Commons:Village pump

Shortcut: COM:VP

• Community portal
  • introduction
• Help desk
• Village pump
  • copyright
  • proposals
  • technical
• Administrators' noticeboard
  • vandalism
  • user problems
  • blocks and protections

↓ Skip to table of contents ↓       ↓ Skip to discussions ↓       ↓ Skip to the last discussion ↓

COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES (index) Commons Help desk Village pump (general discussion) Copyright Proposals Technical Graphics and photography discussion Photography critiques Image improvement Illustration workshop Map workshop Photography workshop Video and sound workshop Categories for discussion Undeletion requests Deletion requests Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard Translators' noticeboard Work requests for bots Contact administrators Vandalism User problems (Dispute resolution) Blocks and protections Bureaucrats' noticeboard CheckUser requests Oversight requests Telegram IRC webchat Commons mailing list (archive) Commons' bugs on Phabricator Welcome to the Village pump This page is used for discussions of the operations, technical issues, and policies of Wikimedia Commons. Recent sections with no replies for 7 days and sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=--~~~~}} may be archived; for old discussions, see the archives; the latest archive is Commons:Village pump/Archive/2023/05. Please note: If you want to ask why unfree/non-commercial material is not allowed at Wikimedia Commons or if you want to suggest that allowing it would be a good thing, please do not comment here. It is probably pointless. One of Wikimedia Commons’ core principles is: "Only free content is allowed." This is a basic rule of the place, as inherent as the NPOV requirement on all Wikipedias. Have you read our FAQ? For changing the name of a file, see Commons:File renaming. Any answers you receive here are not legal advice and the responder cannot be held liable for them. If you have legal questions, we can try to help but our answers cannot replace those of a qualified professional (i.e. a lawyer). Your question will be answered here; please check back regularly. Please do not leave your email address or other contact information, as this page is widely visible across the internet and you are liable to receive spam. Purposes which do not meet the scope of this page: Please do not make deletion requests here: use the relevant process for it instead. For technical support and graphics talks (PNG, SVG, GIF, etc.), please post on the Graphics village pump. To ask for image improvement, see: Graphic Lab/Photography workshop for photographs. Graphic Lab/Map workshop for maps. Graphic Lab/Illustration workshop for other illustrations. To ask for video or audio improvement, see Commons:Graphic Lab/Video and sound workshop. For translation requests, please post at Commons:Requests for translation. For media requests, please post at Commons:File requests. Search archives:       Start a new discussion

Legend
In the last hour
In the last day
In the last week
In the last month
More than one month
Manual settings
When exceptions occur, please check the setting first.

Centralized discussion See also: Village pump/Proposals   ■ Archive What rules should we have for media created by automated cameras? (17 April 2023) Should Commons opt-in to global abuse filters, or opt-out from them? (22 March 2023) Overhaul of categories by period (5 December 2022) Tolerate users to upload pre-1949 Chinese books (13 November 2022) Version of Saudi flag to use (11 July 2022) Concern regarding revocability of KOGL licenses (22 December 2021) Should deleting content from your own talk page be forbidden? (11 November 2021) Revise the COM:FOP Sweden section (1 February 2021) Template: View   ■ Discuss    ■ Edit   ■ Watch

	SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 7 days.

May 06

Crops of licence-reviewed files

i suggest we come up with a standard operating procedure for such files. currently, it seems croptool doesnt copy the reviewed template, giving rise to for example File:26th Tokyo International Film Festival Nagasawa Masami (cropped).jpg. theoretically, only sysops and reviewers can add or copy the reviewed template.

here're some solutions:

1. let croptool copy the template while uploading the new file.
2. it's ok for non-reviewers to copy the template.
3. make a bot that copies the template.

RZuo (talk) 16:26, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

a) has Croptool a new maintainer who could implement a solution, or has the current maintainer been appeased and convinced to return to Wikipedia?

b) While an image may be legal, a crop of it may be not, for example if an element of the picture is no longer de minimis in the crop. C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 18:28, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

if necessary, an open source repo can always be forked.

2nd concern makes sense, but whether something copyrightable is de minimis has no relation to the validity of the licence? RZuo (talk) 09:30, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

It can be forked. But it doesn't need to. Wmflabs can assign a new maintainer. But: Nobody seems to be interested to become this maintainer. C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 22:34, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Croptool down

Speaking of which, the croptool is giving me err. 502. Fix soon, please, or is just me? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 16:29, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

I've got the same problem. --Denniscabrams (talk) 17:40, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

May 11

Wrong deletion

Today, User:Jameslwoodward deleted Data:Ncei.noaa.gov/weather/Montpelier.tab and Data:Ncei.noaa.gov/weather/Juneau.tab without any valid reason and without any notice. Both sites are U.S. weather stations, both state capitals, and are corroborated by at least two sources. All data are owned by NOAA and are in the public domain. --Fumikas Sagisavas (talk) 06:31, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

This appears to be related to Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with Data:Ncei.noaa.gov/weather. MKFI (talk) 06:34, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

@Fumikas Sagisavas: The DR refers to COM:SCOPE. Could you please elaborate how these data tables fit into the scope of this project? I think the problem might be that since the data namespace was launched in 2016 we apparently hadn't much discussion about this. As we are a media archive, something like Data:NewYork.map is surely within scope but I fail to see why we should keep tables with weather data. Thinks like that are probably better hosted at Wikidata. --AFBorchert (talk) 07:11, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Because these data will be directly used as data charts on Wikipedia, but due to technical reasons, it is currently only possible to upload weather data data on shared resources and not on Wikidata. Fumikas Sagisavas (talk) 07:22, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

If it is at Commons, it has to fit into COM:SCOPE. Technical reasons like other projects do not support that yet are not sufficient to place something at Commons. --AFBorchert (talk) 07:44, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Actually technical reasons might be enough, see COM:INUSE: "It should be stressed that Commons does not overrule other projects about what is in scope. If an image is in use on another project (aside from use on talk pages or user pages), that is enough for it to be within scope." In any case if these files are used and they can't be reasonably hosted in other projects I believe we could adjust COM:Scope to allow them. MKFI (talk) 08:14, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

I agree. If there is a big class of such files we should probably have a more thorough discussion, but rather seeking a solution than just keeping them off Commons. Until that, I don't think we should delete them on scope grounds. –LPfi (talk) 08:38, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, the data sets in question are very much in line with how the Data: namespace was intended to be used.

The whole Data: namespace was basically introduced through the backdoor before it was ready to be integrated with the rest of Commons. We still don't have any good way to organize it (no categories, no SCD), is does not seem to exist in the documentation and we never properly discussed how it fits in with existing policies (or if we did, the results of those discussions did not trickle down to the actual policy pages).

So +1 to having a thorough discussion. To Do:

1. Re-visit the old discussions, and refresh our collective memory on plans, intentions and predicted problems
2. Do some research on how the namespace is actually being used today
3. Discuss what's good and bad about this
4. Figure out how that does or does not work with existing policies and adjust policies if necessary
5. Delete what is not covered by the new policies.

Bonus: Poke developers until they finish what they started.

Do we have something like a Commons:WikiProject data namepace where we could make a plan? El Grafo (talk) 12:08, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Comment I don't necessarily have an issue with files containing tabular data being hosted on Commons myself. What I don't like is that .tab files are editable, at least from what I've seen aren't sourced to the original file or website where the information came from, and contain no summary information. Which IMO goes against the guidelines. Also, at least in the case of weather data, the information is added to Wikipedia articles manually anyway. So I don't really see what the difference is between someone entering the data into the Wikipedia article from the original source themselves and it being uploaded here first and then transferred to Wikipedia. Except entering the data here first turns Commons into a buffer zone where the information can't and/or isn't going to be sourced, summarized, corrected, Etc. Etc. There's no reason this information can't just be added to whatever Wikipedia article it's going to be used in and they can deal with the sourcing issues, verify that it's correct, fix the information if it isn't, Etc. Etc. on their end. I don't think that's our job or within the projects scope though. That said, if .tab files couldn't be edited and contained summaries/sources, cool. I don't think they should be hosted on Commons until then though. --Adamant1 (talk) 14:55, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

• @Adamant1: this is a wiki, everything is editable. Making content uneditable is simply against the entire purpose of the project. Just because we don't provide ready-made tools to modify images does not mean that they are immutable. Sourcing for files is needed for copyright reasons but we don't require citations to verify map accuracy. Data files do have both summary descriptions and source parameter - if the editor did not fill them then that may be a reason for deletion. MKFI (talk) 10:39, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@MKFI: There's clearly a difference between someone editing an image using desktop software or the crop tool and uploading a new version of it versus having an "article" that information can be added to in real-time. One still treats Commons like a media repository, and the just recreates Wikipedia with a .tab or whatever at the end of the URL. You can argue about semantic, but editable "page" of tabular data is simply using Commons like Wikipedia. Otherwise there's zero point in having the distinction. As to the rest of what you said, I said the .tab files should have sources. Not that each individual data point in the file needs to citated to something. I'm sure you get the difference. As to if the tab files are sourced or not, they haven't been from what I've seen and at least with the .tab files uploaded by Fumikas Sagisavas there was pushback when I asked for them. Either that, or the files were sourced to a page that didn't contain the file. I have yet to see a .tab file that's sourced to the actual URL where the file came from, probably because the information is added to the file manually from different pages, which again is why they are just glorified Wikipedia articles. --Adamant1 (talk) 17:21, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@Adamant1: The fact that with Commons you need to use a desktop image editing software is a technical limitation, a flaw we should try correct. It is certainly not the model to aspire for. Trying to make Commons more like Wikipedia is very much desirable. Commons is simply a common storage place to support the different Wikipedias; it does not mean that we should be different from them except when needed for a file-centric project. MKFI (talk) 18:57, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

• Re: "Commons is simply a common storage place to support the different Wikipedias," I disagree vehemently, and if that were to become a limitation on our scope I would immediately resign from the project. - Jmabel ! talk 20:07, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

• Not only that, but User:MKFI, have you heard of Wikivoyage, Wikiversity, Wiktionary, etc.? Inform yourself. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:47, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

• I used "Wikipedia" here to refer to all Wikimedia projects and intended it as a reason to expand our scope, not limit it. While all projects are independent, our decisions affect others more than most but I feel we are sometimes too insular. MKFI (talk) 19:51, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

• Use "Wikimedia" if you want people to understand you. But in fact, Commons:Project scope is broader than that: "Wikimedia Commons is a media file repository making available public domain and freely-licensed educational media content (images, sound and video clips) to all. It acts as a common repository for all Wikimedia projects, but the content can be used by anyone, anywhere, for any purpose." And making Commons more like Wikipedia could be problematic in several ways, notably including scope but also fair use (unless Commons changes its policy on that, which I doubt we'll see). In which ways do you want to make it more like Wikipedia? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:00, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

• FWIW, Wikidata is pretty useless for tabular data. If such data belongs on a WMF project, it would be this one. And, yes, there has been way too little discussion of almost all aspects of Data: space. - Jmabel ! talk 17:21, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
• It's my understanding that such files are supposed to go here, and thus COM:SCOPE needs to be updated accordingly. Help:Namespaces#Data says "This namespace is used for two types of datasets, Tabular Data with suffix .tab and Map Data with suffix .map", and refers to [1] and Commons:File types#Data files. At the very least this disputed speedy deletion should be undone and a proper deletion debate opened. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:53, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

  I agree with both @Pigsonthewing and @Jmabel

  "Documentation links"

  • Tabular help <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Tabular_Data>
  • Map help <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Map_Data>

  Ooligan (talk) 08:51, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

May 12

Commons:Administrators#Reda_Kerbouche

Dear active Commons users,
I write to you today to humbly ask for your support in my candidacy for adminship on Commons. As an active user on this platform for some time now, I have dedicated much of my time and effort to contributing quality content and ensuring that the community maintains its positive reputation as a thriving platform for sharing knowledge.

As a potential admin, I bring with me the experience and skills necessary to help manage Commons and make critical decisions that will ensure its continued growth and success. I am confident in my abilities to navigate the complex challenges of this role, and I am committed to providing a transparent and effective leadership style that prioritizes the needs and voices of the community.

That being said, I also understand that not everyone may share my vision for Commons. Therefore, I respectfully ask that those of you who do not support my candidacy for adminship also make your voices heard. Whether you vote for me or against me, I am always open to constructive feedback and welcome the opportunity to engage in meaningful dialogue with all users.

So, I implore you to participate in this crucial decision-making process and make your voice heard. Let us work together to ensure that Commons remains a welcoming, collaborative, and dynamic platform for years to come.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely, Reda Kerbouche (talk) 08:52, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators/Requests/Reda Kerbouche was closed as "Unsuccessful".   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 12:38, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Vector 2022

Has there ever been a discussion regarding switching Commons to Vector 2022? If so, could you point me to it? If not, I would like to discuss the possibility of switching to Vector 2022 like Wikipedia. Interstellarity (talk) 14:00, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

I think Vector 2022 is currently no option for Commons as it is focused on articles and text where a narrower text filed is better to read. On gallery pages you want to see as many pictures as possible on your screen. GPSLeo (talk) 14:51, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

If you want the layout to change for your account: go to Preferences, tab Appearence, click on Vector 2022. JopkeB (talk) 04:23, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Pinging @Interstellarity.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 12:39, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

We should have a directory of free resources

Sometime ago I looked into the Libertarian Party of the Netherlands and on their website they claim that all images on their website are freely licensed images, they then list a number of sources for these images and to my surprise the Wikimedia Commons wasn't mentioned at all. But their list did contain the following online resources:

• https://cupcake.nilssonlee.se/
• https://focastock.com/
• https://isorepublic.com/
• https://jaymantri.com/
• https://littlevisuals.co/
• https://loc.gov/pictures/ (Images from the Library of Congress).
• https://mystock.themeisle.com/
• https://negativespace.co/
• https://picography.co/
• https://skitterphoto.com/ (Skitterphoto).
• https://stocksnap.io/
• https://www.stockvault.net/

I'm not aware which of these have mostly been imported and which ones haven't, but for years I've actually wanted to make a central directory of free websites from which we can direct users to websites to look for useful educational images which have licenses compatible with the Wikimedia Commons and direct them to relevant categories, but as this is thousands of websites I wouldn't know how to categorise these websites. I would suggest copying Wikipedia's list of reliable sources (and perhaps also create a related list of reliable but seemingly free websites).
The page I envision would have a WikiTable design and a link to the website, a description of the website, instructions on how to import from it, perhaps a field for tools, and also a category for where to put images from said source. I'll make an example below. Perhaps it could be called something like "Commons:Resources".
While writing this I find that something similar existe, but it's hardly advertised anywhere at the Wikimedia Commons, this makes me wonder why it isn't placed somewhere visible?
Plus as I've brought the topic up anyhow, perhaps it could be organised better, I'll create an example table below. -- — Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 19:32, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

These websites offer beautiful photos. But I wonder whether they are useful on Commons. They all, except for those on https://loc.gov/pictures/, lack information about the where and when. I think we have enough photos taken on unidentified locations and with unknow date. So I am not in favor of putting them on a list like Commons:Free media resources (the U.S. Library of Congress digital image archive is already in it). JopkeB (talk) 05:11, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

@Donald Trung: Then put it on your liberTarian website. Stanislov Patrick 473 (talk) 11:57, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Stanislov Patrick 473, that is not my website, I'm not a Libertarian and I have never been a member of the Libertarian Party, I just used it as a point of reference... — Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 12:20, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

@Donald Trung: Maybe you should consider joining so you can edit their websIte?! 12:25, 17 May 2023 (UTC)~~ Stanislov Patrick 473 (talk) 12:25, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Currently:

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?photo_license=CC-BY-SA Crowdsourced plants and animals photos. CC-BY-SA, CC0 and less permissive licenses. Photos are compressed to ~3MP size. Use {{INaturalistreview}}.

Becomes:

URL	Description	Warnings	Template(s)	Relevant categories	Tools
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?photo_license=CC-BY-SA	Crowdsourced plants and animals photos. CC-BY-SA, CC0 and less permissive licenses. Photos are compressed to ~3MP size.		{{INaturalistreview}}.	Media from iNaturalist

Something like this. Or is that less handy? The more I look at this the more I realise that most of the ideas I have surrounding it exists, yet I don't see it advertised anywhere, perhaps we should try to make these pages more visible. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 19:37, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

I think there would have to be divisions by type or such, but it could work. You might look at Don-vip's list they use for their bot at Commons:Spacemedia for inspiration. — Huntster (t @ c) 20:30, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@Huntster: donal or donner Stanislov Patrick 473 (talk) 12:25, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

@Stanislov Patrick 473: I don't understand. — Huntster (t @ c) 13:26, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

May 13

Roma Termini or Roma Tiburtina?

Is the category correct or is a rename necessary?

It looks like a duplicate of File:NTV ETR 575 Roma Tiburtina train station 08 2018-1227.jpg Smiley.toerist (talk) 09:21, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

I think that it is Tiburtina. Ruslik (talk) 20:15, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

I wil ask for a rename. The other file is cropped version (a small cut-out above).Smiley.toerist (talk) 09:10, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Annotated copyright information from the archives of Latvian pictures

I recently moved image File:Akmens tēli, Torņakalns.JPG from lvwiki to common, but I don't know how to label the copyright information, thank you! The copyright information of the original text is w:lv:Veidne:Edgars2007 attēls of lvwiki, but only lvwiki has the logo of this free copyright. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fumikas Sagisavas (talk • contribs)

@Fumikas Sagisavas: the equivalent template on commons is {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} You can use it to attribute to the user by using it like {{Cc-by-sa-3.0|[[:lv:User:Edgars2007|Edgars Košovojs]]}}. --William Graham (talk) 15:10, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

@William Graham: CC BY-SA 3.0 is the same as CC BY-ND 1.0 Stanislov Patrick 473 (talk) 11:57, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

@Stanislov Patrick 473: No, it is not. I'm sorry, but licenses with restrictions -nc- (noncommercial) and -nd- (no derivatives) are not usable by themselves for Wikimedia Commons. For the reasons, please see Commons:Licensing/Justifications.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 12:33, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: WMF is non-profit so it is noncomerial Stanislov Patrick 473 (talk) 12:34, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

@Stanislov Patrick 473: Have you read Foundation:Resolution:Licensing policy? Commons doesn't accept files with only a CC BY-ND license (or CC BY-NC for that matter) per Commons:Licensing policy.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 12:43, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

May 16

Category:Men of the People's Republic of China by name vs. Category:Men of China by name

Is there any actual difference between these two categories? Trade (talk) 17:04, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Convenience links (would this have been so hard?): Category:Men of the People's Republic of China by name, Category:Men of China by name. - Jmabel ! talk 18:03, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Prior to 1948 there is no PRC. It would be odd to call one of the Emperors (for example) a "man of the PRC". Similarly for Chin Gee Hee (died 1930), etc. But I don't know whether in practice that is how it is being used. - Jmabel ! talk 18:07, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Probably because of POC/ROC/ROK/HK/MC disputes. Stanislov Patrick 473 (talk) 11:55, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

For anyone who hasn't worked it out, Stanislov Patrick 473 is a disruptive vandal. - Jmabel ! talk 15:20, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

May 17

About Category:Uses of Wikidata Infobox with no image

In Category:Uses of Wikidata Infobox with no image are a lot of Wikidata items, for which no image is availably and probably will not be in the future. For instance artists who died centuries ago (before the 19th century), who made a lot of works that are in the category and/or gallery page, but of whom is no portrait available. However those WD-items stay there for everlasting days, people might invest time to search for proper images (over and over again), time which may be better spend. Does a solution exists for this problem? Otherwise I would propose to label those WD-items (for instance with a specific template) and take care they will be removed from and not enter again this maintenance category. JopkeB (talk) 05:45, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

• I suppose you can set image=no_value in instances where there will never be an image, then have the search that creates the category exclude where we have image=no_value. --RAN (talk) 12:22, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Making Uploads More Reliable on the Commons App

Hi everyone!

I am Ritika Pahwa, a third-year undergraduate at Indira Gandhi Delhi Technical University for Women, India, and I have been accepted as a Google Summer of Code(GSoC) contributor at Wikimedia Foundation for this summer. I wanted to take this opportunity to share about the upcoming enhancements in upload reliability of the Commons app that I will be focusing on in the next few months as a GSoC contributor.

My project aims at addressing upload-related issues and dealing with metadata loss. I have often experienced upload-related issues myself and would like to fix them so that all the Commons lovers get a seamless experience with the app! I would be working towards upload reliability over slow internet connections, uploads stuck in the Queued state, and loss of location data despite being present in the EXIF metadata of the pictures (GitHub Issue).

I look forward to collaborating with my mentors, Nicolas Raoul and Kaartic Sivaraam, and working together towards a hassle-free upload process!

Best,

Ritika Pahwa — Preceding unsigned comment added by RitikaPahwa4444 (talk • contribs) 08:44, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

@RitikaPahwa4444: Try using the "isUploadSuccess" function. It is faster than using the one using the main DB. Stanislov Patrick 473 (talk) 11:54, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

For anyone who hasn't worked it out, Stanislov Patrick 473 is a disruptive vandal. - Jmabel ! talk 15:22, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

@RitikaPahwa4444: could you explain what you mean here by "metadata loss"? People use the term "metadata" in several different ways, ranging from meaning only the metadata encoded within an image file (e.g. EXIF) to all data of any sort about the photo other than the image itself, regardless of where it is stored. - Jmabel ! talk 15:24, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Jmabel, some versions of Android scrub the EXIF location from JPGs before an app can read it. So, the usage of "metadata loss" here stands for the EXIF metadata of the image. RitikaPahwa4444 (talk) 06:14, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Do you have an example of an Android device? Most Messenger Apps and Social Media Services do that, but if the OS did, third party gallery apps would be severly crippled. C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 07:17, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Many app developers complained about this, some even stopped maintaining their apps because of this. See https://github.com/commons-app/apps-android-commons/issues/5015#issuecomment-1295710362 and around for context. Cheers! Syced (talk) 07:45, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

@RitikaPahwa4444

• A way to make sure, that an upload was successful and complete is to have the app compare the MessageDigest of the local file and the Uplaoded file.
• MW completely ignores MetaData of Video files, but that is an issue of MW, not the Upload process (actually you can query the MetaData from the API, it is stored in a database field of MW
• Slow uploads is something that is dealt with by the Offroader upload app (also: Comparing of MessageDigest before upload to avoid duplicates and after upload to check, if the uploaded file is intact, paused and continued upload, spliting videos in 4GB parts and transcoding, and optionally writing a protocol of the upload stages)
• You have "contact me" links to linkedin and medium, two sevrvices that I do not use, but you can contact me at Mastodon or Threema with question about my own upload tool and Offroader.

C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 20:17, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Moving from Category:Tram line 76 (Düsseldorf) to Category:Stadtbahn line U76 (Düsseldorf)

I have problems with: [2] and [3]. These are pictures of the Straßenbahn linie 76 and not the Stadtbahn linie U76. There is the distiction of Category:Lines of the Düsseldorf Stadtbahn and Category:Tram lines in Düsseldorf.

This should be structured as by: Category:Tram line 79 (Düsseldorf)Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:24, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Should we adopt the proposed Child Protection policy?

I noticed recently that Commons:Child protection is still marked as a draft policy, despite having been in the works for several years. I'd like to start a discussion here with the goal of making it an actual policy on Commons. The policy, as written, is eminently reasonable, serves as a reasonable baseline for child protection, and would help to bring us in line with child protection policies adopted on several other Wikimedia wikis (such as MetaWiki and EnWiki). — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 14:58, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm in favor of approving this policy, but there is one thing that's glaringly absent from it: a statement that everyone who violates it will be reported to Wikimedia Legal. Should we add that? Why or why not? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:47, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

I think this is just a summary of other guidelines they are already in place. The "Advice for younger editors" could be advises to all people on the internet. Many of the cases mentioned on the page are not a reason of a infinite block they are cases for T&S and global bans. T&S is currently not even mentioned on the page. If we think we need something like this we should create a general Commons:Privacy and security advises page. GPSLeo (talk) 19:24, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

I think that would be a wise addition, so I've added that here. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 20:24, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

How do we figure out which material is considered obscene? The page already says that CSA is against the ToS (obviously) so i figure out the obscene part refer to something else Trade (talk) 21:33, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Since we operate in the United States, it would be by applying the Miller Test. I don't anticipate this being an issue we would encounter; genuinely obscene material is going to be out-of-scope, so we'd be deleting it already. The sorts of obscene images that are prohibited by that test cannot have non-trivial literary, artistic, political, or scientific value, and I think that educational media is going to almost always meet one of those.

Frankly, I'm struggling to come up with an example of something that's possibly in educational scope, not covered under CSAM, and also obscene under U.S. law. The closest I can come up with is a video taken by a rapist of them actively brutally raping some non-child being uploaded for use in an article about rape to demonstrate an example of what violent rape looks like—and I think WMF would have to delete it anyway because of applicable law (as well as... ya know... basic human decency, or absent that the Commons:Photographs of identifiable people policy). And even that example feels like a bit of a stretch. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 02:07, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Might wanna add this into the policy page Trade (talk) 15:11, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

And, for what it's worth, the ToU prohibits Posting or trafficking in obscene material that is unlawful under applicable law, so I don't think that this is introducing anything new. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 02:10, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

1. The proposed policy says: "Those affected should contact an admin by email". I have had very bad experiences with this, when I emailed an admin i really trusted. This should be deleted and perhaps replaced by contacting VRT, where at least several admins can look at it, which is a certain protection against a malicious admin.
2. It contains a list of things a child can do to not get harrassed. Somehow I had expected a list of things that commons and the community do to protect children (for example implementing a direct message system, that does not expose email addresses by design).

--C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 07:07, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

May i ask what happened regarding the admin you emailed? Trade (talk) 15:12, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Them turned out to be a friend of another well connected user who was later globally locked because of another incident. C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 19:45, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

The other options that we would have would be:

1. "Those affected should email the Commons oversight team at oversight-commons@lists.wikimedia.org",
2. "Those affected should email the Commons information team at info-commons@wikimedia.org",

or some combination of the two.

Do either of these stand out as better to you, C.Suthorn? My hunch would be toward pointing towards the oversighters (who are vetted for this sort of sensitive information a bit more closely than admins or random VRT members are), but the problem is that there's typically a good bit of lag between an email being received and an oversight action being taken. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 04:44, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

If there is no suitable group and no suitable email address, a suitable group can be set up and an appropriate email address can be created. For example "protect-me@wikimedia.org"? C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 05:55, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Sitting on this a bit more, I think the solution to this would be to try to have more oversighters. This sort of stuff involves the same level (or greater) trust than the other things that get suppressed, so having more people vetted for that purpose would probably be the optimal way forward. In emergencies, Stewards can act, but I don't think that they are going to want to be taking on this stuff (CC: AntiCompositeNumber and DerHexer, Jon Kolbert, who appear to be the only Commons admins who are also Stewards from what I can see). There aren't a shortage of people who are trustworthy enough to perform oversight tasks; the bigger issue is persuading people to run. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:24, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

No, i don't think that policy is needed here specifically as its already covered under Wikimedia Foundation's own Terms of Use.. It was something worth discussing a decade back but since WMF started hiring more employees including litigators and lawyers, there is no need for it..--Stemoc 17:30, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Just my two cents, but it seems like putting the cart before the horse to have special policies for protecting children when there aren't even basic civility guidelines in place that are being inforced. Let the WMF deal with it if it's something serious, but that's already happening from what I've seen and admins aren't dealing with more minor stuff in the meantime anyway. It would be weirdly discriminatory if they were only dealing with civility issues or harrasement if either one involved children but not anyone else. --Adamant1 (talk) 18:49, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I agree that we need to work on getting COM:CIVILITY to policy status and actually enforcing civility norms. I think that's orthogonal to this discussion, though, and I don't see making progress on one as blocking progress on the other. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 04:30, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Just today a user was warned for copyvio despite my ban request being for posting pornography of a woman without her consent. No amount of policy will matter if admins don't actually read the block requests. Trade (talk) 00:19, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Setting the Wikimedia Commons category by importing from the Russian Wikipedia

I have a request for automatic insertion of personalities from w:ru:Категория:Телеведущие Первого канала to Category:Channel One Russia presenters. Is it possible to do this with the help of a bot, since there are 406 articles in the specified category of the Russian Wikipedia? —MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 16:12, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Finding Geolocation Leads with Bellingcat's OpenStreetMap Search Tool

This new tool from Bellingcat looks as though it might have great potential for identifying some of our "unknown location" pictures.

It will work best in areas that are well mapped on OSM; and where the picture is relatively modern (or historic features remain) and the approximate location is known.

Caveats are that it requires a Google account for login and I have not yet tried it in depth.

If the code is open, maybe we could have an instance on Toolforge? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:31, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Seems a good idea to me. Untill that time, can we mention this tool on Category:Unidentified locations? JopkeB (talk) 04:39, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Is this image (Lord Durham's report in French) in public domain in US?

Here's the image in question: File:Lambton - Rapport de Lord Durham (page 4 crop).jpg . It was published in 1839 in Montreal. The file description says that it is public domain in country of origin (Canada), but says there must also be a description of copyright status for the US. I would have thought it would be public domain in the US, given its age, but I (a) don't know if that is correct, and (b) don't know how to edit the image page to remove the "US info needed" tag? (The reason I'm asking is that I planned to use it for an article that was under GA review, and the reviewer suggested that it would be an impediment to GA review if there was a question about the copyright status.) Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 20:10, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes, the file is public domain in the United States because it was published before 1928. Abzeronow (talk) 20:14, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

How do I add that info to the page for the image?Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 00:32, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Add {{PD-US-expired}}. –LPfi (talk) 12:30, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 00:48, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

• Some foreign templates already include the reasons that the document/image is public domain in the USA, making it unnecessary to add a second template. I think that is a better strategy, to move in that direction. --RAN (talk) 12:16, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

May 18

Change of licenses

I've just had several art licenses changed. In combinations of, the death date deleted, and or 1923 deleted. This was justified because The date 1923 is no longer used in the template, it is desirable that it be discontinued, as it is no longer appropriate under modern law. And the dates of life are indicated in the object card. There have been other license changes too, example: PD-Art, not PD-art, sir. What is the justification for this as a change?

To my mind it was a totally unnecessary edit. 1923 flips automatically to 1928. Modern law, shifts sometimes, and the death date is the key element in the code, around which, legislation pivots. Unless wikidata takes over licensing completely, which (for art ) I'm in favour of.

I'm aware of Wikidata's benefits in part, however it reduces the accessibility of the project to the everyman. That's why I advocated retaining the deathdate. Licensing is already complicated enough. This project has for some time, been complicating itself to the point of not being accessible anymore. We are polluted with arcane edits, that add no value.

A question is; what is the licence I should use to prevent this sort of harassment in future? Given that most of my artwork involves the artists dead by 75 or 100 years. Thoughts gratefully received. Broichmore (talk) 13:23, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I've added a section header to prevent problems with the automatic archiving. Feel free to rename the section, if you wish.

Could you provide some example links to where the changes you describe are happening? It is hard to tell without examples what the other editor is doing and whether their actions are appropriate. From Hill To Shore (talk) 14:24, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Presumably the one referred to in User talk:RetroRave#License change. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:03, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Every art example here at Help:Copyrights shows 1923 in the coding, and one of the two shows the death date.Broichmore (talk) 19:01, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

{{PD-old-auto-expired}} is the current best-use template. I'd rather not have the death date for artists that died more than 100 years ago, as then it would cost $30/hr * 1/2 hr per work * a million works = $$15 million!!! for us to analyze everything, which is a good argument for the legislature not to make such a silly change and force needless costs on us and similar archives. Seriously, our planning for a case where rent-seekers are getting more than a century after the artist dies should involve public outrage and aggressive lobbying, not just sitting there and taking it.--Prosfilaes (talk) 21:01, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Do you mean that the year shouldn't be added even if known? What costs does that involve? Or do you mean that the effort to find the year is unnecessary when it is known to be long ago? If we don't state the year (or something like "before 1890") and don't link a WP article or WD item with the death year, how does a patroller or reuser know that the death year indeed is early enough? A PD-old can be added by a misinformed guess.

For the outrage, I think 70 years pma, 95 years after publication or 120 years since creation should still cause that outrage – but it doesn't. In the USA, I have understood that a work can be under copyright regardless of age, if it was published in a certain window (so you need to check for that for any old work).

–LPfi (talk) 11:02, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Test-Upload

Wasn't there a facility where I could upload files to yest them where they automatically get deleted after a while? Cheers, Oalexander (talk) 14:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

File:JPG Test.jpg and other Category:Test images exist, but they do not become deleted, they become reverted to the "original" test file. GPSLeo (talk) 15:03, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Oalexander (talk) 01:21, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

For tests there is also a beta server which may or may not fit your purpose: https://commons.wikimedia.beta.wmflabs.org/wiki/Main_Page Syced (talk) 03:12, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

FYI: Flickr's update community guidelines

https://www.flickr.com/help/guidelines?utm_campaign=community-guidelines-update&utm_source=Flickr&utm_medium=email&utm_content=cc-users

From the email sent by them:

What was once a lengthy list of dos-and-don’ts is now a structured document built around the things that make Flickr great: Inspiration, connection, and sharing.

We also developed a new “give some grace” policy designed to protect both Creative Commons license holders and their users. We love that Flickr is home to generous artists around the world. But we’re not a home for copyright trolls, and never will be.

We shared our thoughts about the process on the Flickr Blog, and you can read the new guidelines yourself right here:

Could be of interest to many here. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:23, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Specifically, Flickr is "asking licensors to give good-faith reusers a 30-day grace period to correct any error or misuse of their open-licensed content with no penalty. This change was introduced to prevent the malpractice of so-called copyright trolls using the threat of litigation to generate income." Is copyright trolling an issue for Commons? If so, should we consider adopting similar guidelines? Nosferattus (talk) 16:48, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

The most used license on commons is cc-by-sa-4.0, the second most used license is cc-by-sa-3.0. The most used group of licenses on commons are cc-4.0, cc-zero and pd licenses. The second most used group of licenses on commons are cc-licenses below 4.0. Possible copyrigt trolling affects this second group. All files imported from Flickr fall into this group. In the past it has been discussed to ask users who uploaded with cc, but below 4.0 to update their files to 4.0 because of the issue of possible copyright trolling. C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 17:01, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't help that much unless the grace period is explicitly and bindingly granted. Otherwise the good faith copyright owners will continue to grant a grace period (usually as long as needed if the reuser is cooperating), while the copyright trolls will ignore the request. –LPfi (talk) 11:07, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

The new guidelines explicitly state that Failure to allow a good faith reuser the opportunity to correct errors is against the intent of the license and not in line with the values of our community, and can result in your account being removed. So, at least Flickr will eject people who do this going forward, but that doesn't actually help the end-user when they are still on the line for whatever liability arises. Frankly, they should just switch to the 4.0 licenses to protect the end-user. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 14:34, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Frankly Commons should ask commons users who uploaded own work with a cc license but below 4.0 to consider to switch their uploads to 4.0. More than a million users have uploaded files to commons and nearly all are unaware of the issue and of this discussion. A small number does use the 3.0 version, because they do not want to use 4.0, but the majority might do the switch. C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 09:27, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

May 19

File:Betriebszentrale S-Bahn Berlin, Halenseestraße am Friedhof Grunewald mit Stellenanzeige Fahrdienstleiter:in am 2023-05-17.png

I uploaded File:Betriebszentrale S-Bahn Berlin, Halenseestraße am Friedhof Grunewald mit Stellenanzeige Fahrdienstleiter:in am 2023-05-17.png. Accidently I uploaded it as File:Betriebszentrale S-Bahn Berlin, Halenseestraße am Friedhof Grunewald mit Stellenanzeige Fahrdienstleiter-in am 2023-05-17.png. Either that, or a glitch in the software changed it from File:Betriebszentrale S-Bahn Berlin, Halenseestraße am Friedhof Grunewald mit Stellenanzeige Fahrdienstleiter:in am 2023-05-17.png to File:Betriebszentrale S-Bahn Berlin, Halenseestraße am Friedhof Grunewald mit Stellenanzeige Fahrdienstleiter-in am 2023-05-17.png. I requested a renamimg from File:Betriebszentrale S-Bahn Berlin, Halenseestraße am Friedhof Grunewald mit Stellenanzeige Fahrdienstleiter-in am 2023-05-17.png to File:Betriebszentrale S-Bahn Berlin, Halenseestraße am Friedhof Grunewald mit Stellenanzeige Fahrdienstleiter:in am 2023-05-17.png. But it turned out that file movers cannot rename the file because of some software problem ("file already exists"). So can an admin please manually do the rename? (context: ":" is a gender marker in the german language) --C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 15:46, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

@C.Suthorn: can you have a colon in a Commons filename? I would think it would confuse the mechanism for "file spaces". - Jmabel ! talk

Such files certainly exist: File:About - La vieille Roche : 1ère partie, le mari imprévu.djvu, for example. There are only 618 files on Commons with colons in their names, though, and their page_ids suggest they're all from 2013 or earlier. So I suspect it's difficult or impossible to create new ones. --bjh21 (talk) 18:02, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

... with one exception: File:Ed Saperia - Open Access Reader: A project to cite all OA papers in Wikipedia - Wikipedia Science Conference 2015.webm, from 2015. I'll stop looking now. --bjh21 (talk) 18:07, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Gremlins

There are Gremlins in Commons! User:Koavf uploaded File:A Weekly Conversation- With Mike at W. S. Jenks & Son.webm and File:A Weekly Conversation- On the Line with Michele.webm in 2021. Both starting with "A Weekly Conversation:". But the Gremlins changed it to "A Weekly Conversation-". Without leaving an entry in history or logs! Prove: go to "Page information" for both files and compare the "Display title" and the "Sort key"! By 2022 the Gremlins had learned to also falsify the sort key: File:Bridge Over River Feugh -Feugh Cottage Banchory Ternan - George Washington Wilson - ABDMS004835.8.jpg. --C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 05:28, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are talking about with the lack of "entry in history or logs" - you can quite clearly see the change for the first file in the history and even navigate to the specific difference at [4]. On the second file I can't see any evidence that it was uploaded under a different name; I was able to change your "proof" on the page information page with a single edit to the default sort template on the file.[5] This seems to be the result of normal editing and there are no gremlins here. From Hill To Shore (talk) 08:14, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

For testing I uploaded a new version of File:Möbeluppsats, 12 delar, VI:II:A.a.11 - Hallwylska museet - 39426.tif with the BigChunkedUploadSrcipt by User:Rillke, but it ended up as File:Möbeluppsats, 12 delar, VI-II-A.a.11 - Hallwylska museet - 39426.tif instead. --C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 10:12, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Page for bad YouTube authors?

I recently got burned by an unofficial YouTube channel that was lifting content from the official one. The channel had high-quality uploads and a few thousand subscribers, and it wasn't clear it was an unofficial one until another user pointed it out to me. This brings me to my question: is there a page that tracks bad YouTube authors?

We have a Commons:Questionable Flickr images for Flickr, but I couldn't find an equivalent page for YouTube. Ixfd64 (talk) 21:02, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

We don't have a comprehensive one; User:YouTubeReviewBot/bad-authors is the old one that was used by the old YouTubeReviewBot, but it is very small and doesn't run anymore. That bot's successor bot hasn't run since April 2022, so we effectively don't have a bot at all doing this task. The existing projectspace tracking page for this (Commons:Questionable YouTube videos) has not been updated in seven years, and its existence is not well-advertised.

That being said, getting an actively maintained tracking page going would be worthwhile—a clever bot writer could use it to tag images screenshotted from known bad accounts with a "failed license review" speedy tag and could notify the uploader, or could at least put them into a category for human review. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 13:46, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

May 21

File:Jaguar E-Type Roadster Eté2016 Marcq-en-Baroeul dfil-du-grand-boulevard en 2009 (1).jpg

Greetings. I have come upon an improperly named image file that needs changing but don't know how to do it. I see no commands or appropriate options. This is the file: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jaguar_E-Type_Roadster_Et%C3%A92016_Marcq-en-Baroeul_dfil-du-grand-boulevard_en_2009_(1).jpg. The problem is that it does not show an E-type Jaguar (see a selection of proper images here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=jaguar+e-type+&title=Special:MediaSearch&go=Go&type=image) but an MG-A instead (https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=mga+roadster&title=Special:MediaSearch&go=Go&type=image) - which the author themselves realizes is the car portrayed in the misnamed file (confirmed in their description of the image here: MG A Roadster au défilé du Grand Boulevard du 27-09-09 à Marcq-en-Barœul, Nord).

Please, whoever has the ability to make this change, do so, as (unfortunately) my ISP changes at least once daily, and I cannot always remember what pages or files I may have worked on here or at Wikipedia and am provided no means of maintaining continuity with a previous day's work. So leaving instructions (even if an unregistered user can carry them out) may still not work out for me to make the change. Thank you, whoever steps up and makes the simple but necessary alteration to the file name. 2601:196:180:DC0:693C:8091:E454:316C 10:03, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

If you note on what page you discussed an issue, you will find it there (or in some cases in an archive of that page, note some keywords to find it more easily). Only appointed users can move files on Commons, but you can request a move, adding {{rename|Jaguar MG A Roadster Eté2016 Marcq-en-Baroeul dfil-du-grand-boulevard en 2009 (1).jpg|3|MG A, not E.}} or something similar (the "3" stands for "obvious error"). –LPfi (talk) 10:54, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Also, you should probably register a user name, which would solve the issue of not being able to keep track of your edits. –LPfi (talk) 10:55, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Is 'Aadgujjkm' a right caption?

An anonymous user added 'Aadgujjkm' as a caption in the Chamoru language. Since it's the user's only contribution, I wonder if this is a good addition. Google translate does not recognize it. Wouter (talk) 13:47, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

On ch.wikipedia.org no results were found. Wouter (talk) 13:58, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

@Wouterhagens, I could certainly be wrong, but I'm fairly sure it's vandalism. It's not found by Google at all, and it doesn't really conform to the structure of what I'm seeing of example Chamoru words. Plus, whenever I see letters like "ujjkm" together, it tells me someone was just hammering their keyboard (they are grouped together on an English keyboard). I'll revert. — Huntster (t @ c) 14:12, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

May 22

Berlin transit icons

I am exploring the possibility of refreshing the U-Bahn and S-Bahn icons (located here and here respectively), but I have run into an issue where the colours in the BVG website, S-Bahn website and VBB map are inconsistent. The following table contains the hexadecimal values from my research into three sources: the BVG website, the S-Bahn website, and the VBB map:

Mode and line colours

Line	BVG (web)	DB (web)	VBB (map)
Modes
Regio	be1414	e10a17	e30613
S-Bahn	45935d	007238	4c9046
U-Bahn	115d91	1e6ab2	0065ae
Tram	be1414	cc151a	e30613
Bus	95276e	a01c7d	a71681
Ferry	528dba	0099d6	009bd9
S-Bahn
S1	bc6194	eb588f	dd6ca6
S2/25/26	457236	047939	007b3d
S3	115d91	026597	0065ae
S41	a0542e	aa3c1f	af5937
S42	af6223	ba622d	cb621a
S45/46/47	bc9144	ca8539	cd9c54
S5	ee771e	ea561c	ee7203
S7/75	8c6dab	764d9a	846daa
S8/85	7dad4c	4fa433	62ad2d
S9	701c28	951732	9b2b48
U-Bahn
U1	7dad4c	7dad4c	62ad2d
U2	da421e	da421e	e94e0f
U3	16683d	2e937d	00a092
U4	f0d722	f0d722	ffd500
U5/55	7e5330	7e5330	815238
U6	8c6dab	8c6dab	846daa
U7	528dba	528dba	009bd9
U8	224f86	224f86	00599a
U9	f3791d	f3791d	f18700
Fare zones
A	be5a00	fba71d	b75116
B	008291	1a9c9f	007d8a
C	5a821e	8dc73f	537a2c

I am aware that the U-Bahn line icon colours were changed by Teo.raff in 2020, in response to Berliner_Verkehrsbetriebe § Farben. However, I am minded to contest the changes because they are notably darker and desaturated, especially with the U7 icon. However, I have problems trying to find the Basiselemente (CD-Manual), as referenced in the German article. I wonder if anyone can help me find that because (1) I may look at using the Pantone hexadecimal values instead from the colour book that I happen to have, and (2) I don't know if the Basiselemente gives those exact hexadecimal values that the website uses. --Minoa (talk) 03:49, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

References

Almost 60 Ukrainian libraries was damaged or destroyed since the war

“	According to her, the Russians have damaged or destroyed almost 60 Ukrainian libraries since the beginning of the war.	”
—[6]

The most imminent threat to library preservation is the Russia-Ukraine war. If Russian bombs hit Ukrainian libraries the book could all gone. Almost 60 Ukrainian libraries was damaged or destroyed since the war. Pictures. Do anyone know about Ukrainian libraries websites with scans? I hope they can be uploaded as part of Commons:Library back up project. 維基小霸王 (talk) 04:56, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Not to poo poo the idea, but ifthe books are already on the websites of the libraries I don't see why that would change just because the physical building was or is damaged. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:10, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

The server could be bombed as well. 維基小霸王 (talk) 09:04, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Australians in South Western Sydney

Hi all, are there any Australians who live in South Western Sydney who might like to help me photograph our area? I have covered about three quarters of the City of Liverpool so far (see Wikishootme). It would be lovely to meet up with some like minded people to document our area :-) - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 09:52, 22 May 2023 (UTC)