User talk:MGA73/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Re:Deletions per "NowCommon"

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello, MGA73. You have new messages at Fastily's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:42, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

deletions because of commons

Latest comment: 14 years ago10 comments3 people in discussion

Hello, You or your bot have deleted a few images I uploaded, because they may be on commons. However, some of the images on commons give no attribution to the original uploader. It is best practice when moving images to commons to preserve the original information, including the original uploader. Wapondaponda (talk) 17:58, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I'm not an admin so I can't delete images. I always try to make sure that original uploader is mentioned. I also fix a lot of images where someone else moved files to Commons without the relevant file history. Could it perhaps be some images from Flickr? Because if images are uploaded from Flickr to both Commons and enwiki then it does not matter what happend on enwiki (unless you are the Flickr user and licensed images different on enwiki). --MGA73 (talk) 18:03, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes many of the images are from Flickr. I am not the individual who took the photos, the original license holder. However, I did request permission from the copyright holders on flickr and a few of them changed their licences to creative commons licenses so that they could be available on wikipedia. I subsequently uploaded the photos to wikipedia, but this was before the big drive to move images to commons. Later a few of these images were moved to commons by other editors, a few mentioned the original uploader but some haven't. I do feel that the original uploader should be mentioned because I did go through the trouble of requesting permission from the copyright holders. Wapondaponda (talk) 20:43, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

If I move images information of original uploader should be on images. Perhaps some of the images was uploaded directly to Commons without the uploader even knew you had uploaded it to enwiki. It is hard for me to find deleted images so I can only check "new" images. --MGA73 (talk) 20:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

It is highly unlikely that another editor would independently upload the same image to commons. The photos are not of celebrities, and one has to search deep into flickr to find them. Obviously some editors found them on wiki articles first and moved them to commons, without mentioning the original uploader. When you tag the wiki article with nowCommons, the wiki image with the original uploader and original information gets deleted. I would suggest that if the uploader on commons is different from the wiki uploader, then it might be a good idea to hold on with the tags in order to resolve who the original uploader is. Ordinarily this wouldn't be a big deal, but I did go through quite a bit of trouble requesting permission to use these photos. Free photos on flickr aren't easy to find. Wapondaponda (talk) 21:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

OK. At the moment I'm looking at images in Category:Flickr images on Commons. If you see any images you uploaded you are welcome to fix whatever might be missing on Commons. Sometimes it is hard because version on enwiki is smaller that the one on Commons. --MGA73 (talk) 21:26, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

A few images which you have edited or tagged

include File:Albino_baby_malawi.jpg, which was moved to [1]

* File:San tribesman headshot.jpg, which was moved to [2]

File:Congo lady.jpg which was moved to [3]

Wapondaponda (talk) 21:45, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

"So fix it" - you can edit on Commons too :-) Images was uploaded to commons in 2007 and in higher resolution than on enwiki. Therefore images was not "transferred" to Commons but someone uploaded a new copy. I have no way of knowing if you worked hard to get images licensed freely or if you just found it - that is why I made no "attribution" to you on enwiki. The photographer should be attributed the work that others do are often "hidden" in file history - we do not have a field for "I found this" or "I persuaded Flickr user to license it freely". So I really do not know where to put that information. --MGA73 (talk) 10:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons, it is best practice to use the commons helper to move images rather than to simply upload a new copy.

Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons also states

If the image has a revision history, make sure to upload the old revisions first. Of course, you might choose to ignore some revisions as irrelevant (for example, vandalism). You should always upload the original version the recent version is based on.

In short it is better to move than create fresh uploads. It is pretty clear that all the wikipedia images are older than the commons images which demonstrates that they are the original images. Wapondaponda (talk) 17:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm looking at the image history on Commons as well as on the English Wikipedia, and I do not believe these images were moved from English but either uploaded independently or uploaded to Commons in order to recreate them at a different language version of an English article. You should feel free to add your information to the images in question, but do not assume that people are being remiss in citing you; as we have a great deal of contributors on Commons who look for images on Flickr. Also, all of the images were uploaded to Commons in 2007. Bastique ^demandez 17:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

File:Scholder.jpg

Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, you marked this one as lacking proof of license.

I'm not the uploader, but the original is here, and is licensed CC Attribution, as stated at File:Scholder.jpg.

Could you please update the file page to reflect this. Thanks, Pete Tillman (talk) 18:48, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi, sorry but omething went wrong when I marked the file. The problem is not the license on Flickr but that it is a photo of a copyrighted work. I tried to add that to the reason for marking the file that way. --MGA73 (talk) 18:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, got it now. If we have to go to Fair Use, I think we should use a better image. I'll upload one sometime. Pete Tillman (talk) 18:42, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Done. You may want to reduce size, if you think that necessary. Cheers, Pete Tillman (talk) 01:57, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Commons

Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I don;t like commons because when i try to link things in the description it never works because it links only to commons. what is that? Daniel Christensen (talk) 08:24, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Daniel. You can link from commons to any Wikipedia by adding :en: in the beginning of the link or :de: for German etc. Syntax is like this en:Daniel or de:Daniel or Commons:Daniel. If you need any help you are welcome to ask. I may reply faster if you ask on my userpage on Commons. --MGA73 (talk) 12:01, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

all right yeah I knew it could be done and I knew commons was better for some reason like how you can categorize photos but I mean are they really more likely to get seen and used if they are there; cause I mean I browsed through and it seemed like there were sooooo many unused and random pictures that it was kind of surplus; it seems like every image uploaded straight to a project gets used because it was uploaded for a reason. Daniel Christensen (talk) 18:47, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

:-) I replyed on commons:User talk:MGA73#Uploading to commons. --MGA73 (talk) 11:44, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

That type of linking is NOT working ANYMORE

Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I tried it on my spanish user page; I tried to link to my English user page and the text disappears when you save it. Daniel Christensen (talk) 07:23, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

WHOA, whoa whoa whoa my fuckup, sorry; I missed that there had to be two colons; one before and one after the link language thing! Daniel Christensen (talk) 07:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah or else it will show in the left side on the screen as an iw-link :-) --MGA73 (talk) 08:42, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

LOL I realized that. I acidentally did that in my photo description. Daniel Christensen (talk) 19:20, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Comments welcome on Commons

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, sorry but I'm not actively monitoring my pages on Commons, I'm pretty much only uploading there.

Yes, I was given a permission by Svetlana Karadzhova, the author of all the photos in the gallery. The permission is in Bulgarian and is part of a long e-mail conversation. How should I go about making this more clear?

Best, Todor →Bozhinov 17:04, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Answered on your talk page (User_talk:TodorBozhinov#Comments_welcome_on_Commons). --MGA73 (talk) 10:58, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

RfA

Latest comment: 13 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Hi MGA73. Could you please opt in for X!'s edit counter by creating either User:MGA73/EditCounterOptIn.js or meta:User:MGA73/EditCounterGlobalOptIn.js with any content? Doing so will make it easier for the Wikipedia community to assess your RfA. Thanks, FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 21:21, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi FASTILY! Thank you for the tip. Of course I will. I created it on meta - hope it works. --MGA73 (talk) 07:22, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Please don't take my 'oppose' !vote to heart. The point I'm making is that I manually revert about 10-20 vandal hits a day, that could be as many as 7,000 a year (although I know it's not anywhere near that)., and I do all that while creating articles, reviewing others, and doing lengthy translations, as well as holding down a full-time job. I have no doubts as to your integrity and sincerity, and you can almost certainly count on my supoprt next time round if this RfA fails. --Kudpung (talk) 09:22, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung. Don't worry :-) I do not mind that not all users think it is a good idea. I know that this is not the perfect solution but I see no better alternative. I have been waiting and hoping for months that backlog would be reduced. The problem is that we also have thousands of images on Commons that we cannot check without having access to deleted information on en-wiki. These images may be used in other wikis around the world. Even if I manage to fix 7,000 images per year and even if no new images will be transferred to Commons it will take me 5 years to do it alone. So I really hope others will help. :-) --MGA73 (talk) 10:42, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

help with a js

Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I am trying to create a script that will check if the items in the watch list still exist and if they don't remove them from the watch list, to clean up the deleted pages.But i don't know how to check using js.--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 10:20, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I have no idea how to do that. The fastes way I can think of is to go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Watchlist/edit and mark all the red links. If you have 10,000 on your watch list that is ofcourse a slow way :-) --MGA73 (talk) 18:29, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I created the a greasemonkey script that auto checks the deleted files from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Watchlist/edit

inp = document.getElementsByTagName('input');
for (i=0; i<inp.length; i++) {
    if (inp[i].type == "checkbox" && inp[i].nextElementSibling.nodeName == "A") {
        if (inp[i].parentNode.innerHTML.indexOf("action=history") == -1)
            inp[i].checked = true;
    }
}

--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 10:43, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Checkcommons script

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

What is the purpose of the nowcommons script, and which pages should it be used on in the process of transferring files? It might speed up my work ;) NativeForeigner ^Talk/_Contribs 03:43, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

The purpose is to mark images with a {{NowCommons}} as reviewed or change the "NowCommons" to a {{NotMovedToCommons}}. The plan is that any user can help check the images marked with "NowCommons" and see if the transfer of the image is ok (see more info at Commons:Commons:Moving to Commons#Check the image and fix the info like here [4] [5] [6] (just a few examples) before you mark them as reviewed). Once it has been reviewed the admins can see that a (trusted) user has checked the file and therefore delete the image. So the script is only about checking. It is not about the transfer itself.

How do you transfer images? And how many? I use a bot so if you have a "long list" I might be able to help you. --MGA73 (talk) 19:24, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

MTC review

Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I was thinking how about if we make a review system for MTC this way a user can review a file and if it qualifiers then it gets added to a list and a bot can uploaded it, what do you think?--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 06:39, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

That sounds good. I think something like that has been tried before - see Category:Images ready to be moved by John Bot II. I do not know excactly what went wrong but we should try not to make the same mistake. At the moment Multichill and I have a plan to do a mass transfer. The plan is to start with the images in Category:User-created public domain images. First step was to sort it in categories for each month. Next step is to do the transfer. Multichill wrote a pywikipedia script just for this task. --MGA73 (talk) 10:09, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

We have a review system for "NowCommons". The system for "ToCommons" could be the same. Once a "reviewer=Some trusted user" is added then the image ends up in a category for this user or perhaps do it with a switch of all reviewers. If the reviewer is list --> "Category:Files reviewed by trusted user" and if not in list --> "Category:Files reviewed by other users". The script to review NowCommons could be modified for ToCommons so it is possible to review the image with one click or fail it and add a reason. --MGA73 (talk) 10:40, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

RFA congrats

Latest comment: 13 years ago9 comments8 people in discussion

Congratulations! :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:54, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations, the members of the English wikipedia project have found consensus to extend their trust to you and to allow you access to the administrator maintenance tool package. Use it wisely! -- Avi (talk) 18:57, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Tillykke! Vyvyan Basterd (talk) 19:01, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Here's your free T-shirt!

congrats! Pilif12p : Yo 19:16, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Now I have a cool T-shirt. LOL! --MGA73 (talk) 19:22, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

A little late to the party. Congratulations indeed. --Kanonkas : Talk 07:37, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations! I knew your AfD would pass in spite of my oppose - I'm sure you realised that my oppose was against Wikipdia policy and previous experience with that policy. It expressed no doubts whatsoever about you personally being a good sysop , and I'm sure you will. Good luck, and I hope to be seeing you around.--Kudpung (talk) 03:05, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you both. Yes I realise that thes "special" RfA was the reason for the opposes and doubt. --MGA73 (talk) 08:19, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

@Kudpung: I smiled when you abbreviated his RfA "AfD"

. And a belated congrats to you, MGA73! Airplaneman ✈ ^Review? 04:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost

Latest comment: 13 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, congrats on your admin promotion, but in preparing the short note about it for The Signpost, I'm puzzled as to "the backlog", which appeared in your RfA text. Is it a copyright backlog for images? Tony (talk) 10:33, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi and thank you. The backlog is not directly a copyright backlog - it is related to files that have been transfered to Commons. Once a file has been transfered to Commons someone needs to check that all relevant information has been transfered correct. If "no" the information should be fixed and if "yes" the file should be deleted on en-wiki. Sometimes files have a wrong license on Commons after a transfer so it could be a copyright issue. As a part of the review process the relevant admin should not just check if info has been transfered but also evaluate if the info is correct. Example is it really own work or just a copy from the internet and is the photo a derrivated work (copy of a painting or a statue)? --MGA73 (talk) 11:01, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Could you check what I say about you here? I'm in there editing right now, so perhaps buzz me on my talk page if there's anything you want me to change. Tony (talk) 14:19, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Looking good :-) --MGA73 (talk) 20:25, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Rollbacker

Latest comment: 13 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hello? Whom do I speak to to become a rollbacker? PolymathSJ talk 21:01, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi PolymathSJ, You can find more help here Wikipedia:Rollback_feature#How_to_apply. However, I think that 19 edits is a little to few to give someone this tool. Perhaps you could work some more and ask again later? Enjoy and thank you for helping! --MGA73 (talk) 21:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I agree. About how much would you suggest? Polymathsj^(Talk) 21:20, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

It is not just the number of edits but at least a few hundreds. But the admins in Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to grant rollback requests are better judges than I :-) --MGA73 (talk) 21:26, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Kit body Kenya7rugby.png listed for deletion

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

It is in use on this page Kenya national rugby union team (sevens). Please remove the delete request. Thanks. Mbwa mwitu (talk) 18:27, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

I think it is this file File:Kit body Kenya7Rugby.png that is used on that page instead of File:Kit body Kenya7rugby.png. Notice the capital R in Rugby. If you still do not agree please (also) leave a comment in the deletion request so we do not risk that an admin deletes the file before I see your note (I'm on vacation). --MGA73 (talk) 20:54, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Re: Now Commons

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Hello MGA73,

I appreciate your suggestion, but I'm still not very comfortable with reviewing files, and I was thinking as well that it's better when two users check the file instead of one. So, when I see that someone checks one of the files I transfer, I look what he does and do some cleaning up afterwards. I always categorize them, though, so they are ready for use in Commons even if they have not been checked. Thanks for the links, I'll have a look on them. Cheers, --Darwinius (talk) 13:21, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Answered in my talk, with a request for help, already. :) --Darwinius (talk) 13:40, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Copyright Issue

Latest comment: 13 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, I came to know that the image express 2.jpg Airport Express 2 and Airport Express is not own work which is claimed by User_talk:Aranjan17, This file copyright belongs to user Indian Rockstar on scyscraper blog. see http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=516812&page=265. Please leave talkback on my talkpage. KuwarOnline ^Talk 13:33, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I asked the uploader how that can be. If we get no good answer fast we should delete. --MGA73 (talk) 20:44, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I already asked Indian Rockstar, If he is ready to release under any free licenses, I m active user of http://www.skyscrapercity.com. waiting for his email. KuwarOnline ^Talk 06:09, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

I dont think so Indian Rockstar is going release under any free licenses. He is not replying to messages/email. KuwarOnline ^Talk 05:10, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I have now nominated the files for deletion here commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Airport express.jpg. --MGA73 (talk) 09:08, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

My file sandbox

Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Please don't retag my File sandbox for deletion([7]), if at all possible. I'm unable to have User:Matthewedwards/File:Sandbox.png, so this is all I can do for now. It's not like the file is being used in an article when the other one could be, and I would fix it if that happened. Thanks, Matthewedwards : Chat 22:35, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Matthewedwards. Yes it should be possible that I do not retag now that I know you still use it :-D However, perhaps you should leave a note on the file description "Please do not delete because..." or something to avoid other users retagging. --MGA73 (talk) 09:23, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

That's a good idea and I'll do that. Thank you! Regards, Matthewedwards : Chat 22:14, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

A few files you nominated for FFD

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

You probably know this already, but I noticed a few files that you nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 August 8 where the uploader requested deletion with the {{ffd}} tag, and you completed the nomination. Those files actually qualified for speedy deletion under criterion G7, and so I've gone ahead and speedied them. SchuminWeb (Talk) 07:49, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Yes I found out later - I was just so focused on getting all incomplete DR's completed :-) Next time I will just delete unless I think the image for some reason should be kept. --MGA73 (talk) 08:03, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

GFDL Purves

Latest comment: 13 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion

Hi. I was not sure at first what licence to use - but I suppose 3.0 is okay. I just didn't want someone to go and put one of the pics on the front cover of a book (not that any are good enough..) without my permission. Would you be able to recommend a template - parameters etc? Michaelwild (talk) 12:31, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Made the reply on User_talk:Michaelwild#GFDL. --MGA73 (talk) 12:45, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Not sure which is easier for you - if I reply here or on my page. Michaelwild is just my wikipedia pseudonym, if someone uses my pictures I would prefer them to use my real name; Purves, M (Michael Purves) would that then be - {{self}}? I don't know how to use a bot to change them. Michaelwild (talk) 12:58, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I put pages on the watchlist so I should see it if you reply where discussion started. But it is also ok here. Is [8] ok? I can do it for all your images. --MGA73 (talk) 21:51, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Well I read your message and I'm pretty sure it is ok to change the license on your images. The bot is running now. --MGA73 (talk) 18:17, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes I think that will do. Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelwild (talk • contribs) 05:02, 21 August 2010

Please can you check the photos on Bradypodion melanocephalum that I just uploaded from another website and see if they are correct.Michaelwild (talk) 20:30, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi again. The "Noncommercial" is a bit problematic. If you see {{cc-by-nc-sa-3.0}} it is a speedy deletion template. So we need a permission from uploader to use it to commercial purpose. --MGA73 (talk) 20:34, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Vandals

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, I asked another admin about whats the best vandal fighting tool to use, but they didn't know. I can't use some of them because I couldn't figure them out. I like reverting vandalism but Twinkle takes so much time. Is there a program like vandal fighter that lets you revert vandalism much easier? Látches (talk) 19:20, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

I've had a lot of success with Huggle, but you have to have rollback to use it. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 19:59, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Cinema Insomnia Barf-O-Vision

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I co-designed the Logo on the bag with the creator of Cinema Insomnia and I have full permission for it's use. Furthermore, Cinema Insomnia allows it's logos and marketing to be copied for fair use such as articles or other non profit expression. DixieDellamorto (talk) 02:11, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the comment - the best place to comment is on Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2010_August_22#File:Barf-0-vision_bag.jpg so I will reply there. --MGA73 (talk) 07:34, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Your message

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I tag as {{mtc}} because I was told that was the official process? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:48, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Now Commons

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Just to let you know I moved the template from "NowCommons" to "Now Commons". Rich Farmbrough, 20:22, 25 August 2010 (UTC).

File:Jing Ulrich in 2010.JPG

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The photo belongs to the person in it - Jing Ulrich. The Fair Use tag was a mistake, and the photo was intended to be free to use by everyone. How can I update the details of the photo so that it will comply with Wikipedia copyright rules? Kjosh2 (talk) 08:19, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for that imformation. I changed the license for you and made a reply here Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2010_August_25#File:Jing_Ulrich_in_2010.JPG so that other users can see the information and reply. --MGA73 (talk) 18:41, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

commons

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, I am unsure as your connection to Peter but I would recommend an email with all the details would be the best course of action, if I can help more than this please feel free to ask. Off2riorob (talk) 09:35, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm just trying to keep Pieter on the track because he does a lot of good work on Commons. I do not know him from other places than on Commons where everyone has heard about him. A mail sounds fine to me - it was just the edit summary I found strange. --MGA73 (talk) 11:39, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

responded to your inquiry re: pix

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

pls see my discussion page Aceofhearts1968 (talk) 11:23, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

File:DCP 0009.jpg

Latest comment: 13 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

You deleted that because it is available on commons with the same name. However, it's not available on Commons under that name, see C20XE. Do you know what the new name is. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 13:20, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I renamed it to File:Vauxhall DOHC 16V.jpg and moved it over. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 13:33, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you for your notice. Sorry about that. The plan was that the file(s) should only be gone for such a short moment that no one should miss it. We have a user that has transfered thousands of files to Commons and I have checked a lot of these transfers and the user makes very very few mistakes. So I put the files in a special category and did some queries to exclude files that should not be mass deleted. After these checks I mass delete the files and check the deletion log for "red files" (files that does not excist). This file was one of them and I undeleted this and a few others just like that shortly after deletion. Once they are visible again the plan is to check if they are on Commons under a new name. --MGA73 (talk) 13:38, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

No problem. these things happen. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 13:50, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Mistaken deletion?

Latest comment: 13 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

When you deleted File:Diode plot.png did you accidentally overlook the {{keeplocal}} template? Or do you have some reason for ignoring it? SpinningSpark 14:06, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes it was an accident. I'm sure I searched the category for "KeepLocal" before I deleted but somehow I must have made a mistake. Sorry about that. If you find any other mistakes feel free to undelete. --MGA73 (talk) 18:54, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

By the way. I do not know the reason why you want the file to be kept local. But if it is to keep a list of files you uploaded I just want to inform you that you can create a category like Commons:Category:Files created by Spinningspark. --MGA73 (talk) 18:56, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that. See User:Spinningspark/Why I don't upload to Commons if you are interested in reasons. SpinningSpark 15:24, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

I see your point. If you are not active on Commons you might miss a DR or whatever the problem is.

As for the file with bad attribution it sometimes happen. In many cases the problem is that local admins delete the files on Wikipedia before the problem is fixed. They did not do it this time so it was easy for me to fix [9] with http://toolserver.org/~magnus/commonshelper.php.

However, who is the author of the file? File:Envelope follower.jpg does not tell but we can asume it was the uploader. --MGA73 (talk) 20:05, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

I would guess so, the uploader inserted the "release to public domain" template. SpinningSpark 20:27, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Bot to delink images

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

You are invited to join the discussion at Category talk:Wikipedia files on Wikimedia Commons. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:55, 25 December 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})

Thank you for your tip. :-) --MGA73 (talk) 19:26, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Re:Possibly unfree File:Luisa Capetillo.JPG

Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

You stated:

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Luisa Capetillo.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --MGA73 (talk) 21:56, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I say:

Please proceed to delete. It is orphaned anyway. I wish you and your loved ones a Happy New Year.

Take care. Tony the Marine (talk) 04:40, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your note. I deleted the file. Happy New Year to you and your loved ones also. --MGA73 (talk) 10:45, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: Checking NowCommons

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I thought the whole point in having the dates was to mark when the backlog of images were moved, so the duplicates can be sorted out before being eliminated. Either way, I will add the dates to images that I move to the commons no matter what. Incidentally, I moved some images connected to the Nassau Veterans Memorial Coliseum to the commons, and many of the duplicate were deleted, but not File:NVMC 2.JPG. What's taking this one so long? ----DanTD (talk) 14:04, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Replied on User_talk:DanTD#Checking_NowCommons. --MGA73 (talk) 14:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Image questions

Latest comment: 13 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Michael,

I see you are interested in working with images, particularly, Category:Wikipedia files with the same name on Wikimedia Commons I'm trying to depopulate that long list, and have run into a couple situations where I'd like feedback from someone with more experience.

Issue 1 This image is on en.Wp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Leiopelma_archeyi_range.PNG

and Commons http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Leiopelma_archeyi_range.PNG

Note that the GNU Free Documentation license looks fine on en.WP, but messed up at Commons. I've noticed this several times. Do you know if:

It requires fixing (if so, how)?
Should be ignored?

Issue 2

This image is in both places as: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CountriesRecognizingROC.png

and

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CountriesRecognizingROC.png

However, the image on en.WP have a long history with multiple editors. That history hasn't been carried over to Commons. Is this a problem?

Issue 3

This image is in both places as: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Moreeb_dunes.jpg

and

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Moreeb_dunes.jpg

However, the Commons image has a tag indicating that it may be deleted. I don't want to delete it from wp.EN, and then have someone else delete it from Commons, so that it is not available. Do you know what should be done?--SPhilbrick T 17:05, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you for your note. I have corrected the problems as below. Generally problems should never be ignored.

Issue 1: Fixed by adding user name in the license template [10]. If you come across a license that is hard to get working you can try {{tl|self|author=[[:en:User:Tnarg 12345|Tnarg 12345]] at [http://en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia]|(the license on enwiki}}
Issue 2: I normally use http://toolserver.org/~magnus/commonshelper.php to fix problems like that [11].
Issue 3: The problem is that {{PD-author}} had no "|name of author". Fixed with commonshelper [12].

Hope this helps you. --MGA73 (talk) 17:24, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

That was quick, thanks for the help.--SPhilbrick T 17:31, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. Thank you for helping with the backlog. --MGA73 (talk) 17:43, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Templates

Latest comment: 13 years ago8 comments3 people in discussion

Before slapping templates on images and requesting speedy deletion, and then notifying user pages with re-direct, why don't you just to check to see if there is not just a simple typo [13] - something you could sort out yourself. Giacomo 10:45, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes if we are sure that PS = PD. --MGA73 (talk) 10:49, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Well why not ask? Instead of trying to have pages deleted and leaving messages on redirected page. Just take the trouble to look at what you are doing. There is no prize for the most images deleted in one day. Giacomo 10:51, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not interessted in winning a prize. I'm interessted in cleaning up files without a valid license. I have a list of more than 3,000 files to check here User:MGA73/No license. Adding a template is asking and it takes less time than having to make a personal notice to all the uploaders. The template does inform the uploader that there is no valid license on the file and that it is important to add one or the image may be deleted. If uploader reads the message it is easy to add a license.

As for the problem with the redirected page I agree it is a problem. But as you may have noticed it was added using a script. I agree that it would be nice if the script was corrected. --MGA73 (talk) 11:00, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

A template on a redirect doesn't inform the uploader of anything, though, except by pure luck, MGA73. So if information to the uploader is important, please accept responsibility for that importance. As long as nobody's actually forcing you to check 3,000 files, it's not a good excuse to say "What can I do, I use a script, pity it doesn't work right". You, not the script, are ultimately responsible for what you do and what you sign. Don't you agree, really? Please don't tell me "No, it would take too long." Too long for what? Bishonen | talk 12:22, 2 January 2011 (UTC).

Yes, now that I know that the script does not always inform the right user I will check. --MGA73 (talk) 12:26, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

By the way. On Commos I always check that oploader has been informed before I delete because of "no license". Does admins not do that on en-wiki? If so they should notice if I or any other users made a mistake. --MGA73 (talk) 12:30, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Ah... that I don't know. Hopefully they do. I'm an admin, but I don't do any work with images, other than uploading them for articles like we (mostly) all do. I'm glad to hear you're so careful. Bishonen | talk 15:22, 2 January 2011 (UTC).

No license

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

See User:Multichill/no license. First try. Filtering some more stuff out now. multichill (talk) 10:55, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

License on File:CRC8-rx.gif

Latest comment: 13 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Thread moved from my Talk page. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 21:59, 9 January 2011 (UTC) Hi!

You have added Template:ImageLicenseFreeUse on the file. The image ends up in Category:Free use licensing Wikipedians which is a category for Wikipedians and not files.

As I understand it by adding this template you agree to Template:GFDL and Template:Cc-by-sa-3.0. Is that correct? --MGA73 (talk) 13:57, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

I want to confirm that I really do release the image to Public Domain. I confirm that it is all my own work and that I relinquish all claim for attribution. Anyone can take it. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 21:59, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you :-) --MGA73 (talk) 22:01, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello, MGA73. You have new messages at Skier Dude's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

File copyright problem with File:Bangla.jpg

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Thanks for your notice. Continuing to learn. I have added the LGPL license with the File:Bangla.jpg screenshot that is used in Avro Keyboard. I think it is ok now. It is a screenshot of OpenOffice software which is under LGPL. Please tell me if there is anything wrong.----Cool BD (talk) 06:06, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

The license looks ok to me. I removed the "ugly" CSD now :-) --MGA73 (talk) 10:55, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

lateral diffusion

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi - I think I have added a tag - is this ok now? thanks....engineman — Preceding unsigned comment added by Engineman (talk • contribs) 17:46, 16 January 2011

Yes it is ok now :-) Thank you. --MGA73 (talk) 17:49, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

User to upload

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

See User:Multichill/top self uploaders. multichill (talk) 21:12, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Kereetadavesha.jpg

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I'm really seeing no evidence that this image is free. Are you able to shed any light on the issue? J Milburn (talk) 23:00, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

No. I have the same problem. The only hope is the note on file talk that author gave a permission (se just need to see it in OTRS). My changes was only to make the links to the source work. --MGA73 (talk) 11:16, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Image migration

Latest comment: 13 years ago9 comments2 people in discussion

You had said "If you have many files you want to move you can also ask someone with a bot and we can move it for you. --MGA73 (talk) 10:15, 19 January 2011 (UTC)" I want to take you up on that! :) This is the list of the ones that are copy-okay for Commons.

Thank you!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 15:24, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi! #1, #2 and #8 (File:MuseumSumpahPemuda-22-Bendera INPO.jpg and File:MuseumSumpahPemuda-11-Indonesisch Nationale Padvinders Organisatie.jpg and File:Пластун с символикой.jpg) was on Commons allready. I'll have a look at the rest now. --MGA73 (talk) 18:26, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Should be moved now. --MGA73 (talk) 18:44, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I looked for the little Commons logo, it hadn't shown up on the three that were already there. I feel silly.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 12:20, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Can you move http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:National_Association_of_Girl_Guides_and_Girl_Scouts_of_Armenia_1996.svg from Commons to EN:WP? It's gonna get deleted there, but we need it here.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 11:07, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

My bot can't move files the other way. Sorry. --MGA73 (talk) 11:18, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Ah, okay, thanks. Know anyone that can?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 13:31, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Did it semi manually with http://toolserver.org/~commonshelper2/. See the result at File:National Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts of Armenia 1996.svg. --MGA73 (talk) 14:45, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, that's great!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 08:24, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

WTFPL license

Latest comment: 13 years ago10 comments2 people in discussion

Is your bot capable of transwiki of these images? CommonsHelper doesn't like the license, even though it exists on Commons. Kelly ^hi! 20:25, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes. I moved one File:42465-panel.jpg. We need to cleanup Category:WTFPL images first because some of the files are both WTFPL and fair use. --MGA73 (talk) 23:23, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Working on it now. I'll revisit in a week or two once the deletions, etc, have sorted out. Kelly ^hi! 23:42, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Cool. Once all bad files are tagged I can move the rest. By the way where did you find higher res of File:Andrey.dashkov01.jpg? --MGA73 (talk) 23:43, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Hehe never mind... :-D --MGA73 (talk) 23:44, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I go to bed now. I moved some of the used files that looked ok. Let me know if there is more to move. --MGA73 (talk) 00:01, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Sure thing! Thanks for the help! Kelly ^hi! 00:02, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

<undent> File:Mel Atkey.jpg and File:Two snails producing offspring.JPG seem OK to move. The others have all been tagged/nominated. Kelly ^hi! 01:24, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Moved. That was fast... If all categories can be moved that fast we can soon nuke all files on Commons :-) --MGA73 (talk) 18:54, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! Kelly ^hi! 21:26, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

GFDL-retouched

Latest comment: 13 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I have (finally!) moved out all the files that used the license {{GFDL-retouched}}, and now I'm wondering what to do with the license itself. We probably don't want anyone using it on any new uploads, because it uses the old "with disclaimers" version of the GFDL. But I don't know if we can just change the license template - what if old files that used it are undeleted or copied back here from Commons? Kelly ^hi! 21:26, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

I think it could be changed. But I think it would be a good idea to add a note on Template talk:GFDL-retouched about the change. --MGA73 (talk) 21:41, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

OK, done. Kelly ^hi! 21:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Perfect! So what is next? ;-) --MGA73 (talk) 14:11, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

NowCommons and reviewer

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hey, I was wondering if you would mind making a small upgrade to User:MGA73/nowcommonsreview.js. Currently many (most?) people that move images to Commons use Commons Helper. When using that tool, you come to a point where it says "add {{NowCommons}} or delete the original image straight away." Clicking the nowcommons button loads up the image page with a new section called "Now commons", and the text to subst {{ncd}}. Now for me, I have the box "Show preview before edit box" enabled in my preferences. When I go through this process I see the text "[pass review] [fail review]" in the preview, before the text has been saved. In a nutshell, could you edit the script so that if it is used when the template is not saved on the page, that it will add the template? That will cut one step out of the process. The main problem would be, if the image has a different name on Commons, I don't know how the script would know. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 23:08, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Moving images to Commons

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Teaming up would be great! For now I have been working through orphaned images in Category:User-created public domain images from December 2006. It's a pretty massive category compared to other month categories, though -- maybe it would be better for me to move to a smaller one to give your bot a test run. Can your bot detect which images are orphaned? I like going through the orphan images because 1) there's a lot of crap to get rid of and 2) useful orphan images would be nearly impossible to find. I've been moving some images to commons using CommonsHelper, but that's a little slow. Maybe the bot would be an improvement. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:46, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Reply on your talk page. --MGA73 (talk) 17:54, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello, MGA73. You have new messages at Calliopejen1's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

orphaned (location) maps

Latest comment: 13 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

I think files like File:Map friedrichsbrunn in germany.png are not worth the effort moving them to Commons. Low resolution, no further use expected. What do you think? -- Common Good (talk) 18:51, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes I agree. But perhaps a DR to be safe? --MGA73 (talk) 18:58, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Of course. That is what I planned to do. (see Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_April_19) Please tag the following files for deletion:

-- Common Good (talk) 19:07, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Done! --MGA73 (talk) 19:48, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much. -- Common Good (talk) 22:03, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome :-) Good that someone helps clean up. --MGA73 (talk) 18:40, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

2000+ images tagged by MGA73

Latest comment: 13 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

See: Category:Wikipedia files with the same name on Wikimedia Commons as of 15 April 2011. If I remember correctly, you said you planned on cleaning up after the bot tagged the images; is that still the case? Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:08, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh you found them :-) It was a requested move and some user told me he would (help) check the files if I moved them. My plan was to wait a few days and see what happens. After that I would see if it is possible to clean up with my bot. If not I guess I have some work to do :-) If you know any users that know about military badges it would be nice with some assistance to make sure the files end in the right categories. --MGA73 (talk) 15:45, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, in the time that I've been here and deleted 10000 images or so (give or take a few thousand) for commons, I've come to understand commons:COM:COA fairly well. Unfortunately, most of the images on en.wikipedia are sourced to third party sites with no evidence of being originally done by the US military, so my solution would be to nominate them for mass deletion. Seeing as a) that wouldn't be very nice, b) there's a good chance I'm wrong, and c) other experienced users disagree with me, I just steer clear of it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:35, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeah problem is that I checked a few random and they were ok (photo of insignia/badge or from official website) so I did not notice that some was from a web site. Anyway all of the files on enwiki should be deleted a now commons or as a copyvio since fair use is not an option (it is always possible to create a free file). So I guess we just have to take it as it comes. We could perhaps just mass delete all the local files and let the cleanup take place on Commons so we do not have to cleanup 2 places. I have seen a few hundred files on Commons and ALL information was there so deleting the local file will not be a problem. --MGA73 (talk) 14:12, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Twinkle will allow you to mass delete an entire category. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:30, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Goldbergcropped.jpg

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I believe the photographer is User:Tedzsee. I simply took his photo and cropped it a little so it was a better headshot of the player. All the right and ownership of the photo belongs to him. JonBroxton (talk) 19:28, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Replied on User_talk:JonBroxton#File:Goldbergcropped.jpg. --MGA73 (talk) 19:46, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Reviving image categories

Latest comment: 12 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion

If I see another image that was uploaded on Feburary 18, 2011, Feburary 19, 2011, or any other day on a category that's dead, I'll revive it regardless of how much trouble it may cause. I was hoping to find other images from those dates, before the cats were deleted again. Frankly I'm surprised that there are as many images that were uploaded into the commons without being tagged as such, but at this point I'm wondering if I should be surprised anymore. ----DanTD (talk) 22:47, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah. The problem can arise if a photo is uploaded to xx-wiki. Later someone copies it to en-wiki. Later someone moved the file from xx-wiki to Commons without knowing that it is on en-wiki. Then Multichill's bot will tag the file on en-wiki. And ofcourse someone may just move a file from en-wiki to Commons without tagging. We just have to check files from time to time and delete the files on en-wiki. --MGA73 (talk) 08:17, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

If you think it's bad here, you should check out ja.wp. I found images today from ja.wp that were uploaded to commons three years ago and remain untagged. Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:02, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

We just need to run a bot there :-) --MGA73 (talk) 12:46, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Who's the Dutch guy who runs the bot here? Surely we could recruit him to do it there. I'm too lazy to do it myself, but the place to start is ja:Wikipedia:Help for Non-Japanese Speakers. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:29, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I made a notice there. Lets see what they say. --MGA73 (talk) 21:22, 10 June 2011 (UTC)