User talk:Slick/Archive 1

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

Schokoladen-Nikoläuse

Hallo Slick, kürzlich hast Du die Bilder File:Schokoladennikolaus Fa. Hellemann Woringen.jpg und File:Schokoladennikolaus Fa. Fohlmeister Rosenheim.jpg der Kategorie Category:Christmas food in Germany zugeordnet. Dasselbe hat kürzlich schon der Benutzer BlackIceNRW getan. Bitte beachte, dass diese Zuordnung falsch ist. Schokoladennikoläuse werden üblicherweise nicht erst zu Weihnachten konsumiert, sondern schon um den Nikolaustag (6. Dezember). Würdest du bitte so nett sein, die Zuordnung zu revertieren. Danke und Gruß. --LepoRello (talk) 17:15, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

  • erledigt, wobei diese Kategorierung das Essen zu Nikolaus ja nicht ausschließt, sondern in meinen Augen nur eine Information ergänzt (nämlich das dies auch "Weihnachtsessen" ist) --Slick (talk) 10:30, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2011 has finished

Logo Wiki Loves Monuments 2011 català | dansk | Deutsch | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | français | galego | magyar | Lëtzebuergesch | norsk bokmål | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | română | русский | svenska | +/−
Dear Slick,

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments and sharing your pictures with the whole world. You are very welcome to keep uploading images, even though you can't win prizes any longer. To get started on editing relevant Wikipedia articles, click here for more information and help.
You can find all uploaded pictures in our central media collection Wikimedia Commons. Many photos are already used in Wikipedia. The contest was very successful with more than 165,000 images submitted throughout Europe. To make future contests even more successful, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in this survey.

Kind regards,

the Wiki Loves Monuments team
 Map of participating countries of Wiki Loves Monuments 2011
Message delivered by Lucia Bot in 01:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Fotos vom Drachenfels

Tolle Fotos! Solche Panoramaaufnahmen haben bisher gefehlt. Gruß--Leit (talk) 22:00, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:SenatorWetmoreInAutomobile retouched.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:SenatorWetmoreInAutomobile retouched.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 06:04, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Stereo images

You have classified a batch of NARA images as "stereo images." I don't think these were taken to be viewed in a stereo format, but just as a handy way of generating multiple images (always more than two I think) from one shutter. I was working on William Shubrick and removed all his images from this category while adding others. It does seem like a visual format that deserves a name, but I don't know what it is, though I don't think "stereo image" is it. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 15:09, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Flickr - Ministério da Cultura - Acre, AC (35).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Flickr - Ministério da Cultura - Acre, AC (35).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 06:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Irish peasant farmer smoking pipe, 1890s.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Irish peasant farmer smoking pipe, 1890s.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 06:02, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Construction of Titanic.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review

Umgebinde

Hallo Slick,

warum hast du die folgenden Bilder in die Category:Umgebindehäuser in Germany verschoben? Ich kann kein Umgebinde erkennen. --Anika (talk) 12:29, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Da habe ich wohl Umgebinde- und Fachwerkhus durcheinander gebracht. --Slick (talk) 09:41, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Your uploads from flickr

Please be more accurate in linking images - it is really not fun to clean up your urls. Materialscientist (talk) 22:53, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I only use the Flinfo Tool to import flickr images and trust them. Maybe there is a bug? --Slick (talk) 11:13, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
I take a request to the developer of the tool http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer_Diskussion:Flominator/Flinfo#falsche_Verkn.C3.BCpfungen --Slick (talk) 11:29, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Very strange bug. Thanks for finding the diffs - there were more around that time, but three will suffice for identifying the problem. Materialscientist (talk) 12:31, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
I identify the bug and report them here. Short: The problem is when the suggested upload-name already exists on commons. In this case the link from the already exists image is taken (after uploading, preview is fine!) instead of the link of the uploadet image. Confusing! --Slick (talk) 17:10, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! Good to know, because I also use this flickr upload tool. I saw this problem with a few other users before and could not understand why the url links were shifted by a small amount (like 7->6 in the ID, or by one file in the flickr gallery). Materialscientist (talk) 00:08, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
I report this in the german help forum, but looks like no one is interesting in this. can you report this too please? --Slick (talk) 15:05, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Can you check File:Olympic_Countdown_-_Trafalgar_Square_2.jpg again, please. The other admin did not a good work. --Slick (talk) 15:05, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

File:Coca-Cola London 2012 Olympic Games Collectable Bottle.jpg

Pay attention to copyright
File:Coca-Cola London 2012 Olympic Games Collectable Bottle.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

— Cheers, JackLee –talk– 11:25, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Olympic flags.jpg

Pay attention to copyright
File:Olympic flags.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

— Cheers, JackLee –talk– 11:28, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

And also:

File:Lugano trolleybus 114, 1994, 01.jpg

File:Lugano trolleybus 114, 1994, 01.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Friedrichstrasse (talk) 12:10, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

File:Lugano trolleybus 121, 1994, 01.jpg

File:Lugano trolleybus 121, 1994, 01.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Friedrichstrasse (talk) 12:10, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Filobus di Lugano

Ciao, se carichi immagini dei filobus di Lugano, inseriscili nella Category:Trolleybuses in Lugano, così evitiamo di sovrapporci. Prima o poi scriverò su it.wiki una voce sulla rete filoviaria di Lugano.--Friedrichstrasse (talk) 12:12, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:No.2 'Dolgoch'.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:No.2 'Dolgoch'.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:04, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Autopatrol given

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. Trijnsteltalk 22:11, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

File:Wrestling at the 2012 Summer Olympics 2074.jpg

Hi! That's not Tamás Lőrincz on the photo, see for comparison: [1] Greetings. Teemeah (talk) 20:34, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

User:Slick-o-bot

Hello!

A question about Commons:Batch uploading/Defenselink:

How do you handle the fact there are already hundreds or thousands of that defenselink files on Commons available? Creating such an enormous amount of duplicated must be accounted. Is there anything for handling it? Regards, High Contrast (talk) 16:05, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Good question. I stopped the bot and check it now. I suppose currently it will force to upload again. --Slick (talk) 16:10, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
In default there is a warning from commos about already exists files during the upload. The bot had ignore this. Now when there is this message, it will not upload twice. I start it again and still watching it. Ok? --Slick (talk) 16:21, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
I do think uploading those Defenselink-files is a valuable action for Commons. A few months ago I have created Category:Cooperative Osprey 1998 and and all images in it are from those Defenselink-pages. And many were uploaded by me or by other users for the last few years. Can you restart this "dupe-control" of the bot again? Another question: Can we somehow shorten the image title? Regards, High Contrast (talk) 16:23, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
I still watching the uploads now to be sure the "dupe-control" will be fine. The names was shorter before. This long names have to be so, as requestet here. --Slick (talk) 16:37, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
I made several tests und be really sure it works fine now. --Slick (talk) 17:34, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
By the way, can you place your (positive) feedback here? I need this to get the confirm to the bot request. --Slick (talk) 17:11, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

New Orleans Bee

Tach! :) Ich habe mal fix gestoebert, die scans sind teilweise unter aller Kanone. Trotzdem sollten wir die Zeitung hier auf Commons verewiegen. Wer weiss wie lange das Archiv online bleibt? IMHO sollten die Zeitungen zumindest in eine Datei pro Monat zusammengefasst werden. Ein paar gute scans kann man ja immer parallel als jpg hochladen. Soweit mein Senf. Wenn ich behilflich sein kann, sag einfach was ich machen kann/soll. :) --Hedwig in Washington (Woof?) 19:28, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Als ich denke am besten kannst mir dabei helfen wenn du genau das nochmal passend auf der Seite des Uploads in englisch postest. Damit ist alles an einer Stelle. Ich antworte dann dort. --Slick (talk) 21:16, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

OK ERledigt. --Hedwig in Washington (Woof?) 01:25, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Tschuldigung, ich war etwas verhindert in letzter Zeit, musste mir einen neuen Compi anschaffen usw.... Ich loesche dann mal meine Bee-pdfs. GLG --Hedwig in Washington (Woof?) 03:39, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

Dear Slick, I appreciate your support for the image called public drunkness. Due to the controversy around the name, I reuploaded and resubmitted it for FPC at #REDIRECT[[2]]. If you could vote on the new one I would appreciate it. Regards, --Tomascastelazo (talk) 16:46, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image Image:Defense.gov News Photo 120723-F-HA794-089 - A U.S. Air Force firefighter sprays water at the fire of a simulated C-130 Hercules plane crash during operational readiness exercise Beverly.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Defense.gov News Photo 120723-F-HA794-089 - A U.S. Air Force firefighter sprays water at the fire of a simulated C-130 Hercules plane crash during operational readiness exercise Beverly.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:04, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

WLM 2012

Hallo Slick, im September 2011 hast Du an dem Foto-Wettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments (WLM 2011) teilgenommen und Bilder von Kulturdenmälern im Land Bremen hochgeladen.

Ob Du schon darüber informiert bist, weiß ich nicht, daher der Hinweis: In diesem Jahr findet der Wettbewerb erneut statt. Wettbewerbszeitraum ist wieder der September, wobei lediglich der Hochladezeitpunkt entscheidend ist. Die Fotos dürfen auch schon früher entstanden sein.

Ich möchte Dich herzlich einladen, mit Kulturdenkmalfotos aus Bremen und Bremerhaven wieder dabei zu sein. Erstes Ziel ist die vollständige Bebilderung der Dir bekannten Denkmallisten, in denen die Lücken direkt ersichtlich sind. Außerdem zeigt eine interaktive Karte die örtliche Zuordnung der Objekte ohne Bild: http://osm.nk-bre.net/nofoto.html.

Aber auch das qualitativ bessere Bild, die andere Perspektive und das zusätzliche Detail sind hochwillkommen.

Wenn Du auch an der WLM 2012 teilnehmen wirst, gebe uns ein kurzes Feedback auf http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Diskussion:WikiProjekt_Bremen/WLM#Fotografen_2012

Viele Grüße und viel Spaß mit WLM 2012

--Quarz (talk) 18:29, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Flickrwashing of London 2012 images

Hi Slick. I deleted the file File:London 2012 - Olympic Closing Ceremony - Girls.jpg which you uploaded because of this Flickrwashing account. Please check if you uploaded more images from that source, as they are most likely unfree. I found that image of the Spice Girls on Getty Images and therefore it was clearly copyrighted. Kind regards, Trijnsteltalk 21:41, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

defense pics

Du hast bei deinen pics leider keine VRIN drin und würde dich darum bitten die noch in deinen Bot zu schreiben und ausserdem erkennt dein Bot auch keine doppelten wie der Vergleich zeigt.--Sanandros (talk) 10:00, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Na sicher ist die VRIN drin, zumindest bei gefühlten 90%. Nur in ersten Uploads war sie noch nicht dabei. (meist erkennbar an den "langen" Dateinamen) Zum anderen sind es nicht die gleichen Bilder (aus technischer Sicht, Checksum) und damit für die Commons nicht als Duplette beim Upload erkennbar. Einzig das menschliche Verständnis und die gleiche VRIN machen daraus ein Dup. Den Dup zu identifizieren wenn das Bild in Byte ein anderes ist, habe ich hier schonmal kurz andiskutiert. Letztlich bin ich dabei mir einen Crawler zu schreiben der alle VRIN aus den Bildern in extrahiert und lokal bei mir in einer Art Datenbank ablegt. Somit kann ich später, zumindest besser als jetzt, Dupletten vermeiden. Bessere Lösung gibt es nicht bei bytemäßig "ungleichen" Bildern. (Bedeutet aber auch ich muss mal eben, zumindest diese aktuell ca. 120000 Bilder auswerten und danach eigentlich permanent auf neue überwachen. Geht eigentlich nur durch (permanentes) wiederholtes einlesen aller. Sprich Dauerlast auf dem Server und Traffic auf meiner Leitung). Und hier noch abschliessend zum Beweis das es nicht das gleiche Bild ist. Ursache wird sich vermutlich in den unterschiedlichen Exif/IPTC-Daten finden lassen.
$ md5sum *.jpg
c778f23c0185be1265ebaa8e6d80cc15  Defense.gov_News_Photo_101218-N-6436W-037_-_Petty_Officer_1st_Class_Steven_Maldonado_and_Gunnery_Sgt._Javier_Vega_both_assigned_to_Naval_Mobile_Construction_Battalion_40_conduct_a_perimeter.jpg
d49067f224276ec3a87841dd84c8dd61  US_Navy_101218-N-6436W-037_Builder_1st_Class_Steven_Maldonado_and_Gunnery_Sgt._Javier_Vega,_both_assigned_to_Naval_Mobile_Construction_Battalion_(N.jpg

--Slick (talk) 14:47, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Ok ich bin nicht so ein guter Progamierer wie du, denn ich hab nur Java und HTML gelenrt von dem her müsstest du mir jetzt erklähren wo genau die technischden unterschiede sind ausser dass die Namen anders sind... Woher stammt den der Code? (und ich hoffe du hast mein Geschwurbel verstanden)--Sanandros (talk) 22:37, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
Also es ist so. Die Commons speichert für jede Datei beim Upload eine Prüfsumme. Die wird aus den einzenen Bytes der Datei berechnet. Ich weiß es nicht genau, aber es müßte sich um den Algorythmus MD5 handeln. Lädt nun jemand exakt die gleiche Datei hoch, entsteht die gleiche Prüfsumme und das Wiki erkennt das Duplikat bereits unmittelbar nach dem Uploadprozess und gibt eine Meldung aus. Ist die Datei jedoch nur bei einem Bit anderes kommt eine andere Prüfsumme heraus und das Wiki erkennt nicht das Duplikat. Bei den vorliegenden Bildern sind zwar die Bildinformationen bitmäßig die gleichen, jedoch unterscheiden sich die im Bild eingebetteten Metadaten. Zum Beispiel ist in dem einen Bild in den Metadaten als Beschreibung hinterlegt:
101218-N-6436W-037 .      Petty Officer 1st Class Steven Maldonado and Gunnery Sgt. Javier Vega, both assigned to Naval Mobile Construction Battalion 40, conduct a perimeter security check around a new combat outpost in Diwar, Afghanistan, on Dec. 18, 2010.  Active duty and reserve component Seabees assigned to Naval Mobile Construction Battalions 40 and 18 secure and fortify a combat outpost in Diwar, Afghanistan.  DoD photo by Chief Petty Officer Michael B. Watkins, U.S. Navy.  (Released).
im anderen Bild:
101218-N-6436W-037.DIWAR, Afghanistan (Dec. 18, 2010) Builder 1st Class Steven Maldonado and Gunnery Sgt. Javier Vega, both assigned to Naval Mobile Construction Battalion (NMCB) 40, conduct a perimeter security check around a new combat outpost in Diwar, Afghansitan. Active duty and reserve component Seabees assigned to Naval Mobile Construction Battalions 40, 18 and 26 secure and fortify a combat outpost in Diwar, Afghanistan. The Seabees continued working despite a suicide car bombing that killed six Soldiers at the site seven days before. The combined efforts by joint forces will restrict movement of Taliban insurgents and help secure self-governing efforts in Afghanistan. (U.S. Navy photo by Chief Mass Communication Specialist Michael B. Watkins/Released).
Das kommt vermutlich daher das jeweils Navy und DoD bei der Herausgabe des Bildes vorher dieses anders beschrieben bzw. umgeschrieben haben. Damit ist für ein Programm welches die Prüfsumme prüft, das Bild nicht das gleiche. Damit kann die Wikisoftware selbst, die nur die Prüfsumme prüft, nicht das Duplikat feststellen. Jetzt kommt aber der glückliche Umstand das die Fotos alle eine VRIN haben. Also scheint es erst einmal logisch Dupletten anhand der VRIN zu erkennen. Das Wiki selbst kann das aber nicht. Also muss man eine "externe" Software oder ein Script benutzen was (vor dem Upload) prüft ob diese VRIN nicht schon auf den Commons existiert. Das bedeutet aber diese Software oder Script muss alle VRINs der Bilder auf den Commons kennen um das zu prüfen. Das wiederrum kann die Software nur wissen, wenn sie alle vorhandenen Bilder auf Commons ausliest, die VRIN extrahiert und z.B. in einer Datenbank abspeichert. Diese Datenbank wäre dann aber nur beim Betreiber der Software - in dem Fall bei mir. D.h. nur ich könnte vor dem Upload auf mögliche VRIN-Duplikate prüfen. Zudem kommen immer neue Dateien auf den Commons dazu, davon hat aber die Software/Script keine Ahnung. D.h. um immer eine aktuelle Liste aller VRINs auf Commons zu haben, müßte die Software permanent auch nach neuen Dateien suchen.
Zusammenfassend ergeben sich also folgende Probleme: 1) Für das Wiki sind Dateien die sich in auch nur einem Bit unterscheiden keine Duplikate. 2) Um dennoch diese Duplikate mittels VRIN zu vermeiden benötigt man eine externe Software/Script. 3) Diese Software/Script benötigt eine Liste aller bereits vorhandenen VRIN die sie nur durch untersuchen aller (VRIN) Bilder erstellen kann. 4) Diese Liste steht nicht für alle auf Commons zu Verfügung, nützt also nur einem einzelnem. 5) Um die Liste aktuell zu halten, müßte die Software/Script ständig nach neuen Dateien suchen.
Fazit: Es ist zwar durchaus technisch möglich, aber praktisch nur aufwändig realisierbar solche Duplikate zu vermeiden, da es genaugenommen, technisch betrachtet noch nicht mal welche sind. Es ist also deutlich leichter per "menschlicher Nachkontrolle" solche Duplikate als solche zu erkennen und damit auszuselektieren. Bei den nächsten größere Batchuploads von US-Mil. Bildern werde ich versuchen das so, zumindest im Ansatz, umzusetzen, aber es werden sicher welche durchschlüpfen, spätestens wenn keine VRIN angegeben ist. Zudem bin ich mir nicht sicher ob ich den Aufwand betreiben sollte wegen "den paar" Dupletten (die genaugenommen garkeine sind), denn man darf nicht den Aufwand unterschätzen die Software zu schreiben und die Daten entsprechend zu erfassen, schliesslich sind aktuell zwischen 110000 und 120000 Bilder mit VRIN auf Commons. --Slick (talk) 19:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
OK ich seh schon bin eh am überlegen ob ich mich als Admin bewerben soll, aber damit könnte es langsam wirklch Zeit für mich werden...--Sanandros (talk) 22:11, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, aber da fehlt mir gerade der Zusammenhang. --Slick (talk) 06:03, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
Dass wir noch die Marines pics und die Coast Guard pics evlt auch noch rein bekommen und damit dann ein ordentlicher Verwaltungsaufwand haben. Wir haben hier auf Commons eh schon wenig Admins und ich hab ich in den Jahren langsam das wissen dafür angeeignent. Btw wie viel Daten werden den mit dem VRIN Abgleich gesendet?--Sanandros (talk) 13:43, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
Ich verstehe deine Frage nicht. Welche Daten sollten mit dem VRIN Abgleich gesendet werden? Zuerst sollen mittels Crawler alle 110000 Bilder mit VRIN auf Commons aufgerufen, daraus die VRIN extrahiert und bei mir lokal in einer Datenbank abgelegt werden. Während z.B. des Uploads der Marines Bilder durch meinen Bot wird die VRIN jedes Bildes vor dem Upload mit der Datenbank verglichen. Falls sie in der DB gefunden wird, braucht das Bild nicht nochmal hochgeladen werden. Das passiert alles auf meinem Rechner, was sollte da gesendet werden? --Slick (talk) 18:06, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
Oben steht "Sprich Dauerlast auf dem Server und Traffic auf meiner Leitung". Das meinte ich mit Datenfluss.--Sanandros (talk) 02:26, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
Ich habe es einmal durchlaufen lassen. Traffic bewegt sich bei etwa 500MB. Das ist erträglich. Muss ja eigentlich nur einmal vor den Uploads laufen um nach Dupletten zu filtern --Slick (talk) 16:15, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Can your bot retrive tiles?

Hello,

Thanks for proposing to upload the batch I requested (maps of India and Pakistan). I am looking for someone who has the bot and the capacity to get the map from [3]. Can your bot retrive tiles and upload a high resolution image from this site? I am also interested by [4]. Thanks, Yann (talk) 09:44, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

The tiles are easy to download, but I did not understand the algorithm yet to join them together to the map. Will try to find out when I am not busy. Stay tuned. What about the licence? --Slick (talk) 16:19, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
There is a german page that explain how to get images like that ("zoomify"). There is an generator you can download all the tiles in one page (2nd map). This will help me to understand the algorithm. --Slick (talk) 16:27, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
You can use the generator and this FF plugin to capture the tiled page (or google to "download zoomify images"). So you dont need a bot. Need a bot furthermore? --Slick (talk) 16:30, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Great, it works! I got the map (File:Delhi as it looked just before the Rebellion of 1857.png) with the toolserver and the FF plugin. For the 2nd, it is actually useless. But how did you get the right URL? And I would definitely use your bot more if you may. ;o) Yann (talk) 08:02, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Check the sourcecode of the page and search for "flashvars" in code for the flash plugin. In [5] it is <param name="flashvars" value="zoomifyImagePath=../antique/Zoomify/old-maps-delhi&zoomifyToolbarLogo=0&zoomifySplashScreen=0&zoomifyToolbarSkinXMLPath=Skins/light/skinFiles.xml" /> Now just extract the zoomifyImagePath and build the absolute path http://toolserver.org/~kolossos/image/zoomify.php?path=http://www.oldmap.co.uk/antique/Zoomify/old-maps-delhi/&zoom=4 and add the hightest zoom available level (&zoom=4). --Slick (talk) 14:58, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I have more work for your bot. ;o) For some time, I have been looking for someone to help copying to Wikilivres files threathen to deletion by the URAA issue. There are about 5,700 files in this case now. Are you interested? Yann (talk) 13:15, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Please add as new Batch Request, so we can talk about there. --Slick (talk) 16:47, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
I dont work outside Commons yet. Sorry. If there are requests for commons, please add to the batch requests. --Slick (talk) 20:42, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Defense.gov photo essay 100102-A-6365W-388.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Defense.gov photo essay 100102-A-6365W-388.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:03, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

QICpromoted|File:Defense.gov photo essay 090215-D-1852B-017.jpg|A tribal elder listens (by Fred W. Baker III) --Slick 19:07, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |Excellent. --Kreuzschnabel 19:14, 25 September 2012 (UTC)Ineligible, as not made by a wikimedian.--Jebulon (talk) 10:53, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello Slick! Please do not nominate images from non-Wikimedians for a quality image. This is a violation of the QI-statues. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 21:49, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

QI tags removed by me today.--Jebulon (talk) 10:53, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Filemover

Hi Slick. I noticed the 70+ requests for those page images. I've given you the filemover right so that you could do these and any further renames on your own. If you'd rather continue with rename requests, thats perfectly ok. I just wanted you to have the option, especially as this large batch of requests might sit there for a while otherwise, as I personally am signing off for the night. Take care. INeverCry 02:35, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. --Slick (talk) 08:47, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

File:The New Orleans Bee 1828 January 0005.pdf

File:The New Orleans Bee 1828 January 0005.pdf has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Sven Manguard Wha? 07:24, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey, I responded to your comment there. Sven Manguard Wha? 16:58, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Bot

Hi :) Just wondering whether you had a chance to read Commons:Batch_uploading#Brooklyn_Museum and were willing to help? Thanks! --Elitre (talk) 12:43, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

I red this already some days ago. Looks like a very interesting job, but currently I like to work on other/older requests first. Maybe later. --Slick (talk) 14:23, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
Ok. Just to clarify, with later you mean days, weeks, months, years...? :) I'm asking just because the project is ending and I just need to understand whether we will make it in time or bequeath the task :) Thanks! --Elitre (talk) 19:00, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
I guess 'later' means weeks up to months. Not sure. And do not forget to finish the job can take up to some weeks additional (in my case). It is not a good idea to request batch jobs at the end of projects. You can try to ask at the Village pump and explain your priority and that the project is ending. Sorry. --Slick (talk) 20:09, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I thank you for your answer and your efforts. "Unfortunately", the partnership with the museum is very recent, we had no idea it would have required so much work and hoped they could help with their previous bot. We will wait :) --Elitre (talk) 15:57, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
You bother me, so I like to play around with the api and the website now to find out the best way to work with. ;) But thats not a guarantee ... stay tuned (some days, maybe weeks) ... --Slick (talk) 16:10, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Yay :D --Elitre (talk) 14:59, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Please watch Commons:Batch_uploading/Brooklyn_Museum for comments/questions. --Slick (talk) 16:59, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
No, it's not too early, you already deserve this for taking care of our GLAM task. Thank you. Elitre (talk) 14:55, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi, just making sure you had noticed my replies. --Elitre (talk) 16:40, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
I did. --Slick (talk) 19:30, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
In your how-to you refer to creative_commons_by_nc. What we are looking for are just the by ones. Sometimes they are labelled as such in a field named Rights Statement: Creative Commons-BY, but sometimes the field is missing and the license is mentioned in the description of the item, if I remember correctly. They might also be using the terms CC-BY instead, it's worth checking. Thanks. --Elitre (talk) 13:41, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
I understand, but the 'by' ones are signed as 'by-nc' in the api. So I guess the museum mean 'by' = 'by nc'. For example this is market as 'by' on the website, but as 'by nc' in the api. To check this go to this api-example (bottom) and change (only) the itemID to 22789. Press 'Call' and in the result you will see the 'rightstype="creative_commons_by_nc"'. Until now I assumed we can ignore this and set all to 'by' if in the api says it is 'by nc', because I did not found any 'by' object yet. So I assumed 'by nc' in the api really means 'by'. Please suggest what we do now. --Slick (talk) 14:47, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
I get it now :) You see, they recently underwent a change of license, switching from the previous one to the BY one. So it's actually "BY" now, although this is not evident from the api yet. Go on, in the meantime I'll let them know of your discovery! --Elitre (talk) 12:14, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, 3 quick requests:

  1. are you able to identify more African pictures from the BM (not objects of course) with the same licenses that might be suitable for the upload?
  2. is it ok for you if we consider your how-to page on processing these pictures as a contribution to our project?
  3. would you consider donating the code for the scripts you are using to the project, so that it can eventually be used in the future? Thank you. --Elitre (talk) 10:51, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

There are 3 quick answers:

  1. yes, but should requested explicit (and for easy scripting should be in the same collection)
  2. yes, I put it in the wiki to share it (but it is not perfect, only like I did it)
  3. all script code you need (except howto resolve the "missing gallery files" problem. I am not sure I can explain this in my bad english.) is in the howto. Hint: the upload script uses pywikipedia, you will need it too.

--Slick (talk) 11:09, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

    • Do you really need me to file another request or can I just add this to the previous one? Nothing really changes, except we are now considering other African files now that all the Objects are uploaded. --Elitre (talk) 16:15, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
You mean import all free images from collection Arts of Africa? Just add this bottom to the first one. I will do. --Slick (talk) 16:20, 1 November 2012 (UTC)


беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Nederlands ∙ русский ∙ slovenčina ∙ српски (ћирилица) ∙ srpski (latinica) ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ українська ∙ +/−

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2012!

Dear Slick,
Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2012, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world!

Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 350,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from 36 countries around the world, becoming the largest photography competition to have ever taken place.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet).

If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help.

To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey in your own language, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2012.

Kind regards,

the Wiki Loves Monuments team
 Wiki Loves Monuments logo
Message delivered by the Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 notification system on 08:36, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Flickr uploading

Hi! The upload you asked for [6] is complete, please consider to subcategorize the uploaded material by country, if possible. -Dzlinker (talk) 15:30, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Slick, do you have any evidence that Flickr user "aussiejeff" is identical to "Tom Beazley"? Also, the Stobkcuf-bot has put wrong date entries into the description of all these images. Relevant is the creation date, not the reproduction date. --Túrelio (talk) 14:27, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Tom Beazley is the father-in-law of "aussiejeff", descripted here. I assume he has the permission. (Should the creator set to Tom Beazley instead of "aussiejeff"?) Yes, Stobkcuf-bot put in the wrong date. I will check ASAP. --Slick (talk) 19:54, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
file dates corrected --Slick (talk) 18:26, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes, author entry should be Tom Beazley (as this will determine the year when the images will become PD). Though aussiejeff's copyright claim seems generally credible to me, due to the large number of images I would feel more comfortable, if you could contact him by email (if available) or Flickr-email (if you have a Flickr account) and ask him directly whether his wife is the only heir of Tom Beazley (otherwise she could not give a valid permission without consulting the other heirs). His reply should then go to OTRS ([email protected]), so that we have a record of his copyright claim. --Túrelio (talk) 20:24, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
I havent any flickr account and I think my english is to bad. Can you contact them? I will use a batch request to replace the creator to Tom Beazley. --Slick (talk) 20:27, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
I can try, but it will take some time, as I'm rather busy currently. --Túrelio (talk) 19:11, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

U.S. Marines Corps batch upload

Though the site has changed, and some of the VRINs are no longer listed, they are still cached on google, which would provide a method of verification. Alternatively, you could contact them and get an OTRS ticket filed. I've also left a message at w:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history#US_Marine_Corps_Photo_Gallery_Upload.

Thanks for completing several of the other batch upload requests!Smallman12q (talk) 00:27, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

FP Promotion

 ★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★

The image File:Flickr - ggallice - Monkey treefrog (2).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Flickr - ggallice - Monkey treefrog (2).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 22:03, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - African art collection - Brooklyn Museum

Thanks for uploading the African art collection of the Brooklyn Museum. It is incredibly beautiful and it is astonishing how a collection on wikimedia commons can be enriched with categories, combined with other African collections and facilitating research and the production of better content, not only Wikipedia articles. It's really traveling through time. Fantastic job. Thank you very much. --Iopensa (talk) 07:42, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

File:USMC-11396.jpg

Your bot's photo, File:USMC-11396.jpg, was uploaded without any information about the subjects (also, the source link is dead). It would be difficult to use this image without knowing who the civilian is who is posing with GWB. Thanks. --rogerd (talk) 19:52, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Convert all interlaced JPGs

Hello, can you by any chance give a look at this bot work request? Thanks, Nemo 10:39, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

utf-8 fix?

Hey, kannst du bitte schauen ob es mit meinem Vorschlag läuft? (siehe Commons:Bots/Work_requests#Convert_all_interlaced_JPGs) --McZusatz (talk) 22:07, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Picture of the Year voting round 1 open

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

  1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
  2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
  3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 10:20, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

File:Haus Automatik ISO 1600 01-LF.JPG

Diese Bearbeitung war nicht verlustfrei. Nur so als Hinweis. --McZusatz (talk) 14:47, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok, aber ich habe auch keine bessere Idee als bereits diskutiert. Verbesserungsvorschläge welcome. --Slick (talk) 15:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

your bot

hello :) can you say me what your bot have make on this file? [7]? thank you --Pava (talk) 11:40, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Convert the image because it is affected by bugzilla:17645. There is more information or see above ↑. --Slick (talk) 16:27, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed your bot performing such conversion, but some files you are converting are perfectly fine as the thumbnail generation is working perfectly... It seems a bit much to my eyes... Esby (talk) 14:32, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
I am only running the bot, I did not select the lists of images to convert. I asked here. --Slick (talk) 15:45, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Converting File:Torshammare i silver fr Sandby kyrkogård, Torna hd, Skåne (Antiqvitets Akademiens Månadsblad 1882 s103).jpg

As the original uploader of the file I wonder why Slick-o-bot converted File:Torshammare i silver fr Sandby kyrkogård, Torna hd, Skåne (Antiqvitets Akademiens Månadsblad 1882 s103).jpg to a non-interlaced jpeg, since both my scanner and my Photshop-program should always be set to save JPEGs in baseline mode. Was my file really saved with interlaced/progressive compression? If Slick-o-bot converted a file that didn't need conversion there is no harm done. I am asking just to learn to avoid future mistakes from my side. / Achird (talk) 09:43, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Replied on his talk. --Nemo 11:08, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks --Slick (talk) 17:22, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

PC

Ah, I hadn't noticed the machine you run the bot on, it's wonderful. :) I run my bots on my daily-work desktop, but it's an AMD E350 so it doesn't consume more than 30–38 W. --Nemo 18:13, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Currently I rent a rootserver to run the bot(s). The thinclient is just for testing and play around now. These thinclients are very cheap here (in germany) and you can get by ebay for less than 20,-€ incl. shipping. --Slick (talk) 18:30, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

File:1706 Frankfurt (Oder).jpg

This edit is lets say interesting. The box your bot is adding says "Large JPEGs are problematic ...." - a file of 550 × 347 (55 KB) ...Sicherlich talk 08:52, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Sure. It doesn't say that it's a large JPEG: ;-) --Nemo 11:47, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
The german version does. --McZusatz (talk) 15:13, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected: 

Eleassar (t/p) 08:31, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

The image File:Defense.gov News Photo 110609-N-XD935-137 - U.S. Navy Petty Officer 3rd Class Bryan Myers maneuvers around a ship s propeller looking for an inert training explosive under a Barbadian coast.jpg, which was produced or uploaded by you, has been nominated for featured picture status at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Defense.gov News Photo 110609-N-XD935-137 - U.S. Navy Petty Officer 3rd Class Bryan Myers maneuvers around a ship s propeller looking for an inert training explosive under a Barbadian coast.jpg. Good luck!

File rename

Hi. You just renamed "File:Flag of Serbia (1941-1944).svg" to "File:Flag of the Government of National Salvation.svg": http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Serbia_(1941-1944).svg As file uploader, I do not agree with this move because there is no source which says that this was "Flag of the Government of National Salvation". Source from which I took this flag says that it was flag of Serbia. Can you please rename file back to original title? PANONIAN (talk) 08:29, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I just rename this as requested by user DIREKTOR that looks ok for me (but I am not a expert in Serbia history), see [8]. I suggest, please talk to this user and if there is a consent, please fill in a new rename request, maybe with a link to the discussion. --Slick (talk) 10:11, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
But this problem. UserDIREKTOR is known POV-pusher and agreement with him is not possible. Do you have some other idea how this problem can be solved? PANONIAN (talk) 11:14, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
I dont know how to revert a renamed image to the old one. So I suggest you request a new rename, but to the old name. I hope someone with knowledge in this can fix it. --Slick (talk) 08:44, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
All right. Thanks. PANONIAN (talk) 18:55, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Renaming files to English

Hello! Here you enabled a file renaming under the requester’s pretense that the original filename was «meaningless». However, this was simply a case of translating a filename from whatever language into English — something the requester did in the past several times, and now just one time too many. I could agree that abbreviated filenames should be avoided, and I could accept the argument (although never agree with such silliness) that filenames must be verbosely descriptive and includes spaces — but this is just an excuse for blatant anglification of Commons, indeed against Commons accepted policy. Therefore I ask you to reconsider this renaming under #2 of Commons:File renaming#Which files should not be renamed?, and ask the renaming requester for a new filename which may fix any percieved meaninglessness but not change the original uploader’s language choice. -- Tuválkin ✉ 13:29, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Bot request

Hättest du Zeit und Lust einen Bot laufen zu lassen, der bestimmte GIF/JPEG Dateien in PNG umwandelt? Betroffende Dateien wären dann in einer Kategorie oder ähnlich markiert. Der Bot müsste dann:

  • Eine neue PNG Datei hochladen und den Beschreibungstext der alten Datei größtenteils kopieren
  • Ursprüngliche Markierung bei der JPEG Datei entfernen und neue Markierung (speedy?, superseded?, duplicate? [noch unklar]) hinzufügen
  • Nutzung ersetzten (selber oder über CommonsDelinker anweisen die Dateien zu ersetzen oder ...?)
  • Manuell (für admins): Ursprüngliche Datei löschen, weiterleiten oder mit superseded belassen. (Abhängig vom zweiten Schritt)

--McZusatz (talk) 16:29, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Prinzipiell hätte ich da durchaus Lust dabei zu unterstützen, allerdings klingt das erstmal nach einem recht komplexem Programmablauf und ehrlich gesagt verstehe ich ab Mitte Punkt zwei fast nurnoch Bahnhof. Ich tue mich etwas schwerr da aktuell zuzusagen, da ich aktuell nicht beurteilen kann wie komplex das werden würde. Du kannst das ja gern mal irgendwo konkreter ausformulieren und wenn ich abzeichnet ich könnte das hinbekommen, schau ich mir das mal unverbindlich an. Also meine Antwort zusammengefaßt: Erstmal Nein, u.U. Ja. Aber ich will da nix versprechen. --Slick (talk) 18:24, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

So eventuell:
for all files in Category:PNGbyBotblabla{
download file
convert file.ext file.png
get raw_text of file
add "category:files processed by bot" to raw_text
upload file.png with raw_text
get raw_text of file
add "category:files converted by bot" to raw_text
update raw_text of file
}
Einzelheiten müssten dann noch besprochen werden. --McZusatz (talk) 21:52, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Klingt ja erstmal ziemlich simpel. Was ist mit den Markierungen und dem Delinker? Gibt es schon konvertierte Beispielbilder? Von welchem Umfang der Dateimenge sprechen wir? --Slick (talk) 22:10, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Die Fragen haben sich inzwischen geklärt. Sagt mir Bescheid wenns los geht ... --Slick (talk) 11:02, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Leyo hat ein Kommentar auf meiner Disk hinterlassen. Also wegen mir kanns losgehen. --McZusatz (talk) 13:06, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

FBI pics

Hi Slick wärst du evtl dabei wenn ich beim FBI mal eine Anfrage mache ob die uns Files zur Verfügung stellen? Denn so viel haben wir ja von denen nicht.--Sanandros (talk) 20:14, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Was verstehst du unter dabei sein? Wenn damit gemeint ist beim herunter- und hochladen von den Pics zu unterstützen -> ja. Wenn es darum geht mit die Anfrage zu stellen bzw. hierzu irgendwie organisatorisch tätig zu werden -> nein. --Slick (talk) 07:45, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Nein es geht in erster Linie nur um darum die files zu laden. Entweder werde ich dort ein mal anrufen oder eine E-Mail schreiben. Vlt werden die uns auch files über Mail schicken und ich würde dir dann die Materialien weiter schicken. Denn bei ihren files sehe ich leider nicht wer sie erstellt haben bzw in wessen Auftrag sie erstellt wurden und daher wollte ich die Urheberrechtlichen Details klären. Aber schon jetzt vielen Dank für dein Angebot der Hilfe.--Sanandros (talk) 17:45, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Non-interlaced something or other

Hello, an image I uploaded was altered because of bug #17645, something about being a non-interlaced image. Is there something I ought to do while creating files to ensure that I don't create extra work for anyone? Thanks, mr.choppers (talk)-en- 06:49, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

GIMP – save jpeg
PS - save jpeg
This depends on you image processing program. Make sure to disable "interlaced"/"Progressive" or to enable "Baseline" in the settings. --McZusatz (talk) 10:26, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Der Help:JPEG link ist doch statisch. --McZusatz (talk) 14:48, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, überlesen. I add the link to summary on converted images. --Slick (talk) 15:58, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the help - however, I have hitherto only ever used the "Baseline (standard)" settings when saving. There is also a "Baseline optimized" and a "progressive" setting. I use Photoshop CS5. I just uploaded this image using the "Baseline optimized" setting, any difference? Also, there is a slider that allows one to choose which quality to use. I have always moved it to 12 (maximum), figuring that only the best is good enough for Wikipedia - is this where the problem lies? Cheers, mr.choppers (talk)-en- 01:19, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
This last image is ok, imagemagick reports no interlacing and exiftool agrees: "Encoding Process  : Baseline DCT, Huffman coding"; there's also "Photoshop Quality  : 12 / Photoshop Format  : Optimised / Progressive Scans  : 3 Scans" as you say but none of this is a problem, there's no reason to degrade images with excessive compression (I don't know if that's too much). --Nemo 07:13, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Therefore the "Baseline (standard)" seems not to be baseline. Unfortunately I can't test this because I have no access to Photoshop right now, but this should be mentioned on Help:JPEG#Progressive JPEGs. (screenshot appreciated). --McZusatz (talk) 14:59, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
I took a screenshot of the save box, with the settings I have used for all of the photos I have ever uploaded here, most of which seem to fall afoul of this bug. Cheers, mr.choppers (talk)-en- 16:24, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
I test with a old Photoshop 7.0. The window looks like the same, and the first two format options create a 'Baseline DCT, Huffman coding' and the third create a 'Progressive DCT, Huffman coding'. --Slick (talk) 17:11, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
So where is the bug? Mr.choppers says he always used the first button (which should produce baseline). But taking a look at some of his old upload reveals that they are Progressive DCT, Huffman coding. Photoshop is buggy? --McZusatz (talk) 17:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
@ Mr.choppers, please link some samples images (that was converted?) so I can check again. All other converted images can watch @ Special:ListFiles/Slick-o-bot, so feel free to compare the before and after. (but maybe beware of your browsers cache) --Slick (talk) 17:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
This one for instance. I got CS5 on April 27, 2012, so any images of mine which were converted after that date are a mystery. Photoshop defaults to "Baseline (standard)" and I had never been aware that there were options until now, most certainly never changed that setting. Here are a few more:

Could you please save one JPG for each option (three in total) and upload them? (content does not matter) --McZusatz (talk) 18:11, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

All five images above were in 'Progressive DCT, Huffman coding' before converting. So I guess there is a bug in PS. And yes, please add sample images as requestet by McZusatz --Slick (talk) 18:24, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Here you go, a is Baseline (standard), b is Baseline progressive, and c is Progressive.
Simply the first and the last are the same and are progressive. So PS has a bug and this is important to know. This may explain a lot of progressive images here. I suggest you contact the support of Adobe if possible. I will post it on the Commons:Village_pump, to confirm our tests by others. --Slick (talk) 20:01, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Hm - and also, some sort of bot recognized that 1a and 1c were the exact same file (hash values?). Interesting. I will use option b from now on. I would contact Adobe as well but since I honestly don't know what I am talking about I would prefer if one of you kids did it. Thanks, mr.choppers (talk)-en- 06:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
  • In case you don't know: the bot stopped about 6 hours ago. Also, would getting a Toolserver or labsconsole: account help making it faster? :) --Nemo 11:37, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
    • The bot is sleeping because of this. I am not sure it can make trouble when keep it running. I think there is no need to do it faster, is there? But I think about to rent a rootserver to save my bandwidth at home for this large project. (And I dislike to depend on others, i.E. Toolserver) --Slick (talk) 16:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
      Ah, ok. I guess you can wait for a day. I don't know at what extent you dislike depending on others, but for instance Wikimedia Labs don't even require approval and the addition to the bot instance would be almost automatical. They currently don't lack CPU or memory and of course bandwidth is not a problem because you'd be inside the cluster (probably connection pmtpa<->eqiad costs the WMF less than bandwidth to wherever your server would be). --Nemo 17:08, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
      Ok, I red about the Labs, but I am to lazy to learn more about. The bot is working fine and there is no need for more speed or RAM ... IMHO. So, thank you, but I am not interested at the moment. Maybe later. More important is to find a solution for uploadet progressive files in future. --Slick (talk) 19:40, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Photoshop CS5?

Hi, so I just came across Help:JPG and read that Photoshop is buggy. I wasn't sure what version of Photoshop, but you linked to this discussion in your edit summary (much appreciated). Seems like it's CS5 that's buggy? I save all my work Baseline "Standard". I'm not sure how to go about using the magick tool to test a JPG I've uploaded, but I'll give it a whirl. Is this bug for certain though? Slick-o-bot hasn't been up and running since February, and it's never touched any of my previous-to-sleeping uploads. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 07:14, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I am sure CS5 has the Bug too (see above the "Congee*.jpg" Test, this images was saved by CS5.1 on Mac). If you save with the first option ("Baseline Standard") it is the same as option #3 ("Progressive"). You can tell me some images I can test for you. I am sure PS 7.0 do not have this bug. I am unsure with all versions greater than PS 7.0, less than CS5. Slick-o-bot converted progressive JPGS (>5 MB, some less than 5 MB) as requested. But the newer consents is only to convert images with broken thumbnails (large progressive JPGs, ~ >25 MB), this will be done by a new Bot User:Thumbnails Check Bot (currently in development). --Slick (talk) 07:34, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
You wouldn't mind checking two images for me? That'd be great. I looked into imagemagick and it's not available for my OS (10.5), or if an older version exists, I couldn't easily find it. Here's a larger image and a smaller image. Both were saved at level 12, Baseline "Standard" JPG. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 07:58, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
I just add a hint on Help:JPEG#Progressive_JPEGs how to test for progressive JPGs with a online tool, so you can simple test by yourself. Ok? --Slick (talk) 08:00, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
And who knows, it may matter: the larger image source file was a TIFF. The smaller image source file was a JPG. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 08:00, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh, thank you. I never saw your reply above because I replied so soon after you did (without having seen it). Anyway, I checked four or five of my images, all reading "Baseline DCT, Huffman coding". I also did a test and saved a TIFF to three JPGs: Baseline "Standard" (result: Baseline); Baseline "Optimized" (result: Baseline); and Progressive (result: Progressive). So I don't think my Photoshop is buggy. Thanks for the link, interesting stuff. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 20:53, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Slick/Archive_1&oldid=102456669"