This is an archive of discussions from 2008 through 2017.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, do so on the current talk page.

Archive 0000 Archive 000 →

Deletion discussions

→ in re: Wikipedia:Moving files to the Commons and {{db-f8}}

2008

Image:Long Billed Corella Beak.jpg

→ See also: image log.

A small comparison of the two images would reveal that Image:Long Billed Corella Beak.jpg is not a crop of the other image (the mouth is open and the bird is facing the camera) Therefore deletion by Wikipedia:CSD#I8 is invalid. Please restore the image. Noodle snacks (talk) 03:27, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your note just as I was going offline, so I undeleted the image quickly before checking further. When I returned, I compared it with commons:Image:Long Billed Corella Beak.jpg and found the two identical after all, so I re-deleted the Wikipedia version as per WP:CSD#I8. — Athaenara ✉ 05:55, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2009

Moving my photo to commons

If you believe "This Wikipedian supports wikiquette and civility / NPA policy," why did you move my photo to Commons without first consulting me? Motorrad-67 (talk) 02:51, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

S3-400.jpg and S3-2000.jpg were both tagged {{NowCommons}}. I have restored both of them as per your objection. — Athaenara ✉ 03:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hexobarbital.png

Hi Athaenara. Both images are correct and show the same molecule, but the Commons version is of higher quality (and is on Commons, i.e. the better place). If you don't want to delete by yourself, just ask a chemist admin such as Edgar181. --Leyo 03:00, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, many admins cruise the deletion categories and will see it. As a non-chemist, I cannot discern whether either or both of two such dissimilar images are correct. — Athaenara ✉ 03:14, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: NowCommons

→ in re: this message about images moved to Commons

Politizer ^talk/_contribs has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Ah, that looks perfect, thank you so much! I totally forgot to update the links; thanks for taking the time to correct those for me. Politizer ^talk/_contribs 15:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, and thanks for the cookie! — Athaenara ✉ 18:06, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

→ in re: this barnstar's move to Wikimedia Commons

		The Barnstar of Thankfulness for Minor Things Needing to Thanked For
		Thanks for deleting the barnstar image page. The New MIKE moral

—Preceding undated comment was added at 23:59, 30 January 2009 (UTC).

You're welcome, and thanks for the star. — Athaenara ✉ 04:40, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you enjoyed it. It's the award I give out. The New Mikemoral^talk_contribs 08:46, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LIRR Station images

→ in re: my post on DanTD's talk page (User talk:DanTD/Archive. January 2009#Now Commons)

Thanks for the deletions and moves. I've tried to remove more of them from articles I didn't want them to be in, and I wish I could've renamed them first. ----DanTD (talk) 00:06, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome (replied further on your talk page). — Athaenara ✉ 04:40, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CSD#I8 war!

→ in re: {{db-i8}} ({{db-f8}}) deletion requests

Heh, I got 2 internal errors because of you! ;) -- lucasbfr ^talk 19:10, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen a few as well! I'm slower because my deletion summaries (e.g. here and here) include uploader and tagger links which need more time to format. — Athaenara ✉ 20:00, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I admit I batch delete once I checked the license here and check a couple of commons licenses ^^ -- lucasbfr ^talk 20:29, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Baptismal.jpg

→ in re: this edit to image page (logs)

Ok thanks, my mistake, I was using Commons Helper for the first time and pressed the wrong button I guess. I'm learning new things everyday in this Wikipedia... --Alainr345 (talk) 00:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolution check?

→ in re: image deletion

Hi. You just deleted File:ChicagoSpire 05 25 08.jpg, which I was just checking before deleting. That's fine - but the version on Commons is lower resolution than the one that was here. Please could you check that the resolutions are the same before deleting images? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:45, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I went to restore it after your message and found that you restored it long enough to upload the higher resolution image to Commons. Well done! — Athaenara ✉ 23:00, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:UltraflightLazairSeriesIII.jpg

→ in re: my post on Ahunt's talk page (image log)

Thanks for letting me know! I am putting all my pictures on Commons now, but migrating the old ones is a great help! - Ahunt (talk) 10:34, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Faulty Commons image transfer + deletion

→ in re: {{db-f8}} requests (local log)

Hello,

I recently tried to migrate seven images to Commons, but the CommonsHelper transfer did not work correctly. I believe there were two images which had multiple versions in their history, but in all cases, only the most recent version was actually migrated.

I was in the process of seeking support when you deleted one of the images in question: File:1882 Cornell University faculty.jpg

As I understand it, part of the deletion process is that the deleter is obligated to manually confirm that all data (including past versions of the image) have been transferred properly, so I was not expecting this to be an issue, or else I would have reverted the changes the script made to the Wikipedia version of the image page.

Can the Wikipedia version of the image page be restored?

Best, Notyourbroom (talk) 14:13, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There were two relevant images deleted; one was deleted by you and the other by a different editor. That other editor did not at first understand what the problem was when I contacted him about it. Please forgive me if this is information you know already, but just to be sure we are on the same page, I will paste my explanation from the other conversation below. --Notyourbroom (talk) 15:25, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Please review this page, particularly items 8 and 9. Transferring the full image history is usually legally required by the most-used image licenses, and it's my understanding that transferring the full image history is considered "best practice" even when not a legal obligation." --Notyourbroom (talk) 15:25, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. — Athaenara ✉ 21:00, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! --Notyourbroom (talk) 21:05, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If it's still giving you trouble, Captain-tucker might be a good one to ask (see here for example). — Athaenara ✉ 21:12, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What has happened to my categories and edit history?

→ in re: {{db-f8}}, images uploaded by Pdfpdf, moved to commons and tagged {{NowCommons}} by GerardusS

It seems that somebody has uploaded a lot of my pictures to commons, and you have deleted the originals.
Because you have deleted the originals, the edit history has gone, so I can't find out what happened.
Further, I can't find out what was on the original pages.
But the most annoying thing is that ALL the categories have been removed, so I no longer can find my pictures!! And if/when I do, I'm going to have to manually add all the categories back in.
This sucks.
Who decides that a picture should be moved/copied to commons?
Why can it be moved without me being notified?
How can it be "F8" without me being informed and given the opportunity to say "hangon"?
Why is the category information destroyed?
And none of it is your fault - you just happen to be the only person who has left any traceable evidence! You have to laugh, don't you. I'm looking forward to you waving your magic wand and solving all these issues. (I mean, all admins have magic wands, don't they?) Failing that, I'm looking forward to your reply. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:21, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is why I format deletion summaries as I do: I don't want the original page creators to be left with no clue about what happened to their work and why. GFDL (that "irrevocably agree to release" stuff) applies here, but notification (and a magic wand ;-) would be cool. As far as I can see, the categories are visible in the upload summaries on the commons pages.

J150W-statue-Dowie.jpg (local logs)
J150W-statue-Florey-1.jpg (local logs)
J150W-statue-Florey-2.jpg (local logs)
J150W-statue-Lee.jpg (local logs)
J150W-statue-Mitchell.jpg (local logs)
J150W-statue-Mitchell2.jpg (local logs)
J150W-statue-Napier.jpg (local logs)
J150W-statue-Oliphant.jpg (local logs)
J150W-statue-RobbieBurns.jpg (local logs)

(Special:DeletedContributions/Pdfpdf is an additional record of upload summaries and other edits.)

I don't have answers to all of your questions, but Template talk:Db-meta and the administrators' noticeboard might be good places to raise the issues of procedure and consideration for uploaders who are not expecting deletion and are blindsided by the event. — Athaenara ✉ 01:40, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! All sorts of interesting & useful stuff!! (BTW: Clicking on Special:DeletedContributions/Pdfpdf results in "The action you have requested is limited to Administrators." for mere mortals like me.) Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:46, 6 April 2009 (UTC) (Gee, that's really bad news about the magic wand ... )[reply]

galleries: I think it's a good idea for uploaders to put an image {{gallery}} on their user page or a subpage (e.g. User:Pdfpdf/Gallery in this case). What do you think? — Athaenara ✉ 00:21, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I did just that in December last year, I guess I must think it's a good idea! (User:Pdfpdf/Galleries)

(I also guess that it would be a good idea if I kept it up to date ... )

One thought: Stuff that is only licensed to appear on one specific page (e.g. images of album covers) could not also appear in the gallery.

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:36, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, we have "special" commands like this one.

However, galleries do have the advantage that you can annotate the gallery entries. It looks like there are pros and cons all over the place, and that's just from two of the possiblilities. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:52, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Torch Relay and Commons

→ in re {{db-f8}}: images uploaded by Benlisquare, moved to commons and tagged {{NowCommons}} by Tm

I did not provide any permission for my images to be moved from EN Wiki onto Commons. Refer to the preface on w:en:User:Benlisquare/Gallery. Additionally, I was not inquired nor informed by anyone regarding such a move. My WikiStress is on the verge of reaching critical mass, I would like the EN files to be restored and the Commons images removed, simple as that. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email guestbook complaints 02:43, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How is that position consistent with the {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} license under which you released them?

— Athaenara ✉ 05:00, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Images and logs

[ Linked images and logs above. — Athaenara ✉ 05:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC) ][reply]

Again, I must stress that I was not inquired nor informed by anyone. Is that not a basic right, so that I am able to express my side before any action is taken? -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email guestbook complaints 12:20, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:T-43a-may89-323dftw.jpg deleted

→ in re: {{db-f8}} and deleted image (local log) (Commons log)

Did You actually check the picture's claimed source before deletion? feydey (talk) 16:32, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, I didn't. Having checked it at your behest, I now see that none of the photographs at the source link provided by the uploader match File:T-43a-may89-323dftw.jpg. Shall I post that on the Commons page or would you rather do so yourself? — Athaenara ✉ 16:44, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done, twice. feydey (talk) 17:17, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added a note as well. — Athaenara ✉ 17:23, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Odyssey1.jpg

→ in re: {{db-f8}} requests for Odyssey2 and Odyssey3; see also: Odyssey1

Hi, I saw that you have delete the files "Odyssey2.jpg" and "Odyssey3.jpg" because I've transfered them in Wikimedia Commons. I wanna segnale that the image "Odyssey1.jpg" is still in English Wikipedia even if it has been transfer on Commons. I think that there is a mistake in that file, instead if I be wrong I'm sorry from now. --Kimi95★ 10:20, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the original upload information was missing from the Odyssey1 file on Commons, so I added it (diff). I don't know of other mistakes there. — Athaenara ✉ 21:38, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NE 475ad.jpg (Vandals) Thanks

→ in re: {{NowCommons}} and this edit

Thanks for undoing my (aborted) Commons copy for the image. Everything seemed to go correctly with CommonsHelper, but I later found the copy didn't "take." <Sigh> Back to the help file...Geoff ^T ^C 20:38, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome, and good luck. — Athaenara ✉ 00:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image problem

Hi,

Im contacting you due to an image issue. I uploaded [1] on commons today. I did not realise that [2] exists on en.wiki and when I tried to add the image to an article, I got the en.wiki one. Can u pl. suggest what I should do? Thanks, Around The Globe^{सत्यमेव जयते} 15:23, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you can re-upload with a filename which doesn't have that problem and request deletion of the other (see Commons:Deletion requests/Speedy deletion). — Athaenara ✉ 18:06, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

F8 deletes

Thank you for deleting all the images I tag as F8. :) I'd do it, but I'm not an admin.--Rockfang (talk) 06:45, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify, I'd delete other F8s. Not my own.--Rockfang (talk) 06:47, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, you're welcome; {{db-f8}} followup is one of my favourite admin activities because one rarely encounters ill will or incivility in the process. I agree that it's best for admins to share in the distribution of tasks rather than both tag and delete one-man-band style. — Athaenara ✉ 07:00, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image deletion

Hi there, I notice that you have deleted File:West footing of Humber Footbridge.jpg, despite the {{nocommons}} tag. Please reconsider. I've seen too many images disappear over at Commons for capricious reasons, with no attempt to contact the original uploader in this project, to want to have to depend on them keeping images I have uploaded, which is why I put the template on.Thanks. Risker (talk) 23:48, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I apologize for having overlooked the {{NoCommons}} tag, which I fully support. I removed the {{NowCommons}} tag as well. — Athaenara ✉ 00:08, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your help,Athaenara. I've also touched base with the editor who had tagged the images with the {{NowCommons}} tag, and he is reviewing his other tags. Risker (talk) 00:33, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. — Athaenara ✉ 03:44, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion of 1909 Grand Palais Paris image

Hi Athaenara,

File:Salon de locomotion aerienne 1909 Grand Palais Paris.jpg was deleted with this comment "(WP:CSD#F8: now on Commons. Uploaded by Per Honor et Gloria, tagged by Ekabhishek.)"

I am requesting undeletion at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Current requests#File:Salon de locomotion aerienne 1909 Grand Palais Paris.jpg.

~~Do you know the source of this image?~~ At Commons:Commons talk:Licensing#PD-US when no evidence work was US I have tried to find the name of the photographer or agency~~, was it from Science et Vie maybe?~~ so that it might be kept on Commons, otherwise it may get deleted there. -84user (talk) 14:48, 6 December 2009 (UTC) I struck through parts that were for the uploader, whom I have just asked, and clarified. -84user (talk) 15:11, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Restored. — Athaenara ✉ 16:16, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2010

Rushcliffe Halt.JPG

Hi! Are you able to show me the history of File:Rushcliffe Halt.JPG, deleted per G7. I would check it... Thanks. -- Basilicofresco (msg) 07:35, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure:

01:00, 17 April 2010 . . FrescoBot (83 bytes) (Bot: blank page meeting G7 criteria for speedy deletion)
15:31, 14 April 2010 . . Palmiped (empty) (Removed Category:Nottingham Transport Heritage Centre (using HotCat))
15:30, 14 April 2010 . . Palmiped (50 bytes) (Adding category Category:Nottingham Transport Heritage Centre (using HotCat))

The file log is here. – Athaenara ✉ 08:08, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! -- Basilicofresco (msg) 17:49, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome (and thanks for informing Palmiped). – Athaenara ✉ 19:19, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image talk deletions

Could you please restore File talk:20061022 HW Park Parakeet Nests.JPG, File talk:20061022 Hampton House and South end of Harold Washington Park.JPG, and File talk:20061022 Hampton House from center of Harold Washington Park.JPG for images that have been moved to commons. --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:16, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. – Athaenara ✉ 02:29, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion request

Would you mind undeleting File:Rivington Little Lake Distr.jpg? I had just declined the speedy on a similar image and am preparing to send it to Commons, and I was about to do likewise with this one. Nyttend (talk) 05:18, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. – Athaenara ✉ 05:23, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Transfer is finished, so I've deleted it under F8. Nyttend (talk) 05:33, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

F8: Media file available on Commons

Good work in cleaning up the files that exist in commons. I see that you have a lot of contributions there. I am not sure whether you are picking up the images in any particular order. May be you can select the older ones from this Category:Wikipedia files with the same name on Wikimedia Commons. Just thought of sharing this with you. Thanks. --Sreejith K (talk) 07:51, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I agree that removing local duplicates of files which are secure on Commons after having been properly transferred there is a good thing^[tm] because it reduces duplication of services.

I've started from that central category many times. When a single editor has tagged a large number of such files, however, file history pages are directly accessible from that user's contributions page, which becomes a convenient starting point. (For example, in January 2010, BotMultichill tagged thousands of such files; in May you tagged thousands more.) If there is a single page comparable to the category but sorted by date I don't know where it is. – Athaenara ✉ 16:08, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you see the category I gave, you can see that the images are again sub-categorized by the dates. Most of the categories have only less than 10 images in them. Deleting those images on priority means that we can clear the sub categories and the main category as well. Hope I am making sense here. -- Sreejith K (talk) 08:25, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see now that the category has changed a lot since the last time I looked at it, thanks for the heads-up. – Athaenara ✉ 18:42, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Followup: I checked the May 2008 categories and found that out of twelve files only one could be deleted per WP:CSD#F8, which reminded me of why I learned many months ago to rely upon the contribs pages of reliable image taggers. There are too many images transferred to Commons without original file histories, sources, and licenses; indeed some have been copied to Commons by users who claim license for themselves when the images were originally licensed by other authors. I find it disheartening and tedious to try to clean up after improper transfers or outright co-optation (I don't use bots or scripts). – Athaenara ✉ 20:15, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reinhardt University

→ see also: local log and commons log (history) for image

Question, I see in my watch list that the "Blanch Hagan Chapel" pic was deleted, something about in Commons. Am I reading it wrong, the pic is staying on the page, it just resides in Commons, so doesn't need to have a separate file?

Confused Carsonmc (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:02, 21 July 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, you understand it correctly. File:Blanche Hagan Chapel.jpg, which you uploaded locally in January, was transferred and tagged {{NowCommons}} in June. Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons explains the process fairly comprehensively. – Athaenara ✉ 01:10, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File deletion of File:Cambell filter.png

Do you have a reason for not complying with the request to keep this file local? SpinningSpark 06:12, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I missed that, restored. – Athaenara ✉ 06:40, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, SpinningSpark 15:38, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. The last time this happened was many thousand {{db-f8}} files ago, back in December 2009. Uploaders who tagged their images {{KeepLocal}} or {{NoCommons}} are well within their rights to remove {{NowCommons}} tags, which add their images to a speedy deletion category; the Commons images will still be linked on the local file pages, so it doesn't deprive anyone of information. – Athaenara ✉ 04:00, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See User:Spinningspark/Why I don't upload to Commons if you want my reasons. SpinningSpark 06:15, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. – Athaenara ✉ 07:04, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

W2WCDA

You maybe interested in Wikipedia to Wikimedia Commons Deletion Assistant tool that I created... Just friendly FYI since I saw you delete a few images for the Commons. --AllyUnion (talk) 01:17, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I compare files in detail and don't remove local files before I've verified that all the author, upload, and licensing information is included in their Commons equivalents, checking descriptions and categories as needed. I don't use scripts / bots, but thanks for the tip. – Athaenara ✉ 02:08, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All it is really is a split screen viewer. --AllyUnion (talk) 17:22, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bah!

Are you also working on Category:Wikipedia files with the same name on Wikimedia Commons as of 5 June 2010 at this very moment? Don't like to step on toes. --Closedmouth (talk) 12:44, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and I noticed that a couple of files disappeared while I was checking their BotMoveToCommons status over there. – Athaenara ✉ 12:58, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bot to delink images

You are invited to join the discussion at Category talk:Wikipedia files on Wikimedia Commons. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:54, 25 December 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})[reply]

2011

Deletion of files per F8

→ in re: Building mode0, 01, 1, 02, 2, 03, 3, 04, 4, 05, 5.

Hi! I'm working on Commons:Category:License migration candidates and one of the files is File:Building mode0.png (there is a serie of those files). It has not been transfered to Commons via bot so the description page is not "the usual one". I checked the original on enwiki and it is GFDL with disclaimers but the file on commons is without disclaimers. Once the file is deleted on enwiki it is hard for users to check if file has been transfered correct. Therefor it is importaint that deleting admin checks that information has been transfered correct. I'm sure you know that and you just missed this one. Just wanted to let you know :-) --MGA73 (talk) 20:07, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader's original November 2006 {{GFDL-self}} license (which has included a warning since May 2008 not to add with disclaimers) was changed by a bot to {{GFDL-self-with-disclaimers}} in May 2007. The {{GFDL-user-w}} license is consistent with the uploader's original license. – Athaenara ✉ 01:28, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The original license did have disclaimers in November 2006 per this version when the file was uploaded. In an attempt to get rid of disclaimers a new template with disclaimers was created ({{GFDL-self-with-disclaimers}}) and all files that had disclaimers at that time was changed (by a bot) so they used this new license (with disclaimers). After the big change was done the disclaimers was removed from the old license that should be used for new uploads. So the file had disclaimers when it was uploaded. --MGA73 (talk) 16:03, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see, the general disclaimer is the heavy here. ~~If there is a specific course of action you'd like to recommend, please feel free to do so.~~ – Athaenara ✉ 05:53, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I updated the license to {{GFDL-user-en-with-disclaimers}} for all eleven files. – Athaenara ✉ 06:00, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages for files

Blanking of talk pages for files

I noticed recently you are blanking the file talk pages for files that have been moved to commons. I don't agree with this and wonder if there is some documentation somewhere that says to do this. The problem I have is by doing this it removes the file from the visibility of WPUS and thereby removing it from article alerts. This means that if someone submits it for deletion or discussion we have to actively watch the various pages rather than get a notification of it at the project page making it much harder to know about potential problems with it. --Kumioko (talk) 18:31, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't been blanking any pages, so perhaps you mean deleting?

When WikiProject banners are the only content on the talk page of a file which has been transferred to Commons, I delete it after deleting the local duplicate of the file per {{db-f8}}. When there is discussion on such a talk page, I forward the content to the Commons file talk page before deleting it per {{db-g8}} and I specify that in the deletion summary (example). I don't know where the issue of file talk pages with project banners only has been discussed in general. Would Wikipedia talk:Moving files to the Commons be an appropriate place to open such a discussion? – Athaenara ✉ 21:00, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Per your objection, starting today, I will not delete talk pages which you have tagged for {{WikiProject United States}} although the associated files themselves have been transferred to Commons (example file log and talk page history). – Athaenara ✉ 22:04, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ill start a discussion at the link you provided. I see both sides of the coin myself and Im not sure what the end result will be but since a link (for lack of a better word) is left on wikipedia to the File on commons and because the vast majority of files in use on WPUS are either on commons or eligible for it, not having the banner on the talk page like I mentioned makes the project lose visibility of the file. Thanks for being understanding. --Kumioko (talk) 13:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's been over two years since I followed up on a db-f8 (then db-i8) for the first time, but even now the Commons seems farther away than it is. I think it would be a good idea if a few project members were a little more active there, putting files important to their project on their Commons watchlists. It would be a more direct way to keep track of the files and, over time, could reduce the need to retain local talk pages for them. – Athaenara ✉ 22:00, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ignoring KeepLocal

Hi Athaenara, in deleting File:Ohms law vectors.svg did you have a reason for ignoring the {{KeepLocal}} template or did you just not notice it? SpinningSpark 00:21, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I missed it, sorry, and that's the second one of yours I missed in the past year!

Local file restored (file log) (page history). – Athaenara ✉ 00:34, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Damn! I forgot it was the second one, perfect opportunity missed to be not polite. SpinningSpark 01:49, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted files available on Commons

→ in re:

Hi my watchlist shows you have deleted Falls sketches 12, 14, 15, 16 as they are available on Commons - but I don't understand whats going on.

I don't understand the Commons section - I don't know how I get there when I stumble in nor how to get out. So my level of expertise in this regard is extremely infintesimal not to say, miniscule.

Magog the Ogre has done a similar process to a number of other files I've uploaded. But as there are more files from similar sources which I would like to upload in the future and Magog sounds a bit of an ... ogre, and you sound nice, I'm appealing to you - can you help? :) --Rskp (talk) 07:13, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Moving files to the Commons explains some of it, but like many such pages it's not the friendliest or clearest of documents.

For these particular files, there's a detail which makes them very easy to reach: if you click on one of them as linked above, you'll find that the [edit] function for the 'Original upload log' section goes to the Commons file, and from there you can click on the history, edit the file, whatever.

My very best advice on this is to upload your images to Commons directly, thereby bypassing the whole evaluation and transfer and deletion thing entirely. I don't know how much I can help with other questions you may have, as I've only ever uploaded one image (File:LombergA1024.jpg), and that was to Commons in January 2008. – Athaenara ✉ 07:33, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I'll keep an eye out for the commons option and next time I see it I'll take it. :)--Rskp (talk) 04:39, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Images with multiple versions

→ see also: Commons file history and Wikipedia file log

Regarding File:Hbpl.jpg, did you notice that I declined deletion before because it doesn't fit F8, because it has older versions that are not on commons? Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:06, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As the older versions were replaced by the sole author/uploader here who uploaded the final version to Commons, it seemed appropriate to let the local file go. – Athaenara ✉ 04:14, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if I could be so presumptuous, I might say that I think that is a bad idea. First, it's actually against CSD policy, for the very good reason that we lose a perfectly good file version. This can be remedied via a split, or FFD. Secondly, I did decline the speedy deletion, and I prefer to think it's best if admins honor each other's adminly decisions, though I suppose it's not strictly necessary as I didn't perform any admin actions.

On a similar note, I hope to soon be putting up content on the toolserver which allows for old versions to easily be transferred to commons over the same file name; this wouldn't have been a good case though because it should have been two different files. Regardless, if you see any files with more than one version in the history that should be transferred according to F8, feel free to just leave it up for a few days, as I've privately been using the tool on my machine for many months now. Magog the Ogre (talk) 13:18, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, the three earlier versions were quite inferior to the final version. All four were by the same user. In cases like this where the other versions really are not usable, I prefer to honor the clear intention of the uploader. – Athaenara ✉ 01:00, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The image existed for two and a half years before it was overwritten. We encourage users to write to a different file so we can keep all of them. That file would not have survived a deletion request at commons, though maybe (maybe not) FFD. Magog the Ogre (talk) 08:33, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Christ of Havana.jpg

→ in re: File:The Christ of Havana.jpg (local log) (commons log)

Why was it deleated? Callelinea (talk) 03:07, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The local file was deleted last month per {{db-f8}} as a duplicate of the Commons file, but the Commons file was deleted yesterday or today. I restored the local file. – Athaenara ✉ 03:22, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding deletion of File:Gary R. Englert.jpg

→ see also: commons log, local file log, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gary R. Englert.jpg, and related AfD

In the logs it says you deleted this file but when I clicked on the link the image is still there? Did something happen that I don't know about. Thanks. TheGoofyGolfer (talk) 18:02, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It still exists on Commons. – Athaenara ✉ 00:16, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It did, but no longer. – Athaenara ✉ 05:45, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Asa Biggs Historical Marker 1.jpg

→ in re: File:Asa Biggs Historical Marker 1.jpg (local log) (Commons file history)
→ see also: Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2011 August 5#Image info

Please see WP:HD#Image info. Ta. Chzz ► 22:59, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Undeleted per FieldMarine's concerns. – Athaenara ✉ 23:12, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ILramzor2.png Image Deletion

→ in re: File:ILramzor2.png (local log) (Commons log); see also: File:ILramzor.png (local log)

Please help me. I'm a bit new at uploading images to commons. I saw on my watchlist that you tagged 'ILramzor2.png' with an 'F8'. I tried to understand what an F8 is, but reading the legalese is a bit beyond me.

I used 'Italian traffic signs - semaforo verticale.svg' created by 'User:F l a n k e r'. Flanker's work was released into the public domain. I changed the yellow color to match local signage. I then uploaded it to 'English Wikipedia'. Later I moved it to 'commons.wikimedia' so it could also be used on 'Hebrew Wikipedia'.

Where did I go wrong. (Without asking me to struggle with the F8 explanation again), please tell me what I can do to fix the situation. Thanks in advance for your help. --@Efrat (talk) 05:12, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Later in the day - - "User:Magog the Ogre" retagged the file F8. I get the impression that it will only be deleted from 'en.wikipedia' but remain in 'commons.wikimedia'. If that's what's going on, then I shouldn't get hysterical???????????? --@Efrat (talk) 15:50, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right... – Athaenara ✉ 18:00, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

TY --@Efrat (talk) 03:21, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

YW – Athaenara ✉ 03:23, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please undelete

→ in re: G'sBuscot (history), Buscot Wiki (history), Buscotnorth (history)

please undelete these files which say quite clearly "keep local"

Athaenara (talk | contribs) deleted "File:Buscotnorth.jpg" (F8: Media file available on Commons)

(Deletion log); 00:29 . . Athaenara (talk | contribs) deleted "File:Buscot Wiki.jpg" (F8: Media file available on Commons) (Deletion log); 00:29 . . Athaenara (talk | contribs) deleted "File:G'sBuscot.JPG" (F8: Media file available on Commons)

Thank you. Giacomo Returned 19:53, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done, sorry I missed the {{KeepLocal}} tags! – Athaenara ✉ 20:37, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You gave also deleted many other images uploaded or manufactured by me, all with a "keep local", perhaps you would like to undelete them also. Thank you. Giacomo Returned 21:51, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would, I'll see if I can find them. – Athaenara ✉ 21:55, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In your deleted contribs, I found the following files which had been transferred to Commons:

File:G's Buscot Park 1 Jpeg.jpg (local log) (commons log and history)
File:G's Buscot Park 2 Jpeg.jpg (local log) (commons log and history)
File:G's Buscot Park 3.jpg (local log) (commons log and history)
File:Lake at Chateau de Marly.gif (local log) (commons log and history)
File:Heythrop ParkFlip.jpg (local log) (commons log and history)
File:Rockingham House.jpg (local log) (commons log and history)
File:Mitchelstown Castle.jpg (local log) (commons log and history)

None had KeepLocal tags. Do you want any of them to be restored and KeepLocal tags added, or are they OK as they are? – Athaenara ✉ 22:44, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:LTC Signature 1998-2002.png

Hi. Thanks for correcting my attempted move. I used the "Move image to Commons" tab but it didn't seem to produce the expected results. I initially wondered if it was some sort of cacheing issue, but maybe I didn't follow the instructions correctly. Anyway, thanks. --Trevj (talk) 10:47, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I know transferring files isn't easy. – Athaenara ✉ 11:47, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'll stick with CommonsHelper in the future. --Trevj (talk) 12:23, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now Commons

→ see also: file history on Commons

Hi! Please remember to check the license on Commons before you delete the file on en-wiki. File:Hunterian Collection.jpg was GFDL|cc-by-sa-3.0,2.5,2.0,1.0 on enwiki but only GFDL|cc-by-sa-3.0 on Commons. --MGA73 (talk) 06:58, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As you say, it was {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-3.0,2.5,2.0,1.0}} here but transferred to Commons with {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} {{GFDL}}. Thanks for fixing it (it might be good to mention it to Frank Schulenburg, the editor who transferred the file, as well). – Athaenara ✉ 07:14, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem :-) Frank may understand it but sadly I do not think it is possible to get all the hundreds (or thousands) of users that move files to Commons to understand the problem. It is probably much easier to talk to the few admins that work on Now Commons files. If I find users that transfer a lot of files I tell them - otherwise I just fix it. --MGA73 (talk) 13:10, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages of deleted Commons content

When deleting talk pages of files moved to Commons, I would appreciate if you could move over old content, especially {{oldffdfull}}, {{oldpuffull}}, which have Commons equivalents ({{oldffdfull-en}} and {{oldpuffull-en}} respectively). This helps avoid duplicate discussions and deletion requests. Magog the Ogre (talk) 13:47, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen a few (not many) of those. I stored a note in one of my work pages about the templates and hope to use them properly when the occasion arises. – Athaenara ✉ 21:52, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 10:50, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome, and thank you for the heads-up – I hadn't known about the Commons equivalents – Athaenara ✉ 12:50, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please could you not delete talk pages containing project banners or the like. G8 specifically excludes "talk pages for images that exist on Wikimedia Commons". Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:21, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK. – Athaenara ✉ 09:15, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a good reason

Why I was not notified that two files I uploaded were deleted? Basic courtesy, at the very least, seems to suggest I should have been. → ROUX ₪ 13:34, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They were deleted per WP:CSD#F8 after Danmichaelo (talk · contribs) tagged them {{NowCommons}}. I undeleted the files and removed the tags per your complaint. – Athaenara ✉ 20:50, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is not an answer to my question, nor do your subsequent actions make any sense. Let's try again. Is there a good reason why I was not notified, by you, that two files I uploaded were deleted, by you? → ROUX ₪ 01:03, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notification, if at all, is usually by those who tag files per Moving files to the Commons, and generally uploaders have such pages on their watchlists so they'll be aware when files have been tagged. If you wish the local copy to be retained, you may add a {{Keep local}} to it. – Athaenara ✉ 02:13, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't particularly care whether it's here or Commons. What I care about is your lack of courtesy, followed by bizarre actions, and refusal to answer a specific question. Which you still haven't answered. Why did you fail to let me know, as a courtesy, that you had deleted the files in question? → ROUX ₪ 02:54, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So that's a 'no' in response to my question, then? Jolly good. → ROUX ₪ 21:50, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wyland Whales Apple Valley MN.JPG

You moved it to commons, then deleted it, and then they deleted it on commons. ~~Thanks for NOTHING.~~ Sorry for being snippy. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:11, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why it would be consider a copyvio, but that was the reason Infrogmation gave in the deletion log. I restored the local file (log, history). – Athaenara ✉ 20:15, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for restoring. However, you should check the link he posted on his commons talk page, and see if there actually is a copyright concern. I was expecting to see a "freedom of panorama" argument, if anything. Unless that's effectively the same thing. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:50, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see one problem, at least. I had posted it as PD-self (under my previous ID, 6 1/2 years ago, when I didn't know anything much about photo restrictions here), and although I took the picture, I obviously did not paint the painting. Any advice? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:28, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I have none, isn't there a discussion board for licensing questions? – Athaenara ✉ 21:25, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files with multiple versions in history

I would like to remind you that if a Commons file has multiple versions in its history, that all of the file versions are required to be on Commons for it to be eligible for F8. While it usually won't come back to bite us in the butt if we ignore the rules on it, that's true for any deletion criterion.

If you don't have the time to transfer to old versions to Commons, let me know and I'll use my bot to do it; you can even let me know afterwards, because the bot can see deleted versions of a file. Again, my bot would be public but the toolserver admin has placed a very low priority on fixing the server bug that's not letting it function.

In any case, I totally understand not wanting to move over old images; it's tedious enough that, in fact, I did write a bot to automate the task. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:08, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PS. I'm talking about multiple versions of the same image; not times when the image should be split. If it should be split, well then we just have to split it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:08, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reminder. I don't transfer files myself, but before deleting local duplicates I'll be more diligent in determining whether multiple versions of a file exist and have been transferred. If multiple versions exist but haven't been properly transferred, I'll try to remember to note that in the local file. – Athaenara ✉ 01:57, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Also, I wrote a script aaaaaaages ago that really helps me transfer files (hence the reason why my deletion summary always say (using Magog the Ogre's move to commons assistant) [3]. If you want access to it, and are geeky enough to know how to run php from the command line, I'll send you the source code. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:22, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Commons talk pages

Shouldn't talk pages that contain only project banners for files that have been moved to commons be deleted? Why did you exempt them? Of course, if the talk page contains discussion, keep it. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 15:16, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That was my view, but others have objected. See for example Martin (MSGJ)'s 17:21, 2 October 2011 (UTC) comment above in the "Talk pages of deleted Commons content" section. – Athaenara ✉ 06:35, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Male Blue Dragonfly Australia.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Male Blue Dragonfly Australia.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:43, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File talk:The Chinese Spring Offensive Korea April 1951.jpg

Why did you tag this for G8-exempt? Talk pages with nothing except a wikiproject tag are not useful for the project. Nyttend (talk) 21:59, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2017

File:Gregoire Lake 0356.jpg

Hey there, I was going through some files and landed on File:Gregoire Lake 0356.jpg. I noticed you tagged it to keep a local copy "per uploader's request" - I was wondering where this request took place as the editor hadn't edited for three years prior to that request. Thank you. Jon Kolbert (talk) 19:18, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That was more than six years ago. A bot had tagged it as being available on Commons in December 2010, and comparing that with the uploader's statement may have prompted me to tag it in January 2011. – Athaenara ✉ 08:11, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a Wikipedia user page.

If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site.

The original page is located at https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User_talk:Athaenara/Archive_0000.