc|Grand-Duc]] But the source is correct; they're just AI-generated. [[User:Aaron Liu|Aaron Liu]] ([[User talk:Aaron Liu|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 22:32, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
:::The reasoning for deletion wasn't "bad source", but "copyvio derivative", the images claiming as having been made by AI generative software and said to depict contemporary actresses can only be derived from unfree sources. Regards, [[User:Grand-Duc|Grand-Duc]] ([[User talk:Grand-Duc|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 23:09, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
::::Yeah, I realized. I meant to talk about the images without any personality that Artemisia just tagged as lacking a source. [[User:Aaron Liu|Aaron Liu]] ([[User talk:Aaron Liu|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 23:11, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
:: Wait, I didn't realize you meant the personality images, sorry. @[[User:ArtemisiaGentileschiFan|ArtemisiaGentileschiFan]] The images don't necessarily satisfy the bad source SD criteria as they're simply AI-generated. [[User:Aaron Liu|Aaron Liu]] ([[User talk:Aaron Liu|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 22:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
:::{{replyto|Aaron Liu}} The ones I tagged don't seem AI-generated to me. The pants seem to be a photograph superimposed on a background with a paper texture and the gif and images of the necks seem to be cropped photos. [[User:ArtemisiaGentileschiFan|ArtemisiaGentileschiFan]] ([[User talk:ArtemisiaGentileschiFan|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 23:35, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
:::: @[[User:ArtemisiaGentileschiFan|ArtemisiaGentileschiFan]] 1. That doesn't mean they couldn't have been self-taken. 2. There's a lot of characteristic AI blemishes, such as the number of fingers and basic human anatomy (lip splitting in side-view Adam's apple, weird hip section for bell bottoms) [[User:Aaron Liu|Aaron Liu]] ([[User talk:Aaron Liu|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 03:34, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

= February 22 =

== Actions regarding post-ban of Shāntián Tàiláng ==

* {{User|Shāntián Tàiláng}}
Yesterday this user was [[m:Requests for comment/Global ban for Shāntián Tàiláng|globally banned]] and now the user page was [[Special:Diff/902898938/1001116022|changed by me]] to indicate this situation (I have preserved all final revisions of the user page created by this user here in [[User:HingWahStreet/Shāntián Tàiláng|Commons]], as well as in [[m:User:HingWahStreet/Shāntián Tàiláng|Meta]], [[q:User:HingWahStreet/Shāntián Tàiláng|Wikiquote]] and [[s:User:HingWahStreet/Shāntián Tàiláng|Wikisource]]). I prefer not to request for a speedy deletion of its user page, because the previous edits seem to have its historic value. Also requesting is that the three-month local block for this user should be extended to indef to match the current ban status of this user. <span style="font-family:PMingLiu; color:#FFFFFF;">[[User:HingWahStreet|興華街 (<i>Hing Wah Street</i>)]] - [[User_talk:HingWahStreet|💬]] - [[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|📝]]</span> 08:23, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

:''because the previous edits seem to have its historic value''. Maybe it isn't the case here, but if a previously good user suddenly turns to the contrary, it can be because his/her account was hacked, and the user completely lost access to it. In those cases, it would be a good thing that the user's page, talk page, contributions, etc, are indefinitely kept as they were, with all subsequent vandalisms reverted and revision deleted, and the account permanently locked (if there is no way to return the account to the user with due guarantees). I'm probably not the first one to think about this, and maybe this is how it is usually done already. [[User:MGeog2022|MGeog2022]] ([[User talk:MGeog2022|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 16:25, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
::{{tq|... it can be because his/her account was hacked, and the user completely lost access to it.}} The user is not hacked, but being kicked out due to his/her misconduct in several wikis. He/She did have access previously, and after being blocked in one wiki by another he/she created several socks to regain edit rights. <span style="font-family:PMingLiu; color:#FFFFFF;">[[User:HingWahStreet|興華街 (<i>Hing Wah Street</i>)]] - [[User_talk:HingWahStreet|💬]] - [[special:contributions/HingWahStreet|📝]]</span> 13:51, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
:::Yes, I was only talking about the general case of user pages belonging to hacked users, I didn't mean that it applied to this particular case. [[User:MGeog2022|MGeog2022]] ([[User talk:MGeog2022|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 14:29, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

==  Upcoming Language Community Meeting (Feb 28th, 14:00 UTC) and Newsletter ==

<section begin="message"/>
Hello everyone!
[[File:WP20Symbols WIKI INCUBATOR.svg|right|frameless|150x150px|alt=An image symbolising multiple languages]]
We’re excited to announce that the next '''Language Community Meeting''' is happening soon, '''February 28th at 14:00 UTC'''! If you’d like to join, simply sign up on the '''[[mw:Wikimedia_Language_and_Product_Localization/Community_meetings#28_February_2025|wiki page]]'''.

This is a participant-driven meeting where we share updates on language-related projects, discuss technical challenges in language wikis, and collaborate on solutions. In our last meeting, we covered topics like developing language keyboards, creating the Moore Wikipedia, and updates from the language support track at Wiki Indaba.

'''Got a topic to share?''' Whether it’s a technical update from your project, a challenge you need help with, or a request for interpretation support, we’d love to hear from you! Feel free to '''reply to this message''' or add agenda items to the document '''[[etherpad:p/language-community-meeting-feb-2025|here]]'''.

Also, we wanted to highlight that the sixth edition of the Language & Internationalization newsletter (January 2025) is available here: [[:mw:Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia Language and Product Localization/Newsletter/2025/January|Wikimedia Language and Product Localization/Newsletter/2025/January]]. This newsletter provides updates from the October–December 2024 quarter on new feature development, improvements in various language-related technical projects and support efforts, details about community meetings, and ideas for contributing to projects. To stay updated, you can subscribe to the newsletter on its wiki page: [[:mw:Wikimedia Language and Product Localization/Newsletter|Wikimedia Language and Product Localization/Newsletter]].

We look forward to your ideas and participation at the language community meeting, see you there!
<section end="message"/>

<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">[[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]]</bdi> 08:28, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:SSethi (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Distribution_list/Global_message_delivery&oldid=28217779 -->

== Method to add photos directly from Google Photos would increase uploads a great deal ==

Very often when I am looking through my photos on Google Photos I will see a photo it would be great to upload here. But I would need to download it, change the name, add my name and license choices, etc, etc, and frankly it's just too much effort 99̬̤% of the time. If a cooperation could be established with Google, where one of the options when we click on our own photos is to "share this photo on Wikimedia Commons", and it auto-fills our license name/info, allows us to rename the file if we want, and then a quick upload, for individual and groups of photos, I know I would upload much more often and assume many others would as well. I assume Apple has some equivalent photo storage as well. If Commons could approach these companies and see if the development of such a mechanism is a possibility, it could be a boon for the collection of photos here. [[User:RaffiKojian|RaffiKojian]] ([[User talk:RaffiKojian|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 13:36, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
:Yes, this is my main way to upload. Looking at the photo in the Google Photos App, I click the Share button and Share With Commons App. The Commons App talks me through the upload process, asking me for a "Caption" which will actually be the  the filename. It offers me a choice of "Depicts" and "Categories" and carries out the upload. Afterwards on the real computer and its browser, I do more categorization, insertion into whatever articles the pic can illustrate, and so forth. [[User:Jim.henderson|Jim.henderson]] ([[User talk:Jim.henderson|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 14:10, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

== Delete duplicate without replacing filename ==

A file should usually have exactly one name. But there are (often mathematical) files with systematic names, where different names must lead to the same image. Often this is achieved, by uploading duplicates. <small>(E.g. [[:Category:Set of colored Coxeter plane graphs (red, orange, yellow, green... vertices)|this category]] contains many duplicates, such as [[:File:4-demicube t02 D3.svg|4-demicube t02 D3]] ... [[:File:8-demicube t06 D3.svg|8-demicube t06 D3]], [[:File:9-demicube t07 D3.svg|9-demicube t07 D3]].)</small> Theoretically, the best solution would be, to upload the file with a neutral name, and then create redirects with the systematic names. <small>(E.g. the neutral name is [[:File:Number pyramid Lonicera; depth 7, gravity 7.png|foo and bar]], and the redirects are [[:File:Number pyramid Lonicera; depth 7.png|foo]] and [[:File:Number pyramid Lonicera; gravity 7.png|bar]].)</small> But that is tedious and error-prone. Most people will not even consider that, and just upload duplicates. Those could be deleted using {{tl|Duplicate}}. '''But that would lead to the automatic replacement of the old names in articles.''' <small>(E.g. I have once marked [[:File:6-cube t0 B4.svg|6-cube t0 B4.svg]] as a duplicate of [[:File:4-cube t0.svg|4-cube t0.svg]], which lead to [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=6-cube&diff=prev&oldid=637015151 this replacement] in the article {{w|6-cube}}.)</small> I want to propose a parameter for {{tl|Duplicate}}, that will prevent this. <small>(The redirects should go into a category called ''synonym redirects''.)</small> --[[User:Watchduck|Watchduck]] <small>([[User talk:Watchduck|quack]])</small> 14:21, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

== Adding support for C2PA metadata to photos uploaded to Commons ==

A new initiative to help determine the provenance of an image, called “[https://contentcredentials.org/ Content Credentials]” has recently emerged as one way to help detect AI or otherwise manipulated images. Image editing applications, AI-generation tools, and camera makers are implementing these credentials in their products.

When an image that contains these credentials are uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, Commons should display this metadata alongside the image.

I created a [[phab:T387075|this Phabricator task]] to consider the technical implementation of this idea. I’d love to hear what others think from a social and administrative perspective. 

While [https://c2pa.camera/ few cameras] today support this feature I think it would be a good idea to get ahead of things. :) 
[[User:Ckoerner|Ckoerner]] ([[User talk:Ckoerner|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 21:11, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

= February 23 =

== Video recording location start and end points  ==

suppose I upload a continuous, unedited video taken of the view on a train ride between two adjacent train stations. How to record those start and end points in sdc?

Or a time lapse video made of 10 pictures, of which all the coord are known? How to record the two end points? Or even all the 10 points? [[User:RoyZuo|RoyZuo]] ([[User talk:RoyZuo|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 08:07, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

:No idea how it could be done for SD but '''[[Commons:Village_pump/Proposals/Archive/2024/09#Qualifiers_for_categories_(which_parts_of_videos)|here]]''' is how it could be done with categories. If it's written into the categories, that can be used for SD and vice versa. '''[[Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2024/10#Unidentified_train_station|Here]]''' is a previous discussion about this and I recommend to check both of the videos embedded there to see something that can be done currently. [[User:Prototyperspective|Prototyperspective]] ([[User talk:Prototyperspective|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 19:27, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

== Sandbox files for test edits ==

Hi, there is currently a [[commons:sandbox]] page for carrying out experiments and test edits. However, I haven't found any file pages dedicated to test edits. I need these for developing gadgets like [[Help:Gadget-Cat-a-lot|Cat-a-lot]], [[Help:Gadget-HotCat|HotCat]], bots, and for testing [[commons:Structured data on Commons|Structured Data on Commons]] edits, as well as for guiding others in Commons editing. For these purposes, it would be beneficial to have some clearly named test files with explanatory content for test editing.

Example filenames:
* <code>File:Sandbox - test file 1.svg</code>
* <code>File:Sandbox - test file 2.svg</code>
* <code>File:Sandbox - test file 3.svg</code>
* <code>File:Sandbox - protected test file 4.svg</code>
* <code>File:Sandbox - protected test file 5.svg</code>
* <code>File:Sandbox - protected test file 6.svg</code>

I believe these would be beneficial for other users as well. I would like to know if there are already existing sandbox files for test edits that I haven't been able to find, and if not, would it be acceptable to create them? --[[User:Zache|Zache]] ([[User talk:Zache|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 08:46, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

:They exist and are all in [[:Category:Test images]]. [[User:GPSLeo|GPSLeo]] ([[User talk:GPSLeo|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 09:04, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
::Hi, thank you very much! --[[User:Zache|Zache]] ([[User talk:Zache|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 09:27, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

== We are hosting the wrong Wikipedia icon ==

[[File:Wikipedia's W.svg|thumb|upright=0.4|This is not the Wikipedia icon.]]
In 2007, [[User:STyx|STyx]] uploaded the image at right and named it [[:File:Wikipedia's W.svg|Wikipedia's W.svg]]. This W, however, is neither the [[:File:Black W for promotion.png|Hoefler Text W]] used in the [[:File:Old version of the Wikipedia logo used until 2010 (big, English).png|2003 Wikipedia logo]] (which is wider and has different serifs), nor the Linux Libertine W used in the current 2010 Wikipedia logo (which didn't exist in 2007). Five months later, it was replaced with the [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/5/5a/20160408104008%21Wikipedia%27s_W.svg official Hoefler Text W]. For fourteen years, it remained as the Hoefler Text W and was used in countless contexts, both official and unofficial. However, in late 2021, it was reverted back to the original mystery W. Now there are countless projects linking to this file and calling it the "official" Wikipedia icon and saying that it is based on the Hoefler Text font, which is no longer true. It is also included in the WMF's [https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal:Visual_identity_guidelines official Visual Identity Guidelines], although it was added when it was the Hoefler Text W, not the mystery W. The file is currently protected, so I can't revert it, but unless someone has a good reason, I think it should be reverted back to the official Wikipedia icon (based on the Hoefler Text W). And if anyone doubts that the WMF still considers the Hoefler Text W as the official Wikipedia icon, please take a look at [https://foundation.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Legal:Visual_identity_guidelines&oldid=119559#toc-w] where all of the other icon images except [[:File:Wikipedia's W.svg]] clearly use the Hoefler Text W. [[User:Nosferattus|Nosferattus]] ([[User talk:Nosferattus|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 20:16, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
:{{ping|GVarnum-WMF|Jdforrester}} ^ [[User:Nosferattus|Nosferattus]] ([[User talk:Nosferattus|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 21:57, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

= February 24 =
== Flickr2Commons problems again ==
Repeatedly, for about the last 30 minutes, at the point where I try to upload to Commons, I get a bogus "The file you submitted was empty," and it "goes red." I have some manual (non-tool) workarounds, but clearly something is wrong. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 00:45, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

:Pardon me if I'm stupid, but have you tried [[Special:UploadWizard]]? Is that an implementation of Flickr2Commons? —[[User:Koavf|Justin (<span style="color:grey">ko'''a'''vf</span>)]]<span style="color:red">❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯</span> 01:55, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
:: {{ping|Koavf}} Yes, there are other ways to copy images from Flickr. As I said, I have workarounds. Flickr2Commons is my preferred tool for the particular ongoing task I am doing; it is in several ways better than UploadWizard for that particular task. (Also better than Flickypedia, and I'll be very sorry when that eventually supersedes Flickr2Commons, as I gather it will.) - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 04:54, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
::Working again now, in any case. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 05:27, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
:::And now, less than a day later, failing. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 22:26, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

== Which categories? ==

I came across [[:File:Kritian Fantomme.jpg|this image]] that I don't think is a ‘real’ photo and added the category [[:Category:Computer-generated images of people|Computer-generated images of people]]. [[:File:Light brown hair woman.jpg|This image]] looks like a real photo, but the user has added the categories [[:Category:AI-generated images|AI-generated images]] and [[:Category:Portrait photography|Portrait photography]]. Finally, I occasionally come across ‘real’ photos of people's faces that are, however, software-polished in such a way that the skin, for example, is unnaturally flawless. So there too, a computer has been used to alter the original image. Which categories are best in the first two cases? [[User:Wouterhagens|Wouter]] ([[User talk:Wouterhagens|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 14:40, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

:In the first case [[:Category:AI-generated men]] (the image doesn't seem useful by the way) and [[:Category:AI images generated by unidentified software]]. In the second case also the latter since there is no cat for StyleGAN yet. [[User:Prototyperspective|Prototyperspective]] ([[User talk:Prototyperspective|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 17:21, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
::As for the latter, there is [[:Category:Retouched pictures]], which has various subcats depending on the type of retouching that was done or the software used. (It's a maintenance category however, and you're not supposed to add pictures manually.) [[User:ReneeWrites|ReneeWrites]] ([[User talk:ReneeWrites|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 08:54, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

== Naming of [[:Category:PD-Art (Yorck Project)]] ==

I had an edit request to make regarding the categoization performed by {{tl|PD-Art-YorckProject}}, but there are a few options, so some discussion is probably in order. See [[Template_talk:PD-Art-YorckProject#This_template_is_categorizing_all_files_into_Category%3APD-Art_%28PD-old-70%29]]. – [[User:BMacZero|BMacZero]] ([[User talk:BMacZero#top|🗩]]) 17:46, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

== [[:Category:License review needed]] ==

Many files have languished in [[:Category:License review needed]] so long (e.g. over a decade) that there is no hope of ever definitively resolving whether they were appropriately licensed at time of upload. As a result, it is very difficult to find files that ''are'' capable of being effectively reviewed, because that category and its subcats are so clogged with hopeless cases.

I would like to see us clear these one way or another. I have several ideas of what we could do, but it's not an area I've worked in much, and for all I know some good decisions may already have been made and I'm just not aware of them. Does anyone have more sense of what is going on here? - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 21:33, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

:#probably no file has "languished... over a decade", since at some point many years ago the category was close to empty. rather, some users recently slapped the template on old uploads.
:#use the TOC to jump to recent uploads.
:[[User:RoyZuo|RoyZuo]] ([[User talk:RoyZuo|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 09:55, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
::Probably the decade-plus-old files were not initially tagged, but they never had their licenses reviewed. They were tagged later. E.g. [[:File:Tiziano Ferro on Radio Bruno.jpg]], [[:File:Tradlinx logo.png]], [[:File:Image of Timothy Elisha McPherson Jr.jpg]] (just under a decade). - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 20:51, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
This pops up every once in a while, see [[Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2024/10#Almost_400k_files_need_license_review]], [[Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2023/05#License_reviews]] and [[Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2023/04#103,857_unreviewed_files]]. Let's add a timestamp just like {{tl|Uncategorized}}. That doesn't solve the problem, but does break it into small blocks people can work on. [[User:Multichill|Multichill]] ([[User talk:Multichill|talk]]) 21:43, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

:@[[User:Multichill|Multichill]]: I like that idea. &nbsp; — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 21:51, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
:Category already sorted by time. [[User:RoyZuo|RoyZuo]] ([[User talk:RoyZuo|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 14:28, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
* There is a proposal at [[Commons:Village_pump/Proposals#Add_an_outcome_of_LicenseReview]] and it can't solve the problem, but it can help. We need more people (or bots) to help review files but there are a number of files there are hard to fix. And my guess is that when someone meet files they can't fix they are likely to skip it and if the next files are also hard to fix then there is a risk they give up and stop reviewing files. So we need to make it possible to do something about those hard files. And I do not think the solution is always to delete. --[[User:MGA73|MGA73]] ([[User talk:MGA73|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 07:54, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

= February 25 =

== Word, category for ==

[[File:(20250222) Germany 15.jpg|thumb|upright=0.5|the defect in the wooden sleeper]]
[[File:(20250222) Germany 12.jpg|thumb|upright=0.4|concrete crack filler]]? [[User:RoyZuo|RoyZuo]] ([[User talk:RoyZuo|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 14:28, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

:@[[User:RoyZuo|RoyZuo]]: I think you got it right the first time, with [[:Category:Material cracks]]. &nbsp; — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 14:41, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
:The dark lines on the road are likely [[:Category:Bitumen]] lines. Bitumen is used like an adhesive for asphalt.[https://www.gerhard-herbers-gmbh.de/sortiment/nahtkleber/] [[User:Nakonana|Nakonana]] ([[User talk:Nakonana|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 17:02, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

== Swiss local trains in France ==

[[File:Mulhouse station 2001.jpg|thumb|in 2001]]
There used to be project to run a local international service, with Swiss trains. Except fro this one picture, I have never seen any other local Swiss train in Mulhouse. Is this a project wich has been abandoned? Around Geneva there are plenty of local international trains. Does anyone knows what happened?[[User:Smiley.toerist|Smiley.toerist]] ([[User talk:Smiley.toerist|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 16:17, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

== Wiki Loves Bangla 2025 has begun—Join us! ==

[[File:Wiki Loves Bangla wordmark logo-en.svg|right|200px|frameless|link=Commons:Wiki Loves Bangla 2025]]
Hello,

Greetings from the '''Wiki Loves Bangla Team'''!

We are excited to announce that [[c:Commons:Wiki Loves Bangla 2025/en|Wiki Loves Bangla 2025]] is coming soon! This year, the contest theme will focus on '''Birds of Bengal''', inviting participants to capture and share stunning images of Bengal's diverse birdlife.

'''Contest Details'''
:📅 Dates: '''1 – 31 March 2025'''
:📍 Theme: '''Birds of Bengal'''
:🎯 Organized by: [[meta:Bangla WikiMoitree|Bangla WikiMoitree]]

'''[[c:Commons:Wiki Loves Bangla 2025|Wiki Loves Bangla]]''' is an international photography contest hosted on Wikimedia Commons to document Bengali culture and heritage worldwide. As part of the Bangla Culture and Heritage Collation Program, it is held annually with a specific theme, inviting participants to contribute their photographs to Wikimedia Commons to expand free knowledge. Through this campaign, you can become part of a community dedicated to preserving and showcasing the beauty, behavior, and biodiversity of Bangla’s birds. This initiative aims to highlight the richness of Bangla’s natural heritage to the world.

'''How can I participate?'''

The contest runs from '''1 - 31 March 2025''' on Wikimedia Commons. To take part, simply:

:📷 Capture photographs of '''Birds of Bengal'''.
:📤 Upload your images to Wikimedia Commons under the Wiki Loves Bangla 2025 category.
:📖 Learn more about contest rules and guidelines on the [[c:Commons:Wiki Loves Bangla 2025/en#Competition Rules|contest page]].

'''Why participate?'''

By contributing, you help in documenting the rich birdlife of Bengal, making knowledge accessible to all. Plus, there are [[Commons:Wiki Loves Bangla 2025/en#Prizes|exciting prizes]] to be won!

'''Prizes'''
: [[File:Simple gold cup.svg|20px]] '''1st prize''': BDT 50,000, crest, and certificate. 
: [[File:Simple silver cup.svg|20px]] '''2nd prize''': BDT 25,000, crest, and certificate. 
: [[File:Simple bronze cup.svg|20px]] '''3rd Prize''': BDT 15,000, crest, and certificate.

If you are interested in participating in the photography campaign, start photographing and get ready for the photo campaign happening on Wikimedia Commons. For more information about the rules and prizes of the contest, refer [[c:Commons:Wiki Loves Bangla 2025/en|here]]. For any questions, email us or join our telegram group [https://t.me/WikiLovesBangla here].

Warm regards,<br>
[[User:Moheen|<b style="text-shadow:#c5C3e3 0.2em 0.2em 0.2em; fontcolor: #3b5998">~''Moheen''</b>]] [[User Talk:Moheen|<sup>(keep talking)</sup>]] 17:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)<br>
'''Wiki Loves Bangla Team'''.

<nowiki>#WikiLovesBangla</nowiki>

== What has happened to the instructions on reusing a file? ==

I am guessing that this is a result of the change to the Vector 2022 skin, though possibly it happened some other way. We seem to have lost the "Use this file" links (which I had quite recently mentioned in [[Commons:How to#How do I reuse Commons content?]]), and there is no obvious substitute. How are end users supposed to know how to properly credit a Commons file when reusing it? - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 20:56, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

:@[[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]]: You might want to ask at [[MediaWiki talk:Gadget-Stockphoto.js]]. &nbsp; — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 21:30, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
:: Ah, there is already discussion there; someone turned it off on purpose (ill-advised in my view, but I'll change the documentation). - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 21:36, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

= February 26 =

== Central banner request for Wiki Loves Bangla 2025 contest ==

The second edition of the [[Commons:Wiki Loves Bangla 2025/en|Wiki Loves Bangla]] photography contest will take place on Wikimedia Commons from March 1 to March 31, 2025, aiming to enrich content related to Bangla culture and heritage. A [[meta:CentralNotice/Request/Wiki Loves Bangla 2025|central notice request]] has been submitted to reach both registered and non-registered WikiCommons users. Thanks. [[User:Moheen|<b style="text-shadow:#c5C3e3 0.2em 0.2em 0.2em; fontcolor: #3b5998">~''Moheen''</b>]] [[User Talk:Moheen|<sup>(keep talking)</sup>]] 07:23, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

== Standard way to add an image ID in {{tl|Information}} ==

Is there an already existing way/template to include the image/object ID information with template {{tl|Information}} (for example for objects photographed in a museum or as inventory number of larger image collections)? <br/>
An example what I'm looking for would be something like {{tl|Object location}}. I know that you can create your own information fields with {{tl|Information field|parm=<nowiki>name=|value=</nowiki>}}, so I'm asking if there ''already exists'' a solution for this. --[[User:D-Kuru|D-Kuru]] ([[User talk:D-Kuru|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 07:48, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
: So basically a template for this item on Wikidata [[:wikidata:Q1417099|Q1417099 - accession number]] --[[User:D-Kuru|D-Kuru]] ([[User talk:D-Kuru|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 07:52, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
::{{ping|D-Kuru}} I think what you're looking for might be in one of the derivative templates like {{tl|Artwork}}, which has parameters for collections or museum exhibits. [[User:ReneeWrites|ReneeWrites]] ([[User talk:ReneeWrites|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 09:31, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
::Seconding ReneeWrites here. {{tl|Art Photo}} may be what you want. See [[:File:Frederic Storck - Muncitorul pietrar - 1896 - 01.jpg]] for a recent example where I used it this way. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 06:35, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
::: {{re|Jmabel}} ''|accession number ='' sounds pretty much like the thing I am searching for, but I wonder if this can also be included in {{tl|Information}}. The general parameters of {{tl|Artwork}} work somewhat, but don't really fit all that well either. Additionally it looks a little bit of overkill to the one line I actually need in the information template. --[[User:D-Kuru|D-Kuru]] ([[User talk:D-Kuru|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 07:16, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
::::{{ping|D-Kuru}} A slightly less cumbersome way to do it (output will be clear to humans, but not to bots) would be to set the "other fields" parameter of {{tl|information}} to {{tlx|InFi|accession number|''the actual number''}}. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 17:25, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
:::::This is what I thought would be the easiest (not necessarily best) option ''for now'' (the so called "temporary"-forever). IMO the ID could be made machine readable if included in the structured data with [[:wikidata:Property:P217|Property:P217 - ''inventory number'']]. --[[User:D-Kuru|D-Kuru]] ([[User talk:D-Kuru|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 21:23, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

== Do we have a category for images that are now censored by the source?  ==

See: [[:File:ETH-BIB-Abessinische Frau und zwei Männer-Abessinienflug 1934-LBS MH02-22-1082.tif]]. The image is no longer available from the source, except to researchers, because of implied exploitation from the public nudity. --[[User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|RAN]] ([[User talk:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|<span class="signature-talk">talk</span>]]) 16:24, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

:We don't have a category for it, but we do have a template: {{tl|Change-of-license}} [[User:ReneeWrites|ReneeWrites]] ([[User talk:ReneeWrites|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 20:04, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

== Categorisation by location ==

Established categorisation practices make it difficult to differentiate between media depicting objects '''in''' a certain location from media which have '''any sort of relation''' to this location. For example:
* If you look up all images categorized under [[:Category:Hamilton, Bermuda]], you'll see a [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:MediaSearch&search=deepcategory%3A%22Hamilton%2C_Bermuda%22&type=image gallery of ships] photographed around the world, since [[:Category:Ships registered in Hamilton, Bermuda]] is so huge.
* [[:Category:Road transport in the Bronx, New York City]] consists largely of [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:MediaSearch&search=deepcategory%3A%22Road_transport_in_the_Bronx%2C_New_York_City%22&type=image Manhattan photos], because categories such as {{c|Broadway (Manhattan)}} are included in [[:Category:Streets in the Bronx]].
It can we solved by using {{c|Images by location}} categories but they seem to have limited implementation. For example, [[:Category:Images by district by country]] is only utilized for [[:Category:Photographs of Hesse by district]]. Situation seems to be better for cities but still categories such as {{c|Photographs of South Korea by city}} include only 130 photos of Seoul and Incheon.

It would be beneficial to change the established categorisation practices and think of a way to set up necessary category structure (semi-)automatically. [[User:Qbli2mHd|Qbli2mHd]] ([[User talk:Qbli2mHd|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 16:48, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

:Thanks for raising this, it's an important issue. I think this can be solved by how the relation is categorized. Things that only have some relation to a category should only be linked via see alsos instead of being subcategories.
:Additionally or alternatively, things that only have some relation to a place like 'books published in {city}' (a useless overspecific cat in my opinion) could all go into one main category and things that have a direct relation as in depicting the place could all go into another main category – if one cleanly divides like that one can use the deepcat only on either of those. They could be subcats of a common cat or just link to each other via see alsos.
:As a further option there could be preconfigured filters for deepcat – maybe even turned on by default but at least enabeable with just two clicks – that excludes certain type(s) of cats: in your example, excluding [[:Category:Registries]] would solve this across all categories no matter if it's ship or anything else. (Registries could be in some pre-made filter or the page could show the most populous subcats which one can exclude with a × click.) So you'd append ''-deepcategory:"Registries"''. That doesn't seem to work probably because of deepcat issues that need to be fixed '''but [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:MediaSearch&search=deepcategory%3A%22Hamilton%2C_Bermuda%22+-deepcategory%3A%22Ships+of+Bermuda%22&type=image this] works'''. [[User:Prototyperspective|Prototyperspective]] ([[User talk:Prototyperspective|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 18:51, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
::The first problem is one that I agree needs a technological solution - some way to indicate to tools that "this category is for things that have a relation to the parent category but aren't necessarily part of it." That would be useful for a variety of "people from...", "ships registered in...", "companies headquartered in...", etc - categories that are useful but slightly orthogonal to the usual subcategory relationship. 
::The second problem can usually be addressed by adjusting categorization. When something like a road crosses multiple jurisdictions, especially when it skews other things like this does, it's sometimes best to subdivide it to reflect that. There really should be [[:Category:Broadway (Manhattan–Westchester County)]] (linked to the enwiki article), with subcategories of [[:Category:Broadway (Manhattan)]], [[:Category:Broadway (The Bronx)]], and [[:Category:Broadway (Westchester County)]]. The existing structure of [[:Category:Massachusetts Avenue (metropolitan Boston)]] and its subcats is a good model. [[User:Pi.1415926535|Pi.1415926535]] ([[User talk:Pi.1415926535|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 20:14, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
:::Actually Broadway is divided in categories such as {{c|Category:Broadway in the Bronx}} and {{c|Broadway below Canal Street}}, but they all have {{c|Broadway (Manhattan)}} as a parent category for a whole street, which is in turn categorized under both [[:Category:Streets in the Bronx]] and [[:Category:Streets in Manhattan]]. And I'm not sure if such a division for every street would serve any other purpose beyond solving this particular issue - a tiny street may cross an administrative border after all. I think it would be better if territorial categorisation was independent from street category hierarchy. [[User:Qbli2mHd|Qbli2mHd]] ([[User talk:Qbli2mHd|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 21:57, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
:::Maybe it's just the areas I work in but it seems like see alsos are way under utilized on here. More to the topic, there's a ton of categories for objects being housed in museums and the like that aren't originally from there but are subcats of ones for "objects of X location." Which is just wrong. Users don't seem to know what the difference is between a particular object being "of", "in", or "from" somewhere. Either that or they just don't care. But it's a massive mess either way and one that doesn't seem to have an easy fix since it's probably a language issue more then intentional miscategorization. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 22:13, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
::::As I see it, the category system itself only bothers with two questions: 1) Does a relation exist? 2) Is there a hierarchy of groups? It's not surprising when users only consider these when they pick categories. Unless a different system is employed which would necessitate to establish a particular sort of relation (included in full, included in part, originates from, registered in etc), certain rules/guidelines are warranted to define which kinds of relations should be separated and explain why it is important. If such practices are not commonplace and not prescribed, users will never now they should have these considerations when they work with categories.
::::About "see alsos" - I don't edit Commons often, and I can't remember even seeing it here. But I know that some Wikipedia editors consider "See also" sections in articles problematic and see it necessary to eliminate/reduce them whenever possible. It might in part explain the aversion. [[User:Qbli2mHd|Qbli2mHd]] ([[User talk:Qbli2mHd|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 23:05, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
:::::For the general problem of the semantics of category inheritance, see comment made 20:10, 24 February 2025 (UTC) in the discussion at [[Commons:Village pump/Proposals#Major damage to Wikimedia Commons]].
::::: {{tl|see also cat}} is fine, and is usually used for things where the relation is too loose for category inheritance, e.g. to refer from a cat for a person to one for a close associate or relative. 
::::: In the example that started this section: ''you'' may happen to have been searching for things ''in'' the location, but you can't presume that would be the only interest of someone making a search on that location. For example, someone searching for Ancient Egypt could very well be interested in Ancient Egyptian artifacts that are not now located anywhere near Egypt; someone searching for Armenia might well want instances of Armenian culture outside of just that nation-state. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 06:47, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
:Have a look at [[Commons:Structured data]]. [[User:Multichill|Multichill]] ([[User talk:Multichill|talk]]) 22:54, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

= February 27 =

== Cascade protection ==

Apparently, the cascade protection is not working properly. I saw a spam edit from a recently created account [[:File:Hou Yifan (29762728494) (cropped).jpg|here]] and was able to revert it without any issues. I tested it, and it seems I could edit the page as an IP. Is this a recognized issue, or am I mixing things up? [[User:RodRabelo7|RodRabelo7]] ([[User talk:RodRabelo7|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 04:54, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

:Of course, there's a warning stating the "page is currently protected, and can be edited only by administrators". [[User:RodRabelo7|RodRabelo7]] ([[User talk:RodRabelo7|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 04:55, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
::@[[User:RodRabelo7|RodRabelo7]]: That looks like a bug, please see [[:mw:How to report a bug]]. &nbsp; — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 07:35, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
:There have been some fixes to cascade protection this week see [[phab:T24521]], to fix the years long issue that the file description was protected instead of the actual file. I'm assuming it is related to those changes. —[[User:TheDJ|Th<span style="color: green">e</span>DJ]] ([[User talk:TheDJ|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/TheDJ|contribs]]) 10:07, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
::@[[User:TheDJ|TheDJ]]: Protecting just the description sounds very unprofessional. &nbsp; — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 16:51, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
:::Previously the file description page and and image itself was protected when the media was transcluded, but this caused issues for people that wanted to nominate images for deletion or make improvements to the caption or file description. Now only the image itself is proected. The message is leftover that needs to be removed. [[User:Dylsss|Dylsss]] ([[User talk:Dylsss|<span class="signature-talk">talk</span>]]) 21:55, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
::::@[[User:Dylsss|Dylsss]]: AIUI, part of the point of the cascading protection is that files which are on the main pages of our project and many other projects are high-visibility targets for vandals, and should have their file description pages fully protected for the durations of their stays on said main pages. [[COM:AN]] can be used to make legitimate suggestions for changing anything on those file description pages. Just protecting from upload vandalism does not mitigate other types of vandalism. Where did the community have a chance to vote on this change? &nbsp; — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 18:10, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

= February 28 =

== Summaries of the last two Commons Community Conversations now available ==

Hello all! The summaries from our last two Commons Community Conversations are now available on Commons:

* [[Commons:WMF_support_for_Commons/Commons_community_calls/Discussion_5_-_Tool_investment_priority|Community call on Tool investment priority (January 2025)]]
* [[Commons:WMF_support_for_Commons/Commons_community_calls/Discussion_6_-_Impact_and_funding_model|Community call on Impact and funding model (February 2025)]]

If you have more feedback coming about the topics we discussed, you can do so in the [[Commons_talk:WMF_support_for_Commons/Commons_community_calls|Community calls talk page]].

Thank you very much for participating and sharing your feedback! [[User:Sannita (WMF)|Sannita (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Sannita (WMF)|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 15:32, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

:@[[User:Sannita (WMF)|Sannita (WMF)]]: Thanks! When do you anticipate them being available for the first four converstions? &nbsp; — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 18:12, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

== UploadWizard and license review ==

Currently, other than the special case that they UploadWizard has for direct uploads from Flickr, when a user uses UploadWizard to upload a file sourced from a third-party site, there is no built-in way to request [[Commons:License review|license review]]. This certainly results in some link rot, because source pages go away (or change their license) and for licenses that were never reviewed we have no way to prove the older license. (Sometimes it can be done cumbersomely through the Internet Archive, sometimes not even that.) 

[https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Upload_Wizard_feedback&oldid=1003671943#Template:Licence_review I had suggested] that whenever page on another website is given as a source for copyrighted free-licensed material, UploadWizard should automatically tag with {{tl|License Review}}. {{U|Sannita (WMF)}} raised the reasonable concern that might go too far the other way, and overburden admins and license reviewers. (I'm not sure if that concern carries the day or not: after all, every unreviewed license of this sort is at risk of us being unable to keep the file for the long term, because its license status could become questionable.)

Sannita and I both agree this requires broader community discussion, so here we are. Obviously, the most affected people are admins and license reviewers, so we would especially like to hear from them, and in particular from people who already do a fair amount of reviewing licenses. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 17:38, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

:{{s}}. &nbsp; — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 18:14, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
:{{comment}} - if we do this - and perhaps even if we don't! - we ought to change the messaging in the wizard to make it clearer that:
:# The source URL should, in most cases, be the URL of a web page on the site where the file came from - not just the domain name, nor a direct link to the file itself.
:# If the license is not immediately apparent on that web page, another URL should be included which can be used to verify the license.
:As a license reviewer, one of the hardest parts of verifying licenses for content that isn't from major web sites (Flickr, YouTube, etc) is figuring out where the license was specified. It's often hard to distinguish between "the license is there, it's just really hard to find" and "the content was never actually released under a free license". [[User:Omphalographer|Omphalographer]] ([[User talk:Omphalographer|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 19:58, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
:What happens if a file passes license review but was never archived, then the license changes and someone requests takedown? I think a focus on archiving sources when uploading files is also important. <span class="nowrap" style="border:solid 4q magenta;border-radius:9in;box-shadow:0 0 9q magenta">&nbsp;[[User:999real|<math>999</math>REAL]] [[User talk:999real|💬]] [[Special:Contributions/999real|⬆]] &nbsp;</span>  20:12, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
:: {{ping|999real}} good practice by any uploader, but not a burden I'd want to place on the reviewers.
:: The whole point of license review is that someone trusted by Commons has verified the license. The scenario you are describing might be an issue for someone outside Commons who does not share that trust, but that's not necessarily our responsibility to deal with. I would assume that the broader Wikimedian community will also trust Commons on this. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 02:16, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
:::About archiving I did not mean to say license reviewers should have to do it, but that in the UploadWizard suggesting to uploaders to archive the source could be useful. <span class="nowrap" style="border:solid 4q magenta;border-radius:9in;box-shadow:0 0 9q magenta">&nbsp;[[User:999real|<math>999</math>REAL]] [[User talk:999real|💬]] [[Special:Contributions/999real|⬆]] &nbsp;</span>  02:34, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
:::: The question remains, why isn't archiving done automatically? The English-language Wikipedia already automatically archives any external link. Maybe we could change the way URL's are displayed at the Wikimedia Commons, that "Archive now" and "Check the archives" become automatic options for any URL. Maybe the toolbox for license reviewers could include a option that is "Archive this link" whenever they click on an external link, but not every website allows archiving. I noticed ever since LLM's became popular a few years ago that more and more websites now disallow bots (including the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine) from scraping its content. --<small>[[User:Donald Trung|Donald Trung 『徵國單』]] ([[User talk:Donald Trung|No Fake News 💬]]) ([[Commons:WikiProject Numismatics|WikiProject Numismatics]] 💴) ([[w:nl:Gebruiker:Donald Trung/Mijn werk 🏢|Articles 📚]])</small> 13:29, 1 March 2025 (UTC) 

:I {{Support}} this in general, but I worry this will just create an even bigger backlog, and the same problems (e.g. link rot) will still occur when the license is not reviewed in time. I think before implementing such feature, we need to find ways to reduce the workload of licence reviewers, so we will be well prepared to deal with the influx of license reviews. [[User:Tvpuppy|Tvpuppy]] ([[User talk:Tvpuppy|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 03:21, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
{{ping|Jeff G.|Omphalographer|999real|Tvpuppy}} are any of you license reviewers? (& same question to anyone else who may reply here.) - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 06:03, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

:I'm not a license reviewer, just wanted to express my opinion on this as an uploader/contributor. [[User:Tvpuppy|Tvpuppy]] ([[User talk:Tvpuppy|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 06:25, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
:Yes. I haven't had time to do much reviewing lately, but I'm familiar with the process. [[User:Omphalographer|Omphalographer]] ([[User talk:Omphalographer|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 06:27, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

= March 01 =
==Commons Gazette 2025-03==
In February 2025, 1 sysop was elected; 1 sysop was removed. Currently, there are [{{canonicalurl:Special:ListUsers/sysop|limit=500}} 182 sysops].

Election:
*[[User:Gnom]] was elected sysop ([[Commons:Administrators/Requests/Gnom 2|29/2/2]]) on 20 February.

Removal:
*[[User:Spiritia]] was removed on 12 February [[Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section/Feb-Mar 2025|due to inactivity]]. She had served as sysop [[Special:UserRights/Spiritia|from 9 April 2008]].
We thank her for her service.
----
Edited by [[User:RoyZuo|RoyZuo]].
----
<small>''[[Commons:Commons Gazette|Commons Gazette]]'' is a monthly newsletter of the latest important news about Wikimedia Commons, edited by volunteers. You can also [[Commons talk:Commons Gazette|help with editing]]!</small>

--[[User:RoyZuo|RoyZuo]] ([[User talk:RoyZuo|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 01:55, 1 March 2025 (UTC)