Commons:Village pump

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

Shortcut: COM:VP

↓ Skip to table of contents ↓       ↓ Skip to discussions ↓       ↓ Skip to the last discussion ↓
🌐 Village pumps for other languages
COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES
Welcome to the Village pump

This page is used for discussions of the operations, technical issues, and policies of Wikimedia Commons. Recent sections with no replies for 7 days and sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=--~~~~}} may be archived; for old discussions, see the archives; the latest archive is Commons:Village pump/Archive/2025/01.

Please note:

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

Purposes which do not meet the scope of this page:

Search archives:

   

Start a new discussion

# 💭 Title 💬 👥 🙋 Last editor 🕒 (UTC)
1 How do I create a playlist 6 5 RoyZuo 2025-01-17 16:40
2 Greenland 15 6 MB-one 2025-01-18 09:20
3 Upload wizard issues? 14 7 Ooligan 2025-01-18 21:55
4 Category:Iglesia de Nuestra Señora de la Asunción, Peralta de Alcofea 28 8 Isidre blanc 2025-01-18 08:14
5 Dispute resolution on whether images are AI upscaled 11 7 Belbury 2025-01-21 10:15
6 Launching! Join Us for Wiki Loves Ramadan 2025! 0 0
7 Do we have tool that will run OCR on pdf files and store the text in the PDF 8 3 Samwilson 2025-01-17 13:48
8 Wrong coordinates 4 3 Samwilson 2025-01-18 01:44
9 FlickreviewR 2 user talk redirect 3 3 Stefan2 2025-01-20 17:03
10 Category:Bioregions 2023 3 2 Adamant1 2025-01-17 20:35
11 Massive upload problems 2 2 PantheraLeo1359531 2025-01-19 19:30
12 Whisky ABV 3 3 Jmabel 2025-01-19 00:40
13 File:RotaryIncrementalEncoder.jpg appears as broken link in wp article 10 3 Glrx 2025-01-19 13:54
14 UI for data files 14 5 Beland 2025-01-19 23:54
15 UK to require age verification for adult content 4 4 Yann 2025-01-19 12:32
16 Line art 2 2 EncycloPetey 2025-01-19 12:24
17 Trump Meme logo 9 5 Trade 2025-01-20 18:22
18 Template:Cities of Ukraine 9 6 Jmabel 2025-01-22 03:28
19 New photos of Donald Trump 4 2 Moxy 2025-01-21 05:18
20 video2commons 13 5 Trade 2025-01-22 22:57
21 Odd CropTool behavior 3 1 Jmabel 2025-01-22 22:08
22 Personality rights tag for deceased people 4 2 Jeff G. 2025-01-22 16:02
23 Licensing different than Structured data 2 2 Tvpuppy 2025-01-23 03:00
Legend
  • In the last hour
  • In the last day
  • In the last week
  • In the last month
  • More than one month
Manual settings
When exceptions occur,
please check the setting first.
Thatched water pump at Aylsham, Norfolk [add]
Centralized discussion
See also: Village pump/Proposals   ■ Archive
Template: View   ■ Discuss    ■ Edit   ■ Watch
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 7 days.

January 07

How do I create a playlist

I have a few audio files that I liked. How do I save them as a playlist under my account, without needing to download them to my computer and setup playlist locally? Gryllida (talk) 22:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not aware that the repository Commons offer such a capability. Is is not Spotify or YouTube, which are dedicated streaming services - a repository is more akin to a warehouse and not comparable to a radio station. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 22:38, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can create a Wikiradio playlist. Prototyperspective (talk) 19:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gryllida: It's not ideal but you can create a personal gallery in your user space with links to the files and organize it as a playlist. The files should be playable directory in the gallery without having to open them individually in separate browser windows or something. --Adamant1 (talk) 22:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Another question: how can I download multiple files from search results? Gryllida (talk) 07:45, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Commons:Download tools. RoyZuo (talk) 16:40, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 09

Greenland

The games have begun. In advance of the ground invasion, the softening up of the landscape is currently underway. By this I mean the de-legitimisation of Greenland as a constituent country of Denmark. The excuse is that Greenland is not a part of Denmark, it's a part of the Kingdom of Denmark. I noticed it first at Category:Churches in Greenland. No doubt further sapping is taking place elsewhere. Predictably, the discussion with the editor (@Hjart: ) got nowhere. Can someone say "Stop!" please? Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:43, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if I understand the reasoning here: Greenland being a constituent country in the larger Kingdom of Denmark and co-equal to metropolitan Denmark is more legitimate (or whatever) than Greenland just being a part of Denmark. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Technically, you're correct. But practically speaking, it would be a nightmare to implement. Every category of Denmark would have to have a parallel category for Kingdom of Denmark. Massive duplication for no practical benefit. To most readers, they would not understand the difference. The same would then have to be done for the Kingdom of the Netherlands and others. At the very least, it merits a discussion, not unilateral action that smacks of vandalism or POV-pushing. Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:21, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Denmark and Kingdom of Denmark definitely needs to be split. Another reason is that Faeroe and Greenland are no members of the EU but making them part of Denmark and not the Kingdom of Denmark makes them part of the EU. The category tree Category:Kingdom of Denmark already exists. GPSLeo (talk) 17:12, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's all true. But who's going to do the work of creating many thousands or near-duplicate categories? Simply unilaterally breaking the parentage by deleting Denmark from all Greenland categories is not a solution; it's closer to vandalism IMHO. Laurel Lodged (talk) 18:00, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you think that this affects many thousand categories? This change only affects the higher level categories which are at most 2000 for a depth of 3. GPSLeo (talk) 20:16, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to @MB-one: for fixing Category:Churches in the Kingdom of Denmark. One down, 1999 to go. Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:03, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@@MB-one and Laurel Lodged: But is that really a fix? When Category:Churches in the Kingdom of Denmark is a subcategory of Category:Buildings in North America it means all buildings in Denmark (the part in Europe) is now a placed under North America. And if you want Category:Kingdom of Denmark to be a part of North America then perhaps start by fixing the category. And should Category:Buildings in the United Kingdom also not be a part of North America? --MGA73 (talk) 06:31, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What's the alternative? That Greenland should have neither Denmark nor the Kingdom of Denmark as its parent? Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:26, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The multiple continent problem occurs with many countries and we have many similar inaccuracies at many places. This is something our category system can not handle. GPSLeo (talk) 20:44, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If we really wanted to model this cleanly we'd have a hierarchy something like:
       Europe          Kingdom of Denmark     North America
           \                   |                   /
            \                  |                  /
             \                / \                /
              \______________/   \______________/
                     |                  |
                     |                  |
                  Denmark,           Greenland
                Faroe Islands
Then handle the Kingdom of Denmark would be treated as an institution rather than a geographical entity. This one is actually a lot easier than (for example) Russia, because there are uncontroversial names for the entities in question. - Jmabel ! talk 21:53, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, FWIW: many of our category inheritance relations are not simply "is-a" or "is part of" relationships. This is especially obvious when we go through metacats along the way, which are essentially a way to label the relationship between their parent category and their child category. - Jmabel ! talk 21:57, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@GPSLeo I agree that it will be almost impossible to fix all these inaccuracies with the current category system. But blatant errors like these can and should be fixed. Greenland is clearly a part of the Kingdom of Denmark and in North America but also Denmark (the country) is clearly not in North America. The solution IMO should be that "x in the Kingdom of Denmark wont be categorized neither as x in North America nor as x in Europe, as the continental categorization will be handled on the constituent country level. MB-one (talk) 09:20, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@MGA73 Thank you for bringing that to my attention. Churches in the Kingdom of Denmark should clearly NOT be a subcategory of Buildings in North America. The problem seems to be {{Topic in country}}, which should be fixed asap. MB-one (talk) 09:06, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See also Template_talk:Topic_in_country#Kingdom_of_Denmark --MB-one (talk) 09:11, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Upload wizard issues?

Was there a recent update to the Upload Wizard? Starting this morning or last night, when I try to upload a batch of files, it takes me through the upload and rights steps as expected, but the describe step only includes one file. I've tried this with different size batches and different photos. Mentioning this issue on Discord, it sounds like I may not be the only one affected? — Rhododendrites talk |  21:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I too am having difficulties with Upload Wizard. After filling out the first page (including adding a specific public-domain tag) the process does not continue to the next page. Instead a moving stripe pattern is added to the field I filled out to add a specific public-domain tag. It goes no further. This has happened today on both an iPhone and Windows computer, Safari and Chrome. Jacqke (talk) 02:49, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Sannita (WMF). - Jmabel ! talk 02:54, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I already mentioned it at Commons:Upload Wizard feedback --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 11:34, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Rhododendrites @Jacqke Hi, thanks for reporting. No, AFAIK we didn't do any change to UploadWizard in the last three weeks, due to code freeze for the holidays. There is one patch incoming on the known bug about missing information about error, but again AFAIK it has not been merged yet, and should go up next week. Can you please open a bug on Phabricator and put me as a subscriber? Let me know. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 15:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have also encountered the same bug as @Rhododendrites, filed it as phab:T383508. And the custom license tags issue is already at phab:T383415 (although perhaps they have the same underlying cause). the wub "?!" 00:23, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am still unable to load using the Wizard, from Chrome on Windows and on iOS 17.5. Still having the "Add a specific public domain tag" field filled with stripe pattern. Jacqke (talk) 00:51, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When I switched to "author has been dead for 70 years", it advanced to the next page. Jacqke (talk) 00:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Found that removing the "Description" field from the Exif data allowed me to upload multiple files at once again. the wub "?!" 12:15, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Rhododendrites @PantheraLeo1359531 @Jacqke @The wub @Jmabel A patch for this is incoming. It should be on the next deployment train, which means it will be up by Wednesday. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 16:07, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. Thanks! — Rhododendrites talk |  16:09, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that's good :) --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 16:11, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Jacqke (talk) 21:52, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, -- Ooligan (talk) 21:55, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 14

Category:Iglesia de Nuestra Señora de la Asunción, Peralta de Alcofea

Good evening. On October 20th I created the category "Category:Church of Nuestra Sinyora de l'Asumpción, Peralta d'Alcofea" (actually Category:Iglesia de Nuestra Señora de la Asunción, Peralta de Alcofea) linked to article an:Ilesia de Nuestra Sinyora de l'Asumpción de Peralta d'Alcofeya, which does not exist in any other project. Today the name has been changed to Spanish "Category:Iglesia de Nuestra Señora de la Asunción, Peralta de Alcofea" (with advocating error included already solved) and when asking the author of the change the reason I have received inappropriate answers. I ask here for an explanation of the reason for changing the name of the category of an Aragonese church with an article only in the Aragonese Biquipedia to a name in Spanish. Greetings, RenatoGar (talk) 22:39, 14 January 2025 (UTC) P.S.: Given what has happened, this consultation will be my last contribution to Commons. RenatoGar (talk) 22:48, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No particular opinion other than that it is completely irrelevant to Commons which language Wikipedias currently have an article. - Jmabel ! talk 04:15, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Now I understand why there are calls from Aragonese speakers on Twitter to boycott Wikimedia projects. Of course, I will never contribute to Commons, where I see my language being persecuted and blocked. It is clear that there is hatred against my language here. RenatoGar (talk) 08:25, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@RenatoGar: I thought of just leaving that alone, but: could you (or anyone else) explain to me what in that policy you believe embodies "hatred" for Aragonese, or any other language? - Jmabel ! talk 20:42, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel: Aragonese is a language spoken in some regions in Spain where the Spanish have historically made attempts to exterminate it (by declaring Spanish to be the official language, and making it illegal to speak or teach Aragonese in schools). The Aragonese Biquipedia is, among other things, a language and culture preservation project. But Commons is an international project, and having the Aragonese name of an Aragonese church changed to Spanish (a colonizer language, in this context) and having seemingly no recourse to change it back might come across as Commons favoring Spanish over Aragonese. ReneeWrites (talk) 21:20, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, @ReneeWrites. You explain the role of Biquipedia very well.
@Jmabel It's simple. Can you explain why the category of an Aragonese church cannot be in Aragonese but in Spanish?. Why not in German, Russian, French or Portuguese? It seems obvious that in a multilingual project if an Aragonese creates an article about an Aragonese church in the Biquipedia in Aragonese and takes the trouble to create in Commons (multilingual project) the category of that church, he does it in Aragonese and does not find that it is changed to another language (and in the process wrongly naming the church as "Nuestra Señora de los Dolores"). The conclusion is obvious: the aim is to erase the presence of the Aragonese language in a project that is falsely advertised as multilingual. Only English and Spanish are accepted. Aragonese is erased. It always happens the same.
RenatoGar (talk) 21:55, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@ReneeWrites: Yes, I fully understand that, but Pinging @ReneeWrites, RenatoGar, my remark specifically did not comment on the merits of the case, or say what Commons should do: I merely remarked that which Wikipedias have articles is not relevant to Commons in deciding category names. Are you somehow suggesting that when we made that decision a couple of decades ago we were targeting the Aragonese language? Or even that the policy advantages any particular language over another? That's absurd.
For the record: I would not have made this particular move of the category. Potentially controversial moves should not be made without a CfD. That is not what my remark was addressing, and in fact I hadn't even though that far when I made it. I specifically said I was expressing an opinion on only one aspect of it: that this particular criterion (which Wikipedias currently have articles on a given topic) is not relevant to naming categories.
If anyone including RenatoGar seriously sees my remarks as reflecting hate, please, bring it to COM:AN/U. I promise not to comment further (here or there) unless directly addressed and asked for a response. - Jmabel ! talk 22:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel: I did not mean to imply any hate or bias on your part, or even that of Commons itself, I only tried to explain the context of where RenatoGar was coming from, both with the original problem, why it's a problem, and why he got the impression Commons has a bias against minority languages. In any case, do you have any ideas for a sustainable solution? ReneeWrites (talk) 22:11, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel I don't consider your comments to be hate speech. I'm just stating a fact: a single category named in Aragonese in a multimedia project disappears to be replaced by a Spanish name. Would it be correct for me to rename the category "Madrid" in Spanish to "Madrit" in Aragonese? How would that behavior be classified?. If I did that, it would immediately be reverted and I would receive warnings for vandalism. But if it happens the other way around, it seems to be correct. The deduction is obvious: Aragonese is banned in Wikimedia Foundation projects. And I have publicized this on social networks. RenatoGar (talk) 22:23, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Església de Sant Pere de Figueres in catalan, Category:Igreja e Convento de Santa Teresa in portuguese, Category:Église Saint-Pierre de Port-Saint-Père in french.... But the only one in Aragonese disappears. What message is being given to Aragonese speakers? That we will also disappear? Not long from now, our language is considered the language in Europe most in danger of disappearing. And facts like this explain why. I will do everything possible to spread these facts and to make them known to our small community of speakers. And to point out the de facto complicity of the Wikimedia Foundation in tolerating the erasure of my language. This is not a multilingual project since some languages ​​have rights and others are denied them. RenatoGar (talk) 22:35, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to keep my response minimal, and would not be making it unless I had been directly addressed. I have already said (in my immediately previous round of remarks here) that I think the move was not correct, at least not without a discussion. In my first remark, I was simply stating, and will reiterate: in naming Commons categories, it does not matter which Wikipedias do or do not have an articles on a particular topic, so that particular line of argument is not relevant to the case.
No "message" is being sent, but I have no means to stop you from construing one. - Jmabel ! talk 22:59, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It will also be brief: there is a clear and evident message and that is how the Aragonese-speaking community on Twitter is interpreting it. RenatoGar (talk) 23:12, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To which the main loser seems to be the Aragonese-speaking community. They can work with us or not, but the only way to improve Wikimedia Aragonese support is to have a little patience and work with other people.--Prosfilaes (talk) 00:10, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Patience? We receive insults, harassment, complaints, deletions and even death threats. All for editing in the Aragonese Biquipedia. And the answer is always: shut up and don't bother. Patience, they say?..... RenatoGar (talk) 00:28, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've received much of the same for editing in certain areas on here. That's just how it goes with these types of projects. Their usually extremely good at policing mundane non-issues but actual, real problems are just ignored or handwaved and the user who complains about it is the one who usually ends up getting sanctioned. A lot of the non-English language Wikis are extremely niche and being used purely by neo-Nazis to spread nationalist propaganda anyway. The best thing to do is just move on to other things and not work in that area or on the same project again. --Adamant1 (talk) 03:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Are you saying that those of us who work on projects in languages ​​other than English are neo-Nazis? Have I understood correctly?... I see that with the answers I receive, I will have to look for other solutions outside the projects of this foundation. Accusing speakers of languages ​​other than English of being neo-Nazis is mind-boggling... Look, at Biquipedia we are dedicated to creating content in our Aragonese language. With very good results, since we are the Wikipedia with the best ratio of articles per speaker. In my case, dedicated especially to writing articles about architectural buildings from around the world and about cinema, I don't see how that can be used to talk about "nationalist propaganda" or "neo-Nazism". RenatoGar (talk) 07:46, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@RenatoGar: It was just a general comment based on my own experience. Don't take it personally. Have you read many articles on the Russian language Wikipedia though? It's clearly being used to spread nationalist propaganda. Not with all articles of course, but I'm not going to act like it isn't an issue. I'm sure plenty of non-English language Wikis are totally fine though. Which is why I didn't say "every" non-English Wiki is being used for propaganda. So don't misconstrue my comment. The more important and on topic thing here is that it's probably not worth worrying about how your being treated for editing in the Aragonese Biquipedia since it's just par for the course with a lot of Wikimedia projects. --Adamant1 (talk) 12:07, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your point of view and I share it in part. But what I am saying in this thread is not that I have been mistreated in Biquipedia (on the contrary, there is a magnificent and productive work environment) but that what is being pursued is the use of the Aragonese language in Commons, transferring a category created in the Aragonese language about an Aragonese church to the Spanish language. And when I ask the author why, he tells me not to bother. The result is the suppression of Aragonese in this project, in which there are languages ​​with rights and languages ​​without rights, such as Aragonese. And all this with the silent endorsement of the community of Commons users and of the Wikimedia Foundation itself. RenatoGar (talk) 14:44, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
People just like to fiddle with things on here sometimes. At least in this case it looks like the rename was based on a source. Although probably not the best one, but I wouldn't anymore into it then that. You could probably just rename the category back to Aragonese though since it likes there's agreement that it should have at least been discussed first. --Adamant1 (talk) 16:50, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. Well, if no one objects, I will soon transfer the category to its name in Aragonese. Thanks, RenatoGar (talk) 17:36, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You're not going to change nothing unless you take sources that prove that the official name is in the Aragonese language. You can tease people not familiar with Aragon, but the funny thing is that even the local sources that you yourself gave me don't prove that the real name is in the Aragonese language. Even the Aragonese official board of heritage it does not mention that the name is in Aragonese language. That's enough. CFA1877 (talk) 18:59, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever the specific details are you shouldn't have unilaterally changed it without discussion before hand since it looks like both names are used about equally by reliable sources. So at least IMO the edit needs to be reverted and you should start a CfD. Not to speak for other users, but that seems to be the consensus here. I don't see why you'd care if your version is actually the "correct" one anyway. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:12, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What you are saying is not true. The name in the Aragonese language is an adhoc translation made by RenatoGar, it is not officially used. As I have already said, not even the local sources that he provided reflect the name in the Aragonese language. Some are official Aragonese sources. If you are going to take part for someone, at least inform yourself about the matter and don't just believe what one party says. I corrected my own [original] name change and put the one reflected in the sources that Renato gave me, which do not reflect it in the Aragonese language. It is not my version, you can check it at the heritage office of the government of Aragon (here), at the Ministry of Culture of Spain (here) or at the local tourist office (here). Or even on this website specialized in Aragonese Romanesque architecture (here). CFA1877 (talk) 19:32, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Adamant1, @Jmabel, @Prosfilaes, @ReneeWrites: Please see the kind of comments that we Aragonese speakers constantly receive. Do you understand why we say that there is hatred for our language? The three links that this user publishes were provided by me and correspond to pages written in Spanish, not in Aragonese (if I provide him with texts in Aragonese I know perfectly well that he will refuse to read them, we all know each other here, outside of Spain they don't know them yet), therefore the place names are in Spanish. If they were pages in English, the place name would be in English. And if they were in Chinese, in Chinese. But anyway, the answer is always: shut up and let your language not exist in Commons or anywhere else, we already know that the existence of a small language of 10,000 speakers is highly offensive to Spanish ultranationalists who want to erase the existence of that tiny language even in the places where it is spoken. Anyway, I thank you for reading all this and I am sorry for wasting your time, you and I have wasted it, and of course, the Aragonese language always loses. Obviously, I will never upload an image to Commons, where my language is treated like this. Greetings, RenatoGar (talk) 20:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, he even reported me. Incredible! RenatoGar (talk) 20:06, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is not about the official name but, for subjects without a traditional name in English, it's about the local name as used by the available sources. Official names are interesting because they often follow reliable sources, but Wikimedia projects are not official registers.
The original name of the category in Aragonese is fine and it shouldn't have been changed - and even less without previous discussion. Pere prlpz (talk) 13:30, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is a Wikipedia in Aragonese, and in this one, logically, there is the only article that exists about the church we are talking about. It is not surprising, therefore, that the Commons Category is also in Aragonese. And it is correct, as it would be if it were in Spanish or English! And, if it were correct, the change should not have been made. It should be returned to the original category.
CFA1877 I beg you to avoid these types of edits. Show a little more empathy and tolerance towards minority languages ​​and respect for the work done by the editors who have preceded us. We are all working for the same thing.--Isidre blanc (talk) 08:14, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 15

Dispute resolution on whether images are AI upscaled

Paper9oll's 2,218 × 2,160 still
Per later comments in this thread, Paper9oll has now replaced this image with a lower-resolution version. Their original 2,218 × 2,160 still is here.
My 1,103 × 1,080 attempt to capture the same

(I raised a thread at the help desk for this last week, but only got a couple of short responses and realise that this may have been the wrong forum for it.)

I recently flagged many of User:Paper9oll's uploaded YouTube video stills as looking to me like obvious AI upscales, but in a subsequent discussion on their talk page they said that they were simply downloading the original videos and capturing frames from them, and don't believe the images to be upscaled, or agree with me that they even look upscaled, and don't know what else to say.

An example upload is shown. To the left is the image Paper9oll uploaded, to the right is my own attempt to capture the same still from the same video.

Paper9oll's image is twice the resolution (larger even than the highest resolution of the original video that YouTube will serve me) and does seem to show clear signs of AI upscaling which aren't discernable in the original. In general, the face has a much higher resolution than her hand and clothes, which are about the same in each image - this is typical of AI upscalers like MyHeritage that are designed for use on portrait photos. Across the subject's forehead, individual hairs are visible (with an unusual pinstripe pattern on the rest of the hair), but below the level of her chin the hair instantly drops to the same low resolution blur as in my image.

Would other users agree that these look AI upscaled, and should be flagged as such? (Such a decision is significant because it means that the images couldn't be used on the English Wikipedia.) My best faith assumption is that Paper9oll is obliviously using some software that's automatically upscaling the extracted stills. Belbury (talk) 09:39, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is 100% upscaled with AI. If the image was an ultra-high resolution still of the original video, it would be consistently sharp across the board, but it isn't. The eyes, eye wrinkles. lips and strands of hair are incredibly sharp but details outside of that specific area turn wobbly. The right eye of the upscaled image looks in a slightly different direction, and has a slightly different color from the original. ReneeWrites (talk) 10:15, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not too thrilled with having the same discussion a second time, but since the OP is repeating everything they said before, I'll do the same, albeit more briefly. Looks AI to me: highlights on three fingers of her right hand made to look more like fingernails on the wrong side of the finger; skin looks like it has been through some sort of "cosmetic" filter; I could list more, but I think that is enough. - Jmabel ! talk 20:46, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's entirely possible that you're both right - that whatever tools they used to download the video and display it on their computer are doing some sort of "smart" upscaling without their knowledge. But if that's the case, the proper solution will be to use a video player which can capture a frame directly (like VLC - "Video" menu → "Snapshot") rather than going through the intermediate step of a screenshot. Omphalographer (talk) 21:28, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This appears to be AI. There is a waffle- like pattern around the lips and it also affects the margins of the lips. Also, the hair has artificially larger strands with a diffent color tone, roughly equally spaced. I think, this is what you call "an unusual pinstripe pattern." Please, flag this altered image appropriately. Also, the uploader stated that there was a higher quality video on YouTube that they originally had access to, but is no longer available. As with other files sources, it should be verifiable. -- Ooligan (talk) 23:46, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just to needlessly reiterate what other people have already said, these images are clearly AI. The main tell for me is how the hair is smoothed out in Paper9oll's image but not the second one. Just taking a screenshot of a video wouldn't do that. --Adamant1 (talk) 05:58, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The distortions are easily visible on images such as File:Jung Yoo-min at 2019 KBS Drama Awards on 311219 (1).png as well. CMD (talk) 09:49, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paper9oll has now put the 68 images that I initially tagged as upscaled into a DR at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by User:Paper9oll, referencing this pump discussion. --Belbury (talk) 09:08, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

According to Paper9oll we're just en:WP:casting aspersions. Go figure. I've said it before, but the project really needs to stop pandering to uploaders so much. --Adamant1 (talk) 11:25, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paper9oll has now said on their DR that they will reupload some of these images with "the current available resolution" (they have said that some of their images were taken from 4K versions of videos which no longer exist on YouTube), and is in the process of doing so "over the coming days". This includes the image at the top of this thread, which now looks the same as my version, without any of the issues discussed above. So fair enough, whatever their current export process is, it is not upscaling the images.

It's unclear whether they intend to do this to all of their upscaled-looking uploads: the strikethroughs on the DR suggest that where an image came from a 4K source they don't consider it to be upscaled, even though a still like File:Yoona at 2nd Blue Dragon Series Awards on 190723 (6).png very much appears to be (and does not match the detail of the 4K video, when I view it; it's twice the resolution, has the same wispy hair thing going on, and the background banner text is blobby).

I'll see where things are when Paper9oll has finished overwriting files. --Belbury (talk) 16:29, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Given the clear consensus above (and only a mild "not obviously AI-y to me" on the original help desk thread), I've now reviewed this user's upload history and flagged 118 of their files as AI-upscaled under the discussed criteria above (eg. the pinstripe hair going blurry below the face again on File:Jessica Jung for Vogue Taiwan on 20032021 (4).png, compared to an unprocessed still File:Jessica Jung for Vogue Taiwan on 20032021 (6).png from the same video).
Paper9oll has asked not to be notified of further discussions about this issue, so I have not pinged them. Belbury (talk) 10:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 16

Launching! Join Us for Wiki Loves Ramadan 2025!

Dear All,

We’re happy to announce the launch of Wiki Loves Ramadan 2025, an annual international campaign dedicated to celebrating and preserving Islamic cultures and history through the power of Wikipedia. As an active contributor to the Local Wikipedia, you are specially invited to participate in the launch.

This year’s campaign will be launched for you to join us write, edit, and improve articles that showcase the richness and diversity of Islamic traditions, history, and culture.

To get started, visit the campaign page for details, resources, and guidelines: Wiki Loves Ramadan 2025.

Add your community here, and organized Wiki Loves Ramadan 2025 in your local language.

Whether you’re a first-time editor or an experienced Wikipedian, your contributions matter. Together, we can ensure Islamic cultures and traditions are well-represented and accessible to all.

Feel free to invite your community and friends too. Kindly reach out if you have any questions or need support as you prepare to participate.

Let’s make Wiki Loves Ramadan 2025 a success!

For the International Team 12:08, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

January 17

Do we have tool that will run OCR on pdf files and store the text in the PDF

Do we have access to a tool that will run OCR on pdf files and store the text in the PDF. Adobe Acrobat does it but only in the paid version. --RAN (talk) 00:23, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): Not that I know of, but we do have https://ocr.wmcloud.org/ which can OCR individual pages and is integrated into Wikisource. Is there a reason you want the text to be added to the PDF, rather than transcribing it on Wikisource? Sam Wilson 01:30, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ia-upload.wmcloud.org OCRs the works it uploads from the Internet Archive to Commons.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:01, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ia-upload doesn't actually do the OCR, it relies on IA doing that and then copies over the PDF or DjVu with the text layer. But yeah, that's a good way to get a PDF here with a text layer! Sam Wilson 05:38, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I want both, I transcribe at Wikisource, but I like the embedded text. That's why there are more djvu files at Commons, they also embed ASCII text. --RAN (talk) 03:38, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): The issue is that the embedded text will never be corrected. Won't that be annoying? I know there are ideas (e.g. phab:T59807) to make it easier to write Wikisource text back into DjVu (or PDF) files, but nothing currently exists for that. I think the main reason there are more DjVu files on Commons (because the text-embedding capabilities of PDF are similar, as far as we use them) is that the IA used to generate them and so it was easy to copy them there. Sam Wilson 05:48, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The reason there's more DjVu files on Commons is that they're a little less cranky than PDFs at Wikisource. I can't speak to any specific problems, and it's not impossible they're fixed, but by legend and lore, DjVu is better, so when I'm using ia-upload, I go for DjVu. I don't know exactly what ia-upload is doing, but it's not simply copying the files from IA, since IA doesn't produce DjVu anymore. It may be taking the IA OCR data and using that instead of OCRing the images itself.--Prosfilaes (talk) 07:18, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Prosfilaes: It takes the IA's JPEG2000 files, and the DjVu XML (that they still produce) and combines them to make a DjVu for uploading here. Sam Wilson 13:48, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong coordinates

Is there a template to tag photos that have the wrong coordinates? Or should I just delete them? File:Peace Keeping (133376943).jpeg thinks it's located inside a cinema. Of course, it might just be that it's overly precise. Should I add e.g. |prec=1000? Sam Wilson 13:47, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find a template for incorrect locations, the closest thing I could find was a category to put them in (though this is a category that automatically adds media if there's an error in the location template, files aren't typically added manually). You could maybe use Template:Location rounded to indicate it's an estimated location rather than a precise one. ReneeWrites (talk) 16:46, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is also {{Location estimated}}
If the coords are blatantly wrong (e.g. probably not with 100km), just delete them.
We probably should create a template for "I don't believe the location here."
We could also work out a way to better use the precision already theoretically supported by the geocoding templates, but poorly used. - Jmabel ! talk 22:05, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel and ReneeWrites: Thanks both of you, those are good suggestions. I think a specific template could be useful (I've come across others like this). I'm always slightly wary of just deleting the coords as it is likely that they're at least within the right city or region (and probably relating to a GPS not getting a new fix after being driven to a new location or something — although the same applies to arrival photos at airports that can sometimes get the coords from the place of departure…). For this one, I've moved the wrong coords to a comment about them being wrong. Sam Wilson 01:44, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FlickreviewR 2 user talk redirect

User:FlickreviewR 2 is an essential service, but its developer has retired since 2020. I took the liberty to watch his user talk for over 4 years now and answer questions as much as i could, but now i stop. perhaps the bot user talk should redirect to a community page so that future questions posted will be noticed by more users? RoyZuo (talk) 16:44, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it will make sense to redirect to somewhere else. The question is where. And its great that you watched and answered questions. Thanks. --MGA73 (talk) 07:42, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe COM:HD? --Stefan2 (talk) 17:03, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bioregions 2023

I was looking through categories for geographical locations a while ago and happen to come across Category:Bioregions 2023. Apparently it's an attempt by a single user to categories things related to the earth based on some NGOs classification system for bioregions or something. Of course by putting "One Earth" in the name of every category. Honestly, I'm not really sure what the deal is outside of it looking like a weird attempt to replace exiting categories with ones containing the name "One Earth" to advertise the organization. At least that's my guess. Whatever the case, it looks like there's 3150 categories related to One Earth on here at this point. People can look through Category:Ecoregions by country (One Earth) to find plenty of examples. I'm not really sure what to do about it considering the scale. I feel like something should be done about it though. Anyone have any ideas or opinions? Adamant1 (talk) 19:45, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I brought this up with one of the users last year; you may want to review that discussion at User talk:Z3lvs#Regarding Category:One Earth and its subcategories. The use of "One Earth" in the category names is a legitimate way of distinguishing the categories from similar names which aren't part of this category system; that being said, I agree that it's a little unclear how (or if) this system is meant to integrate with other Commons categories. Omphalographer (talk) 20:20, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Omphalographer: The name "One Earth" clearly has to do with the organization of the same name (Category:One Earth). I really don't see how that's a legitimate way of disambiguating thousands of categories that at the end of the day have absolutely nothing to do with the organization. Categories that don't even seem to need disambiguating to begin with BTW. There's absolutely no reason what-so-ever that Category:List of Biomes (One Earth) needs to have "One Earth" in it. Category:Red Sea Mangroves Ecoregion was specifically deleted when it already exited just to add "One Earth" to the name. That's clearly not a legitimate reason to rename an exiting category. It serves no other purpose then advertising the organization. --Adamant1 (talk) 20:35, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 18

Massive upload problems

Are other users also experiencing a massive amount of 503 errors or error messages like "lockmanager-fail-conflict" during upload? GPSLeo (talk) 09:52, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are several types of critical upload/publish errors. Afaik it is planned to be resolved until Wednesday --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 19:30, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whisky ABV

I have begin to put images of whiskies and whisky bottles into subcategories of Category:Whiskies by alcohol by volume, like we do for beers.

Some of the values have one or even two decimal places; would it be best to keep these, or categorise by bands (e.g "42–42.99%")?

Either way, please help with the task. Sláinte! Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:38, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is the alcohol content of a whisk(e)y a property which is commonly used to differentiate between different types, like it is for beer, or is it primarily included on labels for regulatory reasons? Having separate categories for every distinct value certainly seems excessive, especially for something like 50% vs. 50.05%. Omphalographer (talk) 00:16, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I seriously doubt the usefulness of this for Commons; it it is useful at all, I'd expect much wider bands than a single percent. - Jmabel ! talk 00:40, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:RotaryIncrementalEncoder.jpg appears as broken link in wp article

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T384128

File:RotaryIncrementalEncoder.jpg appears as a broken link in wp article Incremental_encoder, and on its commons page there is an "open in media viewer" button instead of the image. This used to appear normally in the article, but something has changed that broke it. Lambtron (talk) 18:56, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Update: On the image's commons page, where it says "Size of this preview: 800 × 583 pixels. Other resolutions: ...", when I click any size except the last option (largest) the server gives me a web page that says "Unauthorized | This server could not verify that you are authorized to access the document you requested." Lambtron (talk) 19:25, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's weird, I can't reproduce this issue, can you give the URL which produces this error? The domain should be upload.wikimedia.org. Dylsss (talk) 19:45, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Kinda looks like phab:T383053 but they aren't in f8. Dylsss (talk) 20:01, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4b/RotaryIncrementalEncoder.jpg/320px-RotaryIncrementalEncoder.jpg
Lambtron (talk) 20:16, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Lambtron Can you access https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4b/Solar_time_vs_standard_time.png/1200px-Solar_time_vs_standard_time.png? Dylsss (talk) 20:18, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No. Same unauthorized message. Lambtron (talk) 20:26, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I reported it on Phabricator: phab:T384128. Once the Swift container is recreated it should fix itself. Dylsss (talk) 20:32, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Lambtron (talk) 20:33, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Same issue at Village pump/Technical. Glrx (talk) 13:54, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 19

UI for data files

I was just looking at Data:Fitchburg Railroad.map, which I know is used by en:Fitchburg Railroad. But nothing on the data page shows if the file is being used on any wikis, and "What links here" doesn't show the railroad article, either. Is something broken? I'm also looking for where metadata could be stored, such as a description or citation to a source, and I don't see one, unlike images and other files. -- Beland (talk) 03:58, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One of the multiple issues with the data space is that theoretically anyone can put whatever they want into a data file since it doesn't have specific fields for sources or descriptions. Let alone are data files easy to find or work with to begin with. So there isn't as much review or verification of them compared to normal files to begin with regardless. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:15, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is some verification. Saving mapdata that is not correctly formatted geojson or has no license is not possible. GPSLeo (talk) 06:38, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. I wasn't aware. At least it's something. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:43, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's planned: phab:T383446. Dylsss (talk) 07:51, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, yay! Is there a ticket for storing user-editable metadata about Data: pages? I couldn't find one in the Phabricator search engine. -- Beland (talk) 08:18, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean? The page content with the metadata can be edited like on every other page. GPSLeo (talk) 10:56, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's not what I'm seeing. When I'm on Data:Fitchburg Railroad.map, if I click the "Edit" tab, instead of being able to edit the description and other metadata as I would for an image, I get taken to a page where I'm editing the contents of the JSON. -- Beland (talk) 11:02, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The metadata and description are entirely stored in the same json file as the geometry data. GPSLeo (talk) 11:12, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That does not seem like a great place to put wikitext, nor would editors be able to use the visual wikitext editor there. If it's going to stay that way, it would be helpful to somehow indicate that on the page, since it's different from other, much more common file types. -- Beland (talk) 11:18, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also wondering if that's even allowed by all the formats that might use the Data: namespace. -- Beland (talk) 11:18, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The only supported data formats are JSON and CSV. - Jmabel ! talk 17:30, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is some discussion in the tasks listed at phab:maniphest/graph/242596/ about using MCR to store Wikitext separately or adding a Structured data slot, but it looks like it is likely to all stay in Json to avoid creating an overcomplicated solution. Dylsss (talk) 17:55, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the pointer! Making a note to myself...looks like on phab:T155290 they are taking similar use cases into account, though maybe putting in a cheap and easy solution that wouldn't support the visual editor for now. (And if it's in JSON it would be in a special field that's removed by a parser before export to an API.) -- Beland (talk) 23:54, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UK to require age verification for adult content

"The UK announces that, as of July, any site that allows adult content — including social media sites — will have to age/identity verify all users, or face enforcement action by the British government." - [1]

Pass the popcorn... Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:11, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To the UK I say "Bollocks!"   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:23, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There has been something similar announced in France, including a decision by Paris Appeal Court to block some porn websites on October 17th, 2024. This comes from a new law voted on May 17th, 2024. But I don't think social media are concerned. Yann (talk) 12:32, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Line art

drawing of a tree

The header of Category:Line art says "Line art is any image that consists of distinct straight and curved lines placed against a (usually plain) background, without gradations in shade (darkness) or hue (color) to represent two-dimensional or three-dimensional objects."

However, the category and its subcats include many images with gradations in shade (example above).

Which interpretation is correct?

If the example is correctly categorised, can someone show an example of a monochrome pencil drawing that would not be included? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:24, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I note that the same user had identified File:CHE Hofstetten-Flüh Flag.svg as an instance of "line art" as well, though I cannot see how this image would qualify as such. The image consists principally of large regions of color not separated by lines. The only line surrounds the star shape near the top. I do not think this is sufficient to consider the image to be "line art". --EncycloPetey (talk) 12:24, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 20

Hi! I just wanna ask if the logo of new company of Donald Trump the $Trump of known as "Trump Meme" can fall to public domain or in fair use? Royiswariii Talk! 08:50, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Royiswariii: Before he is sworn in, definitely not.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 09:23, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What difference would swearing-in make? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:55, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Pigsonthewing: Anything he or his staff posts after he is sworn in will be a part of his second term and thus subject to {{PD-USGov-POTUS}}.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:10, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe that to be true. But we are talking about something posted before swearing-in; its copyright status won't change once that happens. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:58, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know "Fight Fight Fight LLC" isn't owned by the American government. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 12:00, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Royiswariii: If by logo you mean this file, then it is {{PD-text}}. If you mean something else, please specify. Note that Commons does not host "fair use" material. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:57, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Pigsonthewing yeah, that's logo i'm talking. I'm just making sure if it's a pass on PD-text Royiswariii Talk! 11:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It literally is just text Trade (talk) 18:22, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cities of Ukraine

I propose to leave in Template:Cities of Ukraine only cities that are regional centers and cities with a population of over 100 thousand people. In total, there are over 400 cities in Ukraine and adding all the cities of Ukraine is too expensive for the template. The criterion of importance of cities is too subjective and is not found in any other similar template on Wikimedia Commons or English Wikipedia (Template:Cities of Turkey, Template:Cities of North Macedonia, Template:US cities, Template:Cities in Slovenia, Template:Cities of Estonia, Template:Cities of Iraq). Mitte27 (talk) 23:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Микола Василечко. Well very well (talk) 11:47, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See also Commons:Categories for discussion/2024/05/Template:US cities#Template:US cities for a somewhat similar discussion. Well very well (talk) 11:48, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think there could be these types of criteria:
  1. Regional centers — we definitely include all of them in any case,
  2. Cities with population more than XX/YY most populous cities — the same but just with different cutoffs, currently "city with population more than 100 thousands/47 most populous cities". We could try a bit expanding it for "50 most populous cities" or even "100 most populous cities" as done in US template (but probably... there are significantly less categories on Commons for Ukraine cities than US ones).
  3. "Important"/notable cities. I'm not sure whether this is a good criterion — probably the template should include cities, for which there is a high probability of categories existing — and I doubt that for Chornobyl/Pripyat, despite how notable they are, there are many categories on Commons. Also, we have many categories for cities of Ternopil Oblast despite probably most of them aren't very notable — but probably be better on the template because of having many categories.
  4. Cities having more than XX categories on Commons. Probably there wouldn't be many problems with cutoff here (I think that for most cities there are either <5 categories or >10-15 of them). And probably every Ternopil Oblast city will satisfy this criterion.
We should discuss which of these criteria should be used for the template and with what cutoffs.
(Also I would like to suggest that after the discussion will be finished I will conduct a bot run "fixing" inclusions of Cities and Regions of Ukraine templates — i.e. placing them where they weren't placed and removing where they shouldn't be placed.) Well very well (talk) 11:59, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think navigation templates with something like cities as geographic objects are not a good idea. Such templates should better use administrative regions like districts or municipalities without splitting between urban and rural. GPSLeo (talk) 13:18, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
+1. There's a lot of situations where they are impossible to use as a navigational aid due to how their designed and they usually take up way to much room on the top of the page anyway. At the end of the day their just pointless extra noise. --Adamant1 (talk) 16:35, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
-1. No, they are used frequently. For example, in categories like Category:Sports clubs in Kharkiv. Well very well (talk) 16:56, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They're often a symptom of overwrought category structures. If a small set of closely related categories are so widely separated in the category tree that you need a template to navigate between them, that category tree might need to be redesigned. Omphalographer (talk) 21:35, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with that last. It's a much smoother navigation than the category tree, especially for people who are not particularly into Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 03:28, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New photos of Donald Trump

For some reason the software that catches the same file being uploaded multiple times isn't working in the specific case.

we can assume there's others and crop version of many of these

Moxy (talk) 23:27, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate detection only works for files which are completely identical. These images are all slightly different (different resolutions, file formats, adjusted colors, etc) - MediaWiki doesn't attempt to detect that kind of duplication. Omphalographer (talk) 23:34, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wow.... I guess there's a lot of manual cleanup for you guys.... I see two more just uploaded. Moxy (talk) 23:42, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They need proper guidelines at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Donald Trump 2025 inaugural potrait.png Moxy (talk) 05:18, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 22

video2commons

Why is being logged into YouTube suddenly a requirement now?--Trade (talk) 03:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade: What makes you ask?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 05:47, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just wanted to know what happened to warrant this Trade (talk) 05:55, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Trade: What are you seeing on your screen, exactly?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 05:56, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
An exception occurred: TaskError: b"b'pywikibot.Error: APIError: titleblacklist-custom-space: \\xe2\\xa7\\xbctitleblacklist-custom-space\\xe2\\xa7\\xbd\\n[filekey: 1bitu27hsqjc.cbj298.6438344.webm;\\n sessionkey: 1bitu27hsqjc.cbj298.6438344.webm;\\n invalidparameter: filename;\\n servedby: mw-api-ext.codfw.main-6f9dc9ff74-kvkhq;\\n help: See https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/api.php for API usage. Subscribe to the mediawiki-api-announce mailing list at <https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/mediawiki-api-announce.lists.wikimedia.org/> for notice of API deprecations and breaking changes.]'" Trade (talk) 11:28, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Trade: So what title / filename were you trying to use, in importing what Youtube file?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:05, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i forgot. not i just get Error: An exception occurred: DownloadError: b'ERROR: [youtube] D0dslTanUKc: Sign in to confirm you\xe2\x80\x99re not a bot. This helps protect our community. Learn more' Trade (talk) 16:18, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's an error being generated by YouTube itself, not by video2commons. Users of standalone video downloaders like yt-dlp have run into the same message, e.g. [2]. There's unlikely to be anything we can do about it. Omphalographer (talk) 19:02, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is it permanent_ Trade (talk) 22:56, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I got the same message as well when I tried uploading a video through Video2Commons. There error I got was, "Error: An exception occurred: DownloadError: b'ERROR: [youtube] X5gMiDnYEds: Sign in to confirm you\xe2\x80\x99re not a bot. This helps protect our community. Learn more'". RandomUserGuy1738 (talk) 16:30, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if this is the cause but it seems like YouTube recently blocked some VPN IP ranges. To use yt-dlp one may need to use --cookies-from-browser firefox or something similar. If that is now indeed required maybe a video2commons YouTube account could be used for the cookies. Prototyperspective (talk) 16:32, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
YouTube rate-limits downloads on an account-by-account basis, and will block accounts which download too many videos (with no prior warning). A shared account would almost certainly get blocked very quickly. Omphalographer (talk) 19:03, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh, time to activate the YT sockpuppets i guess Trade (talk) 22:57, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Odd CropTool behavior

Lately (consistently, well over a dozen times today) each time I try to crop an image, when I click "Upload" the first time, the crop fails with the message, "Upload failed! undefined". If I click "Upload" again, it works fine. Jmabel ! talk 04:12, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just got much worse. Might be coincidence, but I just updated to the latest Firefox (134.0.2, 64-bit) and now it simply fails, no longer working on the second try. - Jmabel ! talk 22:05, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, it's much weirder than I thought: it actually worked (who knows on which of several sequential trial) but kept giving me an error message rather than a chance to click through to the cropped file. - Jmabel ! talk 22:08, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Personality rights tag for deceased people

Per previous discussion at Commons:Village pump/Proposals/Archive/2012/01#Adjustment proposals for Personality rights, what's the purpose for removing {{Personality rights}} for deceased people? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Absolutiva (talk • contribs) 04:45, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Absolutiva: In some jurisdictions, personality rights are extinguished by laws, various times after death, and we want to make sure that keeping files relating to those rights complies with those laws, and have them tagged (or not tagged) appropriately. In other jurisdictions, those rights may last forever, so the tagging should last forever too. The proper section link for that 13 year old discussion is the ugly Commons:Village pump/Proposals/Archive/2012/01#Adjustment_proposals_for_.7B.7BPersonality_rights.7D.7D, so George Ho please keep live templates out of section headings. Pinging @99of9 for input.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 05:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm here but I'm not sure there is much I can add to this. The template is unchanged since that edit in 2012 where I just implemented the new consensus. Yes it refers to the general situation (living or deceased), but guidelines on when to add or remove that template are a different question. 99of9 (talk) 09:43, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So what are the current guidelines on when to add or remove that template, who wants to change them, exactly how, and why?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:59, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We also want to undelete those files for which the abovementioned law is no longer applicable, on the appropriate day or COM:PDD.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:02, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 23

Licensing different than Structured data

Hi, I came across File:Abubakar Shehu Idris.jpg and the Licensing is different than the structured data. On the main tab, it says CC BY-SA 4.0 but in the Structured data tab it says public domain. How do I fix this, as there doesn't seem to be the option for CC BY-SA 4.0? Myrealnamm (💬Let's talk · 📜My work) 01:16, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Myrealnamm I have corrected the license in the structured data. Tvpuppy (talk) 03:00, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump&oldid=986658534"