User talk:Jmabel

I will be in Barcelona from 28 February 2024, returning to Seattle 4 April 2024, then shortly after that headed to the Wikimedia Summit in Berlin.
Please do not expect me to be significantly available on Commons during that time.
Do feel free to contact me with any concerns related to the Wikimedia Summit.

Archives

/Archive 1
/Archive 2
/Archive 3
/Archive 4
/Archive 5
/Archive 6
/Archive 7
/Archive 8
/Archive 9
/Archive 10
/Archive 11
/Archive 12

vi-Wikipedia dramas

Hi Jmabel! I'm really sorry that you had to see those. I wasn't aware that Commons is not the right place to bring up those issues. Now that I was advised to report those to Meta Request for comments, I created a report there. Sorry again about everything! And Happy New Year! Đại Việt quốc (talk) 00:30, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

File:MyFirstBlog30Dec2023.pdf What is this? Spreading drama using picture? I believe that it's probably encrypted or something. It's the whole drama story in encrypted version. I'm not an expert, so I'm not sure. Commons is not a place to upload picture for personal agenda such as revenge. This picture should be deleted imo. Đại Việt quốc is literally ignoring your warning. You're the local admin, so I'll leave it for you to decide. Thank you! Nguyentrongphu (talk) 09:57, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

It is encrypted using w:en:ASCII characters and Vietnamese signs. JrandWP (talk) 16:47, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Estonian wants to judge notability of categories and to do so alone

Hello again! Could you please weigh in here and here? An Estonian user (who to my surprise it an admin at Wikidata) wants to warn people against using Wikidata info on category pages of lots of people the user thinks are not notable or "probably not notable". Needs to be straightened out. I have really tried to get through to h. Goes on and on and on. SergeWoodzing (talk) 00:45, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Flickr2Commons

Saberia informar o que houve com o Flickr2Commons? Estou tentando baixar algumas imagens, mas está dando alguns problemas para carregar. Luiz79 (talk) 18:08, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

@Luiz79: I know nothing other than that there are reports that it has stalled out. - Jmabel ! talk 18:19, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

About Discussion about AI images

What will happen to the results of our long Discussion about AI images? Is there any chance that we did not put all the effort into it in vain? JopkeB (talk) 04:35, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

@JopkeB: I placed the summary at Commons_talk:AI-generated_media#Possible_alternative/additional_text_for_this_page. That seems to be the page that is most likely to move toward becoming a guideline or policy. I suspect the next step would be for people to look at whether some hunks of it should be moved from that talk page to the project page (and possibly to push toward some of that becoming at least a guideline, if not a policy). - Jmabel ! talk 04:39, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! I am glad this extensive summary has been kept and our remarks can help to make a Commons policy on this matter. JopkeB (talk) 06:07, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Question about category

Hi. You have any idea how to handle Category:Jesse Daniel Brown? Apparently it was created by Jesse Daniel Brown, whomever that is, and contains a lot of personal information having to do with their military career. I'm not sure what the deal with it is, but probably most of it should be hidden from view, if not the whole thing deleted. Including the files. But then if Jesse Daniel Brown uploaded the files and added the information then maybe it's not an issue. Who knows. Anyway, what do you think about it? Adamant1 (talk) 06:40, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

@Adamant1: He appears also to have all of that text content in his user space, so no need to consider even userfying it. I'll create something minimal for a category. Not sure if it's in scope or not, certainly not slogging through all that to work it out, but that wall of text does not belong on a Commons category. - Jmabel ! talk 06:46, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Instituto de Fomento Pesquero

Hola. Creo que va mejor en Category:Organization headquarters in Chile. Gracias y saludos. Carlos yo (Discusión) 18:32, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Convenience links: Category:Instituto de Fomento Pesquero, Category:Instituto de Fomento Pesquero (Chile).

• @Carlos yo: la mayorá de las imágenes en Category:Instituto de Fomento Pesquero (Chile) son fotos de personas. Un "headquarters" es un edificio. - Jmabel ! talk 18:55, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Aquí respondí. Saludos. Carlos yo (Discusión) 14:20, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Ah, sí. Disculpeme. - Jmabel ! talk 14:25, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Why did you revert?

The truck seems to be in the same ladder/tiller style as the other ones in the category... BhamBoi (talk) 00:54, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

@BhamBoi: I don't even remember reverting that edit but obviously I did. I must have fat-fingered somewhere. Please feel free to make the edit again. - Jmabel ! talk 00:57, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. BhamBoi (talk) 00:58, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

TOC in Vector 2022?

Hi Jambel, I have a question I believe you as an experienced editor can answer and I do not want to clutter the help desk for it. I have been editing with Vector 2022 since I edited here more actively and I was surprised there was no table of contents. I have only found out that with Vector 2010 (legacy) there is a table of contents, with which I edit now. Great to be able to link to a specific discussion. Is there a way how to enable a table of contents for vector 2022? Paradise Chronicle (talk) 09:26, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

@Paradise Chronicle: not a clue. Like most users, in terms of skins I set up something that works and then I ignore it. Try Commons:Help desk or Village pump/technical. - Jmabel ! talk 18:44, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Vancouver - False Creek pano 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Thi 23:19, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cathartes Aura in Bandon, Oregon 01A.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Túllio F 01:52, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

More time needed?

Hello! Do we need more time or more input on this and these? SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:49, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

@SergeWoodzing: No, but I probably shouldn't close the second one because I opened it. - Jmabel ! talk 17:49, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Re: Thanks

Thank you a lot for your message. Whatever I can do to help, I'll do it. I cannot guarantee I'll always reach my goal, but at least I'll try. :) Sannita (WMF) (talk) 15:39, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

PD-Art tag

I don't agree with this interpretation of the PD-Art tag. It could get out of hand. What do you think, as a second opinion?

Uploading tiff files, when there's no advantage over jpg's and ownership issues are another matter.Broichmore (talk) 10:47, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

@Broichmore: As I understand it, the intent of {{PD-Art}} is to say "someone worked on this, but not in a way that creates any new copyrights" + "in countries where p.m.a.+70 applies, this is PD on that basis (p.m.a.+70)." I think Historian 1875's argument (not too well spelled out) is that in this case no third party was involved; he himself did the scan and cleanup, and he isn't claiming any rights, so PD-Art is redundant. I think it would have been fine if he had just uploaded with {{PD-old-100-expired}} in the first place, but the fact is, he didn't: he uploaded with {{Cc-zero}}, which implied he has a copyright but is waiving those rights.

I don't think this is a big deal but, yes, including {{PD-Art}} is more correct as a way of asserting that Historian 1875 had no rights to waive. On the other hand, just {{PD-old-100-expired}} is also OK from the point of view of any reuser, and since Historian 1875 removed it himself, that amounts to an acknowledgement that he had no rights to waive. If some third party had removed it, I'd object to that. - Jmabel ! talk 15:52, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

I would prefer, to keep stuff from, the likes of The Graphic simple, many images are uploaded as one off's and little attention is given to the artist's and engravers involved. Often the images are manipulated by interim others to the point of it being difficult to ascertain the actual original look.Broichmore (talk) 17:05, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

@Broichmore: I'm not sure how that relates to the license tag. He does acknowledge retouching the image. - Jmabel ! talk 17:18, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

I agree with @Jmabel that I don't think this is a big deal. I have to say that I'm not sure why there seems to be confusion about the PD-Art tag. I have checked the guidance and it seems to me quite clear that it isn't suitable for this image as applied by @Broichmore.

There are two reasons for this conclusion:

1) The guidance states Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag that the PD-Art tag 'relates to photographs taken from a distance only. For scans/photocopies, see Commons:When to use the PD-scan tag'. Therefore as this was a scan the PD-Art tag cannot apply.

2) Turning to the guidance Commons:When to use the PD-scan tag it states that 'the PD-scan tag should not be used: When you yourself personally made the scan and enhanced the image.' Historian 1875 (talk) 18:01, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

If you want to nit pick it also says, When you yourself personally made the scan and enhanced the image. Do not use it. In such a case, simply use a suitable {PD-old}.

I still have to disagree, because, first, it doesnt really matter, and second, 99% of everything we have of art is scanned by others anyway. Despite what the page says, it is not generally followed. Broichmore (talk) 10:10, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Seattle - University Methodist Temple - stained glass in sanctuary - 2020-08-14 - 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Plozessor 06:28, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Jmabel, Kudos for this pic. They did WHAT with this temple? Demolish? You Americans are really different from my folk. In Germany, such a building, unless structurally damaged by an earthquake and unsaveable or the like, would never be demolished. If someone would plan this (quite unthinkable anyway given the "Old monument protection laws" over here), a number of people would chain themselves to it when the machines roll in. Positively. Pittigrilli (talk) 13:49, 23 January 2024 (UTC) PS: I couldn't help starting to laugh when reading your explanation on what was/shall be built in that place instead - a skyscraper incl. a new church. Now, for this 'replacement' plan the architect/planner would be crucified in Germany beforehand (just slightly exaggerated). That's probably due to the "little differences" mentioned in Pulp Fiction ;-) Pittigrilli (talk) 14:13, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

@Pittigrilli: Unfortunately, because of separation of church and state, governments here have almost no authority over what churches do with their property, nor can they subsidize repairs to church property. If it were a secular building, it would almost certainly have been saved. For what it's worth: it had seismic-safety issues and would have needed major work to save it, way beyond the means of its dwindling congregation (about 100-200 people including children). As I understand it, most (though probably not all) of the stained glass was salvaged, along with a few other architectural elements. I imagine much of this will end up in other churches, though I'm sure some elements will end up in some very wealthy people's homes. - Jmabel ! talk 16:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Seattle U St Ignatius 20.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Kritzolina 15:17, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pop Conference 2017 - Mike Hadreas (Perfume Genius) 01 (cropped).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Mike Peel 21:51, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Now to something completely different - your VAX 11/780-5 pic from LCM

...that I reworked today - what is the rack on the left? A disk array or similar? I ask because I am tempted to also make a version without the rack and background, barebone so to say. Makes sense or would that kind of destroy the machine, if you know what I mean? Pittigrilli (talk) 00:12, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

@Pittigrilli: I honestly don't know. I'd suggest that you write to Hank Levy (levycswashington.edu), one of the team that developed the VAX. I'm sure he'd know, and there's a fair chance that he'd answer. If you write him and he doesn't get back in a week or so, I could suggest other people to ask. - Jmabel ! talk 00:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

@Jmabel: Cool, I will do so. I have become quite used to writing emails to legendary people in recent years, anyway. Cheers, Pittigrilli (talk) 00:46, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

@Pittigrilli: I was actually in grad school with him (at UW). He went back to get his doctorate after working on the VAX. Jmabel ! talk 00:52, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

While that rack is clearly associated with the VAX next to it, I would say that approximately none of the devices are contemporary to VAX hardware. You can clearly see a normal CD-ROM drive at the top left, for example. I wouldn't be surprised if the VAX uses them with an interface, but they are probably more in support roles of storage and networking (NODE 0/NODE 1, etc.) Elizium23 (talk) 02:25, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Pinging @Pittigrilli - Jmabel ! talk 03:56, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

@Elizium23: Thank you, this seems reasonable. Greetings, Pittigrilli (talk) 09:32, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Before 2013 Solstice Parade 050 (9129837465).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. Might need a personality rights template. --Plozessor 05:56, 23 January 2024 (UTC) Template added accordingly. Jmabel 06:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Peter Lerangis 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Can you denoise? There are also two green bad pixels on the right that need to be fixed. --Mike Peel 21:48, 20 January 2024 (UTC) Took a shot at this, please have another look. - Jmabel 06:08, 23 January 2024 (UTC)  Support Good quality. It looks much better now. --Mike Peel 18:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

2 issues related to DPLA bot

The following two issues were originally posted to User talk:DPLA bot. They have both "gone stale" and been archived with no response. I believe they are both matters that still need to be dealt with. User:Dominic who operates the bot has been on a long hiatus except for a handful of edits on January 20. I believe these issues still need to be resolved, so I am bringing them to my own user talk page. - Jmabel ! talk 19:06, 31 January 2024 (UTC) Pinging @Dominic, Adamant1 - Jmabel ! talk 19:06, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Some more-or-less duplicates

BEGIN discussion moved from User talk:DPLA bot history.
It looks like a lot of the material from the magazine The Coast is more or less duplicating files we already had: same resolution, but probably different compression, and definitely different info pulled from the database. For example:

• 
  "Alaska Tells Its Own Story," The Coast, July 1909 - DPLA - 1826cf5bf3942d48a7988d553d022e87 (page 1).jpg
• 
  Alaska Tells Its Own Story - Cover.jpg
• 
  File:"Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Exposition," The Coast, April 1908 - DPLA - 2c5c9b5b134ee76389ffa060bec7881e (page 1).jpg
• 
  Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Exposition - Cover.jpg

How do you want to handle this? My only preference is for not losing information. Jmabel ! talk 04:18, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

And apparently not just The Coast:

• 
  File:"Canadian display makes distinct impression," Pacific Northwest Commerce, October 1909 - DPLA - fd832b02272d33412681175497f977be (page 1).jpg
• 
  File:Canadian display makes distinct impression - Cover.jpg

+ let me add one more strong preference: not having to do a ton of crazy merges by hand. - Jmabel ! talk 04:23, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Restored from archive 2024-01-02 because there was no response. I believe this needs to be addressed. - Jmabel ! talk 04:56, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

@Dominic: I would really like to hear from you on this before we do anything. I assume you have some interest in what happens here, or if somehow you don't, please say that explicitly. - Jmabel ! talk 22:25, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Similarly:

• 
  uploaded 18:24, 5 August 2023
• 
  uploaded 12:30, 24 April 2009

This is the first page of a 50-page document in the DPLA upload; offhand it looks like 35 of those pages were in the prior upload and are in Category:Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Exposition - Seattle, June 1-October 16, 1909. Normally we let the older versions win out, but in this case the newer one is more complete. (I haven't checked whether the old one has anything not in the new one, and the numbering doesn't match). - Jmabel ! talk 00:29, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm coming to think that a lot of these may be more complete uploads of things we had earlier. E.g. the files starting at File:Catalogue of educational exhibits in the Washington Educational Building, A.-Y.-P. Exposition, 1909 - DPLA - e7a64c5f2445fd6dd7b28a225e927266 (page 1).jpg seem to be a superset of what's at Category:Catalogue of educational exhibits in the Washington Educational Building, A.-Y.-P. Exposition. It looks like the latter was interested only in pages that had images. The latter were uploaded by the now-banned User:Dcoetzee, so there's no one really with whom to discuss the intent there. - Jmabel ! talk 19:19, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
END discussion moved from User talk:DPLA bot history.

Thanks for the other time and request for help

Hello @Jmabel, I hope you're well. Today I had a meeting with the booksellers for the R@/Librarian project. I'm contacting you to ask for a service. Would it be possible to delete the first category "February 02 Activity" and place it as a subcategory under the other categories? Thank you very much. Azogbonon (talk) 17:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Azogbonon: All moved to Category:Activité R@/Bibliothécaires 2024-02-02. If you open that page in "edit" mode it should be pretty obvious how to do this correctly in the future. - Jmabel ! talk 19:04, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much@Jmabel Azogbonon (talk) 19:58, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Folklore 2024 has started, Join us!

Hello Jmabel,

Greetings from the Wiki Loves Folklore International Team! Wiki Loves Folklore is an international photography contest hosted on Wikimedia Commons to document folklore and intangible cultural heritage from around the world, such as folk festivals, folk dances, folk music, folk activities, folk games, folk cuisine, folk wear, folktales, folk games, folk religion, mythology, and many more.

The campaign invites participants to document photographs, videos, and audios linked to folk culture and fit within the contest's theme. Through this campaign, you may become a part of a community dedicated to preserving our intangible culture, which has been brought and passed down for thousands of years.

How can I Contribute?

The dates for the submission in the photography contest on Wikimedia Commons are from 1 February 2024 through 31 March 2024. Probably you are wondering how you can take part. It’s simple: grab a camera, record an image, video or audio under the folklore theme and start uploading or Click on Upload Now Icon which is available on right side of Wiki Loves Folklore 2024. To learn more about the rules, check out our Project page on Wikimedia Commons.

Here are the exciting prizes which you can win internationally.

International Prizes

• 1st prize: 400 USD
• 2nd prize: 300 USD
• 3rd prize: 100 USD
• Top 10 consolation prizes: 40 USD (each)
• Best Video prize and best Audio prize: 50 USD (each)
• Top uploader prize for images: First Prize: 300 USD, Second prize: 150 USD
• Wiki Loves Folklore Postcards to top 100 Uploaders
• Certificates and postcards to Local Organizers.

(Disclaimer : The above prizes will only be disbursed in the form of gift card or voucher format only) You can win both International prizes and your local Prizes simultaneously !

If you are interested in participating in the photography campaign, start photographing and collecting media of your local culture and get ready for the photo campaign happening on Wikimedia Commons. For more information about rules and prizes of the contest, refer here. For any questions, email us or join our telegram group here

Warm regards,

Gaurav and Issac

#WeTogether

Wiki Loves Folklore International Team.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:02, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

File:Бюст Галимджана Ибрагимова.jpg

Hello, I'm here about the File:Бюст Галимджана Ибрагимова.jpg. I have information about the authorship, but I do not know how to arrange it. Can you tell me how to add and add the name of the author of the sculpture? At the same time, I am the author of the photo. Diniyar Khasanov (talk) 10:02, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

It looks like you are currently blocked (just after leaving this message). Feel free to contact me after your account is reinstated but not before, including not by using a proxy account. - Jmabel ! talk 16:07, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, my blocking is over, now I want to find out how to properly arrange the name of the author of the bust in the file? Diniyar Khasanov (talk) 12:45, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

I would put it in the description. The most important thing is the death date, of course, because that has bearing on whether this photo can be kept (or, failing that, when it can be undeleted). For the sculptor, do we have a Commons category, creator template, Wikidata item, or a Wikipedia article in some language (or do you have enough information to make at least a Commons category or Wikidata item)? If there is a Commons category of creator template, of course use it. If there is a Wikipedia article you can link it in the description, using an interwiki link (let me know if you need help forming that). Failing that, if there is a Wikidata item, you can reference it with the template "Q", also in the description. - Jmabel ! talk 16:07, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

This is the work of Zilfat Basyrov, who died in 2000. Quick1984 (talk) 16:49, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Then clearly it needs to be deleted (unless we have a license from his heirs) but we should add the info and also note in the DR that it can be undeleted in (I presume) 2071. I'll be long dead, but hopefully Commons won't be. - Jmabel ! talk 18:17, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

At the same time, there is a photo of his bust on this site. They can be used in good faith, right? Diniyar Khasanov (talk) 18:49, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

@Diniyar Khasanov: I think you misunderstand the purpose/scope of Commons. Commons only hosts content that has a certain degree of freedom for reuse (at least with respect to copyright). If the content is not in the public domain (this isn't), then it must be licensed at least freely enough to allow (1) derivative works and (2) commercial use. Yes, Commons itself is an "educational" site, so this it is not a legal issue for us to host images that are less free, but it is a policy issue, based on the purpose of the site. - Jmabel ! talk 18:55, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

No, I understand perfectly well that my file is not yet available for publication. In general, you can delete it, since I still have a way out of this situation. Diniyar Khasanov (talk) 19:02, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Undeletion Request

@Jmabel:Buenas, por favor en el COM:UDEL (en la parte "File:Logo Alcaldía Municipio Blvno Angostura (2021-2025).jpg") esta foto debería ser restaurada (support) o no restaurar (oppose)?? (Cual es tu opinión) AbchyZa22 (talk) 14:54, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

No voto por la mayoría de las UDEL y no planeo mirar particularmente esta. - Jmabel ! talk 16:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

File:Albanian President Bajram Begaj hosts Army Gen. Daniel Hokanson, chief of the National Guard Bureau, for a meeting at the Office of the President in Tirana, Albania on June 8, 2023 - 2.jpg

I don't know if I should ask at the Graphics workshop, but would it be possible to do a Gaussian blur on the painting since the painting is from the 1970s and the artist is still living (I don't think Albania has indoors FOP). Abzeronow (talk) 22:31, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

@Abzeronow: Easily done, I'll do it. - Jmabel ! talk 22:33, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Jmabel for doing that work to save a good photograph from potential deletion. And @Abzeronow, thanks for bringing this photo to his attention. Would you please ping me in the future about my uploads, so I can continue to learn and improve? Again, thanks to you both. -- Ooligan (talk) 19:56, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

I checked and there are two other files I uploaded with this artwork. When you have time, please Gauss the art to retain these photos. 1. [1] and 2. [2] Thank you in advance. --Ooligan (talk) 02:21, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ooligan: Done, though File:Albanian President Bajram Begaj hosts Army Gen. Daniel Hokanson, chief of the National Guard Bureau, for a meeting at the Office of the President in Tirana, Albania on June 8, 2023 - 3.jpg seems to have a purging issue (which should clear up).

FWIW, this is pretty tedious work, and the only part of it that has to be done by an admin is suppressing the "clear" version. If you are going to do this with any frequency, you should probably learn to do it yourself. Jmabel ! talk 07:16, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Is there a link to a tutorial or instructions about Gaussian blurring for the app you use? I do want learn that skill. --Ooligan (talk) 08:15, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ooligan: I use GIMP, which is free. No detailed tutorial. Applying a blur is simple, but requires being meticulous. You use the freeform select (sometimes repeatedly, using the features to add and remove areas) to select the area to be blurred; you go to Filters|Blur|Gaussian Blur... from the menu; you set a high enough number to effectively blur out the copyrighted area. The trickiest of these took about 20 minutes of selection at various zoom levels to really get the whole thing. Assuming the area to be blurred is contiguous, you pretty much have to do it at one fell swoop; otherwise part of it will be unblurred or doubly blurred, because you'll never exactly match one of the edges of your selection area. - Jmabel ! talk 17:07, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Commons Glossary possible addition(s)

Should "Gaussian blur" and/ or "blur" be added to the Commons Glossary, because of its specific and repeated use to help save photos from deletion? Thanks, --Ooligan (talk) 20:36, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Sure, I'll do that. - Jmabel ! talk 20:47, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ooligan: I've added Commons:Blur and linked it from the glossary. - Jmabel ! talk 21:20, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

I had never checked out this glossary, but I will refer to it in the future. Thanks --Ooligan (talk) 02:46, 19 February 2024 (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!

Affected:

• File:Bucharest - Hotel Lido 01.jpg

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 03:42, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Basic lack of FoP in Romania, restore it when we can. - Jmabel ! talk 21:38, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

File:200 anos do Senado Federal (53454334095).jpg

Would it be possible to blur the photo in the poster (I don't know enough Portuguese to know if the text is simple or not, but the ToO in Brazil is high so it might be OK), the poster is too much in the foreground to be de minmis to my eyes. Abzeronow (talk) 21:06, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

• @Abzeronow: It means "Don't involve my name in this infamy." I don't think it would be copyrightable. And, of course, it would be easy to blur with the usual methods, if that's desired. - Jmabel ! talk
  • I think the text is fine, just the accompanying photo on the poster would be an issue. Abzeronow (talk) 21:23, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
    • Might well be a PD photo; it's of the then-president. - Jmabel ! talk 21:25, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
    • Of the two images of her, the one on the back is all over Category:Portraits of Dilma Rousseff. - Jmabel ! talk 21:27, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
    • And I see those were released by her office, on Flickr, with an appropriate license. I wouldn't be surprised if the whole image (including her in front of the portrait in back) had the same status. - Jmabel ! talk 21:30, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
      • Ah, OK. Thanks, Jmabel. Abzeronow (talk) 23:05, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Deadline Approaching for Most Memorable Shot Submission!

Hello Jmabel !,

Camera1 mgx

Commons-Photographers User Group-logo-en

Just a quick reminder that the deadline for submitting your most memorable shot of 2023 is swiftly approaching! As tradition holds, since 2018, we've been sharing our favorite captures from the past year with each other. This year marks the sixth iteration of our beloved "Most Memorable Shot" tradition, and we're excited to see what everyone has to share.

Whether you're a member of the Commons Photographers User Group or not, you're warmly invited to participate. Your unique perspective adds to the richness of our community, and we'd love to see the world through your lens.

So, if you haven't already, take a moment to pick out your most cherished picture of 2023 and share it with us on the designated page. The deadline is February 29th, so don't let time slip away!

Let's keep this wonderful tradition alive and celebrate the beauty and diversity of our collective experiences through photography.

Looking forward to seeing your memorable shots!

Best regards,

Suyash Dwivedi (talk) 17:45, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Your block of 2603:8000::/32

IP range blocks should never be indef as in such cases indef block is a block forever for all cliens of the telecom company. IP range blocks cannot be appealed.

I have shortened the block to 2 years. Ankry (talk) 00:13, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ankry: fine with me. I had left talk page access so that if it became a problem for anyone they could speak up. I don't really see why a years-long block vs. an indef block makes the issue much different, yes we are likely to have someone legit want to use that range sooner or later but it could as easily be in 6 months as in 60. - Jmabel ! talk

Oh, wait, I see what you mean about IP range blocks. I've rarely used them. Yes, I see why that would be different, you'd get the wrong talk page. - Jmabel ! talk 00:52, 25 February 2024 (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!

Affected:

• File:Cercul Militar Nat 1.jpg

And also:

• File:Cercul Militar Nat 2.jpg
• File:Cercul Militar Nat 3.jpg

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 03:54, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Again, if one of the architects lived till 1969, there's really nothing to discuss. Restore in 2030. - Jmabel ! talk 05:17, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Category:Deletion requests for works created by minors

Could you help me with a better name? I feel like this deserves a category given how problematic the copyright situation with these kind of works are Trade (talk) 13:23, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

• @Trade: I think the name is fine, though I suspect the situation would vary enormously from country to country. I know one of our most active participants in the Cascadia Wikimedians, now in his twenties, started actively contributing to Wikipedia (and shortly after that to Commons) at age 10. - Jmabel ! talk 13:46, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

File:桃園市某高中制服.jpg

I must say i'm disappointed you acted faster than [email protected] did Trade (talk) 09:11, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

I reported it to them, but I deleted. I didn't see any reason to leave it waiting around highly visible. I imagine they will hard-delete (since we should not be hosting that even in a way that admins can view it). - Jmabel ! talk 09:17, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

2nd opinion

Can I ask you to cast your eyes down Special:Contributions/Jorge_Arboleda as some have level of interest, numbers seem to have F10 cast upon them. thx  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:46, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: I nominated File:Kol Tuv Sefarad Juan Mejía.png for deletion (the permissions are a mess). I have no idea what you mean by "numbers seem to have F10 cast upon them". Can you please be clearer what you are asking me to look at? (BTW, I'm currently in Barcelona, it's approaching midnight, and I may not get to look further at this tonight.) - Jmabel ! talk 22:13, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Numbers = several of the files; F10 = speedy deletion reason. The things we say when sneaking in a few minutes to do some maintenance. Thanks for looking and nothing urgent.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:23, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: All sorts of problems, I'd say. I'm way backlogged on my own stuff right now (backlogged by about 1000 photos to upload), and not plunging into it, but I added (on his talk page) a question about another problematic photo. You might want to try to snag a native Spanish-speaking admin to engage him. - Jmabel ! talk 07:40, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, that light second opinion is helpful.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:39, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

File:JM marbles 01.jpg

File:JM marbles 01.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 may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request. This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: https://www.liveauctioneers.com/news/top-news/shows-events/west-virginia-marble-festival-to-move-to-paden-city-in-2016/ Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

User who nominated the file for deletion (Nominator) : Someone who's wrong on the internet.

I'm a computer program; please don't ask me questions but ask the user who nominated your file(s) for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot 2 (talk) 20:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

@Someone who's wrong on the internet: are you suggesting I time-traveled 8 years to steal a photo? Looks like they violated my copyright, not vice versa. - Jmabel ! talk 21:16, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

No. I was just being wrong on the internet! Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 21:31, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Category:Humans by chronological age

Are we allowed to put fictional characters in the subcategories? There doesn't seem to be any guidelines Trade (talk) 21:15, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

I have no idea. I never put categories like this on images. - Jmabel ! talk 21:22, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Category:Lake View Cemetery, Seattle - grave column of a Taoist priest

Hi there, I've noticed a new category you recently created, Category:Lake View Cemetery, Seattle - grave column of a Taoist priest. Upon examining the inscriptions, it seems to me that rather than a grave column of a Taoist priest, it's actually a Daimoku stone monument associated with en:Nichiren Buddhism, commemorating the 650th year since the passing of the founder en:Nichiren. I'm curious where you found the information about a Taoist priest, and if there are any references I can check in case I've missed something. Thanks, Stevenliuyi (talk) 00:09, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it came from a Facebook conversation with User:RoKet (not terribly active on WMF projects these days, but a published historian & a former member of the Landmarks Preservation Board who has fluent Japanese. I went through my history there trying (and failing) to find it, though. I can't remember his basis. - Jmabel ! talk 06:53, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Stevenliuyi is correct. anyone who can read kanji and has some knowledge of east asian culture can tell that it's related to 日蓮宗 and all the names are japanese persons', instead of taoism or chinese persons. RZuo (talk) 14:38, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

@Stevenliuyi and RZuo: please feel free to edit accordingly. Maybe it wasn't Rob, then, he'd be unlikely to have gotten something like this wrong. - Jmabel ! talk 14:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Notable images of Seattle

Hi, I see the great work you did here. If you find pictures worthwhile of a restoration, I would be happy to do that. Best, Yann (talk) 12:06, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I tend to be more on the side of leaving historical images as they are. - Jmabel ! talk 15:10, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Template standards

Hi, I am contacting you to thank you for the change but also to bring to your attention an issue that, unfortunately, I would like to point out in a discussion at Village Pump but that for my still mediocre ability to interact in the English language I think is difficult for me to sustain. Doing a lot of dirty work on dates, also with the purpose of emptying the parent categories to sort them into the "by country" categories, but also because over the years finding images uploaded by the same user and in the same adata help a lot to give a certain territorial category to images with too generic or even missing categories, I find specific templates, which over the years I have also cloned by adapting them for example from those for Germany, but also others that while doing the same function are structured differently because different is who created it, perhaps in thinking of improving an existing one or because he had not yet come across a similar one. The obvious need to create standard templates that can be used by everyone with a recognizable pattern that can be repeated from memory do not always yield the desired results, skipping some useful IMHO service categories that someone then provides to add instead of intervening directly on the template (not everyone has the sufficent skills to do so), and the need to create a template that can be used by everyone.

{{Chadmonthyear|2018|December}} vs {{Monthbyyearchad|201|8|12}} This is just one of those found, and I could use some help to report it to the adminship. Threecharlie (talk) 08:56, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@Threecharlie: since there are so few photographs from Chad, this is hardly at all important, but {{Monthbyyearchad}} follows the more common pattern, so you can nominate {{Chadmonthyear}} for deletion and suggest substituting {{Monthbyyearchad}} wherever it is used. I imagine that would not be controversial.

By the way, you can link templates when referencing them: either {{Chadmonthyear|2018|December}} or (shorthanded) {{Chadmonthyear|2018|December}} (go into wikitext edit mode to see how I did that). - Jmabel ! talk 09:03, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Oh, wait, I see {{Monthbyyearchad}} doesn't exist. Build it before you nominate {{Chadmonthyear}} for deletion. - Jmabel ! talk 09:04, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Ok, this is obviously for Chad, but I assure you that if you "look around" on similar templates for other countries in the world you see... places you people will never see... (cit.) now at night I dream of a bot that passes all the Commons templates and makes them compliant, also because in this way the most noobs would only have to do a simple copy-paste changing only one parameter of a template that perhaps they don't understand but in doing so they reproduce it however exactly. If in addition to working on Commons you work on a Wikipedia I think you know well what I'm talking about, in the meantime thank you for listening to me. PS: I know here on Commons not count for anything, but with my 16 years of active contribution on it.wiki I have gained some experience ;-) Threecharlie (talk) 09:30, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

New exemple... {{Monthbyyearargentina}} vs {{Argentinamonthyear}}

Or... {{Argentinaphotomonthyear|2024|March}} or {{countryphotomonthyear|Bolivia|2024|January}}, which unfortunately do not create the same service categories.--Threecharlie (talk) 09:47, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

You might go to Commons:Village pump/Proposals and propose a specific way to make them uniform, maybe having all the other templates make use of {{Countryphotomonthyear}}, so even if there is more than one such template floating around for a particular country the results are essentially the same.

Aside: I'm traveling in Spain right now, and I'm not looking for another project to get involved with. I have over 1000 of my own photos to postprocess & upload, on top of anything else. - Jmabel ! talk 10:54, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very very much, I'm very happy :-D --Threecharlie (talk) 12:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@Threecharlie Template talk:Category description/Year by administrative division#New approach for categories by year may be of interest for yall. RZuo (talk) 13:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of photographs

Please do not delete these hapazardly. Some are part of the DOCUMERICA series. See Category:DOCUMERICA photographers. Category:DOCUMERICA photographs by Eric Vance. Someone screwed it up and I am trying to fix it. Krok6kola (talk) 22:19, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

@Krok6kola: I have absolutely no context for this. Did I delete something you feel should have been kept? If so, what exactly? - Jmabel ! talk 04:14, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes. See Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:US National Archives series: Stock Photograph Files, 11/3/1999 - 3/16/2015 Krok6kola (talk) 04:19, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

I've commented supporting you there, but no, I did not delete something or even propose deletion, please reread: I was commenting on someone else's DR.- Jmabel ! talk 04:23, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

• Just so you know (I'm NOT accusing you) but I see a lot of deletion requests (e.g. copyright violations), even from Admins, for files from Sustainable Sanitation Alliance when all of their files are public domain. Krok6kola (talk) 23:06, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
  • @Krok6kola: To the best of my knowledge, I have never begun or participated in any of these. If you like, you can create a category for these deletion requests, which makes it easier to discuss them collectively. - Jmabel ! talk 23:32, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

I know, and besides I was mistaken regarding the photographer. But I did clean it up and found the photographer: Eric Vance of the EPA. TheImaCow created that category for deletion and they were all photographs of Eric Vance (photographer), the chief photographer of the EPA. Krok6kola (talk) 22:28, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Commons photographers: next virtual meeting on April 13, 2024

Dear member of the Commons Photographers User Group,

I'm inviting you to our next virtual meeting on Saturday, April 13, 2024 at 9.00 UTC ( start time in your timezone (via zoneStamp!) (expected duration for 2 hrs). The primary agenda of this gathering will revolve around discussions regarding the Movement Charter. Your valuable input and participation in these discussions would be highly appreciated. If you're interested in attending, please sign up on this page: Virtual Meeting on April 13, 2024.

I hope you're having a great time taking photos and I'm looking forward to seeing you.

All the best, -- Suyash Dwivedi (talk) 10:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Delete?

Hello! May I trouble you cordially for your opinion here? SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:52, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Signature

Hi, Please fix your signature here. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Done, thanks. Jmabel ! talk 16:45, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Parentless categories

Hello! I understand your concerns completely. Every category I made here is for projects that started and soon will be filled with files and photos. Some of the project leaders had issues with making categories so I made instead of them. Hope you understand. Regards, Milena Milenkovic (VMRS) (talk) 06:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Not to butt in or tell you what to do, but why not wait until the files and photographs are actually being hosted on Commons to create the categories? That's the usual practice. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:58, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

@Milena Milenkovic (VMRS): then please add appropriate parent categories to these categories you created. Otherwise, they show up in Special:UncategorizedCategories, and if they are empty, someone is likely to delete them. If you actually intend them to be used, I'm glad I asked, because usually I wouldn't.

Also (less important), if you create a category description (1) the description doesn't need to say it is a category, any more than the description of a photo needs to say it is a photo and (2) you should indicate with a language template what language the description is in (in this case, {{Sr}}, since categories may have descriptions in multiple languages.

If that isn't enough to guide how you should do this, please feel free to ask at the help desk and someone can help you through this.

Also, generally, you should answer a question where it is asked, not on the talk page of the person who asked it. It can be very confusing when conversations get split over two (or more) pages, like this. - Jmabel ! talk 14:46, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

FYI

This account Laurel Lodged is categorized as "Wikipedia users banned by the Arbitration Committee". The ban on Wikipedia is for essentially the same behavior as is problematic on the Commons. See "Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SmallCat dispute". Krok6kola (talk) 01:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

@Krok6kola: Although the area of work was the same, the ban was for "misgendering users, making comments about other editors' mental health…, using incendiary language when mentioning religion, indicating religious intolerance (MJL evidence), using sexually-charged language…" etc. I don't think I've seen that here, but if you have then please provide diffs. Short of a global ban, Commons tries not to take into account users' behavior on other wikis unless we see similar behavior here. - Jmabel ! talk 05:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Also (from same arbitration): " Laurel Lodged is indefinitely topic banned from maintaining categories. In addition to discussing categories and their maintenance, this includes – but is not limited to – directly adding or removing categories from pages, and moving or renaming categories."

Perhaps this behavior on Wikipedia may have some relevance on the Commons, since here the task is all about categories. Krok6kola (talk) 14:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Compared to Wikipedia its almost impossible to do anything on here that doesn't involve categories in some way, shape or form. So IMO any kind of action having to do with catefories because of their ban in that area on Wikipedia clearly wouldn't workable. I don't think their behavior from what I've seen really justifies it anyway. There's clearly some ambiguity about to categorize religions on here. Although you might justify banning them, and the other user involved in the ANU complaint, specifically from anything having to do with religion. --Adamant1 (talk) 15:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

@Adamant1: I'm not advocating anything regarding this editor on the Commons. Just a FYI. And I don't know much about categorizing religion anyway, and would not be involved in discussions regarding this issue. Krok6kola (talk) 15:36, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

@Krok6kola: OK. Thanks for the clarification. --Adamant1 (talk) 16:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

@Krok6kola: No. They were banned for things like misgendering people, etc. The heated discussion was over categories, so they were to be perma-banned from category work on en-wiki. This only becomes relevant if you can provide diffs showing similar behavior on this site. - Jmabel ! talk 15:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

DVIDSHub access

Joe, is there someone with a DVIDS account who could download a better version of File:RRDF floating pier near Gaza April 2024.webp? I got it from Defense Visual Information Distribution Service, a Department of Defense download site, but they require account creation in order to download the highest quality image. - Bri (talk) 17:52, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

@Bri: Not me. You might ask at the Help desk rather than ask an individual. - Jmabel ! talk 17:56, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I posted over there. - Bri (talk) 18:23, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Categories

Most of the files in Category:TIFF images with categorized JPGs do not seem to have a corresponding JPG. I was told to put files labelled "Original.TIf, as in File:Berlin or bust (HS85-10-29541) original.tif there so I have. But other files in there . . . well, they don't necessarily have a JPG. No wonder editors are confused by the category. It's rather a mess. Krok6kola (talk) 02:18, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

@Krok6kola: If there isn't a mutually linked JPEG, then that's a problem, and they don't belong in the category. - Jmabel ! talk 02:20, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

That's what I think too. I can see the temptation for some of the NYPL TIF files that are very repetitive, but I think it is risky. I think allowing any exceptions to the rule of a linked JPG is asking for trouble. Krok6kola (talk) 02:27, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

• Some of them do have linked JPGs. e.g. File:Banner for AstroDay Chile (Banner-web-AstroDay).tiff. (I repeatedly told people they had to check!) Krok6kola (talk) 02:31, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Edvoro in

Hi Jmabel. Would you mind taking a look at Special:Contributions/Edvoro in? It seems to be nothing more than a spam account, but perhaps (unlike English Wikipedia) that's not expressly prohibited by Commons. The account only made two posts and then left; maybe they won't be back so perhaps nothing needs to be done. If they do come back and start doing the same thing again, is there anything that can be done? -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:56, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Total spam, unlikely ever to do anything useful. Jeff gave them a warning, which means if they do anything further they should be blocked. We view blocks here as preventative, not punitive, and I don't see evidence so far of anything we need to prevent. - Jmabel ! talk 15:01, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Understand. If they come back, then perhaps some action can be taken. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:06, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

@MarchJuly: Sure. They've been warned, so if they come back and behave similarly they should presumably be blocked. - Jmabel ! talk 14:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Kathryn Kates images

Hi Jmabel. Would you mind taking a look at File:KKates 11.JPG, File:KK Headshot 11 14.jpg and File:Judd Hirsch and Kathryn Kates.jpg? The en:User:Jnkatesuploader states they are the brother of en:Kathryn Kates. The uploader states they're also an "art photographer". Do the first two need VRT verification given there isn't any EXIF data or other way to verify "own work" and they can also be seen here (also here in this September 2013 archived page). The photo of Kates and Judd Hirsch does have EXIF data and was taken by an iPhone so maybe that one is of clearer provenance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:06, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I'd be inclined to assume good faith, but you might let them know that you might not be the only person with doubts, and it would probably be good for them to remove doubt without waiting for any sort of confrontation. There are a couple of ways they can do that:

• Assuming File:KKates 11.JPG and File:KK Headshot 11 14.jpg are digital photos, it would be very helpful to upload a raw version with EXIF data as it came from the camera or phone. We can even suppress that shortly after it's uploaded if they don't want it floating around. Here's a typical example from my work of where I uploaded an "original" for reference, even though it's only a cropped version I want to use; here's one where the original is suppressed. I know I've had times when I first uploaded the "good" version, then uploaded the original for reference, then reverted to the "good" version, but I'd be hard-pressed to find one.
• The easiest way to show they are who they say they are is if they can make a public-facing post post from either a web site or social media account (Facebook, Flickr, whatever) that is clearly theirs. For example, I do this near the bottom of http://joemabel.com/, among other places. Then link back to that from their user page, so it can easily be found.

It seems to me that, between the two, that adds up to anything VRT can do, and has the added benefit that it (1) doesn't waste VRT's time and (2) can easily be checked by anyone (or, if the image is suppressed, any admin), rather than anyone with doubts needing to go through a ticket verification.

I hope that helps. Feel free to just aim them to my answer here, or to add whatever of your own. - Jmabel ! talk 14:26, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look at these. Per your suggestion, I was going to post something about this on the uploader's user talk page on the oft chance that they might notice even though they haven't edited since 2014, but I then noticed that someone had already tagged them for speedy deletion in 2022 by someone else. The speedy tags were, however, removed by two different Commons admins, one of which who said they should be discussed at DR. Of course, other Commons admins might have done things differently, but given that at least three admins (you and the two who declined the speedy tags) seem to feel these aren't clear copyvios, assuming good faith might be the best thing to do here; so, that's what I'm going to do since I don't think the uploader is still around to provide versions with EXIF data, and I don't think the lack of EXIF data is going to be enough to establish a clear consensus to delete via DR. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:50, 16 May 2024 (UTC)