User talk:Jarekt/2024

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

QuickStatements in Template:Information

Hi Jarekt. I was wondering if you could explain a little bit how, where and why the QuickStatement metadata as generated by/in Template:Information is being used. QuickStatements use display:none'd information but as external systems do not that display:none into account, it ends up in Google and other systems. It also pollutes the scraped data that is used for things like MediaViewer. So if I have a better understanding of it, then I hope that I can suggest some improvements. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 11:09, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

@TheDJ: The system of QuickStatements tags is managed by Module:TagQS, and the Module:Information is not creating or reading them (at the moment). Those tags are used mostly to pass information from I18n templates used by {{Artwork}} or {{Book}}. Lets pick an example: File:'Courtesan Playing the Samisen' by Isoda Koryusai, c. 1785.jpg. It has {{Artwork}} template with bunch of smaller templates:
Each one of those templates provide internationalized wikitext displayed in a given field, each one of them also generates QS tags that provide the same data in language independent way. The encoding is very close of what a QuickStatement would be to add the same data to Wikidata. So for example, this file's Creator templates adds <div style="display: none;">artist QS:P170,Q3155497</div> to wikitext, which is picked up by Module:Artwork. In case given object does not have Wikidata item or existing item does not have creator (P170) property than Module:Artwork can provide one click way to create new Wikidata item or add properties to the existing one. You can test it by clicking icon. So if {{Information}} template calls {{Other date}} or {{Creator}} than there might be some QS tags floating in the Wikicode, but {{Information}} template does not look for them. The same templates in infoboxes supported by Module:Artwork and Module:Creator modules, might be used to add metadata to Wikidata. Hope that explains things a bit. Let me know is some parts are not clear. --Jarekt (talk) 01:40, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Commons talk:Photo challenge/2023 - December - Fossil fuel

Hello Jarekt, please make soon some decision on the matter - or cancel this challenge : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Photo_challenge/2023_-_December_-_Fossil_fuel ...best regards & a very happy new Year ! Gordito1869 (talk) 12:05, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-02

MediaWiki message delivery 01:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-03

MediaWiki message delivery 00:10, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-04

MediaWiki message delivery 01:01, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Request

Hi Jarek, I have a great request: could you please delete this pic? Profesor Maćkiewicz thinks is not too good and will provide us with a a better one. Thank you! Boston9 (talk) 06:51, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 12:51, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks Jarek! Boston9 (talk) 15:29, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Module Tincture

Hi,
I restored previous version on Module:Tincture, as there were errors displayed (instead of tinctures) on all CoA pictures using the template…
Thank you,--Kontributor 2K (talk) 11:06, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Kontributor 2K, Thank you for fixing that. I corrected my correction and redeployed. It looks like this time I got it right. --Jarekt (talk) 01:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for fixing this,
On the other hand, do you know if someone intends to go on working on the heraldry modules that Sarang has developped ?
--Kontributor 2K (talk) 16:01, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Kontributor 2K, I dont know of any plans. I am quite unfamiliar with heraldry and needs of supporting software. In this case I was just chipping away at files with Lua errors on Category:Pages with script errors. If you know of anything that needs to be fixed I can look at it. --Jarekt (talk) 01:11, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Well, everything works fine, although there would be details to fix; also, adding new users to the IgenCoa users table (table of CoA drawers) is currently not needed (new users don't come there so often).
The distab function was fixed, which is great.
--Kontributor 2K (talk) 10:51, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Jarekt,
I found an issue, for a specifc user's files… (that could occur with some other's, although I didn't notice others yet).
For an example, this file uses the template that shows SVG information with details about software and user.
If french is used, as well as a few other languagues (català, at least), it shows correct information : 'Ce blason a été créé avec Inkscape par xxx', but if english is choosen, as well as many other languages, it shows : 'This coat of arms was created with Inkscape…important by xxx' - '…important' shouldn't be there.
I couldn't find where to solve this, do you think you'd have time to check this…?
--Kontributor 2K (talk) 20:31, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Kontributor 2K, I am so confused by {{COAInformation}} template. I finally figured out that the "image" parameter is responsible somehow for the field in question, but how does {{#invoke:IgenCoa|main|Yr}} encodes for the information in this row? It seems like "Yr" encodes info that SVG correct, that it shows COA, that it was created by user:Yricordel, that it was created in Inkscape, and that it was created as part of fr:Projet:Blasons. That is 5 separate facts encoded in 2 letters. How would the code differ if Yricordel used a different tool that day, or did this one on behalf of a different project? Or if it was User:Steifer for pl:Wikiprojekt:Herby project, as is the case for File:POL COA Awstacz.svg. I can not find in the template documentation how that is done. Also "important by Yricordel" seems like a bad translation maybe "imported by Yricordel"? As "important" is not a verb. So how would information with and without "important" be encoded? I was trying to experiment with {{#invoke:IgenCoa|main|Yr}}, but so far did not find how to display the content in a different language. Most templates on Commons use "|lang=xx" parameter, but it does not seem to work. Sorry about the avalanche of questions, but I am bouncing between documentation of several templates and not finding much. Source code is also not very readable full of 1 or 2 letter variable names that do not mean much to me. --Jarekt (talk) 01:06, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for looking,
Changing the tool for Yricordel from Inkscape to TextEditor is done by adding tool~T = | image=Yr/tool~T.
I found a possible lead in here where the first example stands for stands for : "SVG file created with Inkscape-Important"…
Actually, "Important" links to Help:Inskape#Inkscape SVG vs. Plain SVG, where this section (at Handling Inkscape SVG) gives more info…
Going further is currently beyond my knowledge, maybe i'm already far beyond
--Kontributor 2K (talk) 12:09, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-05

MediaWiki message delivery 19:28, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

pl.wiki P8189

Hello Jarekt,

Can you help with this. Thanks in advance. -- Geagea (talk) 11:37, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Jarekt, the CC0 and FAL templates inside it cannot be rendered since your update. Here is an example. Can you fix this issue? Thanks. 0x0a (talk) 07:21, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Template Self

Hi Jarekt,

Hope you are doing well.

There is something bad (exemple [20]) with that template since the change you did [21]. I don't know what exactly.

Regards, --Benoît (d) 09:38, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Many pages needs to be fixed, such as this one. GZWDer (talk) 11:34, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

@0x0a, Benoît Prieur, and GZWDer: , Thanks for reporting this. I still have no idea what is causing this issue, but I deployed a change that seems to fix the issue. All the reported files seem to be fine after purging. --Jarekt (talk) 13:24, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
Broken again in File:Cardamom buns.jpg.--GZWDer (talk) 13:07, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
@RP88: : Please check whether there are files broken here. GZWDer (talk) 13:35, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
@0x0a, Benoît Prieur, GZWDer, and RP88: , I looked at File:Cardamom buns.jpg and here, and all files seem be be fine after a purge or null edit. --Jarekt (talk) 14:45, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-06

MediaWiki message delivery 19:20, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Attributed to logic

Hi Jarek, I noticed on File:Crucifixión, atribuida a Ambrosius Benson (Museo Arqueológico Provincial de Ourense).jpg when trying to use the QuickStatements link, it still uses the old way with the (now deleted) P1773 (P1773) qualifier. Maybe you can change it to the new system? See d:Wikidata:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Item_structure#Use_of_creator_(P170)_in_uncertain_cases. Thank you, Multichill (talk) 16:03, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

@Multichill: Fixed I missed retiring of P1773. I did noticed 2 competing standards and could read both. Now I am only using the new standard. --Jarekt (talk) 22:42, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Edycje mapek, szkiców walk itp

Pytanie amatora:) Czy mapki (szkice) walk, bitew, potyczek publikowane w polskich publikacjach w latach 1946 - do np 1990 podlegają ochronie autorskiej? Oczywiscie pisze o takich publikacjach, w których nikt nawet nie zająknał się o autorze tychże szkiców. Należałoby uznac że robione były w godzinach pracy przez zespoły historyków pracujących w państwowych instytutach (np im. wandy wasilewskiej), a wydane przez wydawnictwo MON. Pytanie zmierza do tego czy mogę je wstawiać i ewentualnie pod jaką licencją keriM (talk) 22:34, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

@Kerim44: Nie znam żadnej licencji która pozwoliła by panu użyć map i szkiców bitew wydawanych w polskich publikacjach w latach 1946 - 1990. Dla szkiców opublikowanych więcej niż 70 lat temu można użyć {{PD-70-anon-EU}}. Prace historyków pracujących w państwowych instytutach USA można użyć na podstawie licencji {{PD-USgov}}, ale w Polsce brak podobnego prawa. Fotografie bitw wydane w polskich publikacjach w latach 1946 - 1990 można użyć na podstawie {{PD-Poland}}, ale ta licencja jedynie dotyczy fotografii a nie map i szkiców. Dlatego większość dobrej jakości map i szkiców jest tworzona przez wikipedystów na podstawie opublikowanych map. --Jarekt (talk) 03:29, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Dziękuję za wyjaśnienia. Rozumiem, że dozwolony byłby rok 1954 i wcześniej (są szkice Kirchmayera z 1946 ale dość hm słabe). Całkiem przyzwoite zaczynają się od 1958 (mówię o kampanii wrześniowej). Ostatnie Twoje zdanie - hm... ale ciągle za mało, a ja tego nie potrafię (pisze o polskim podwórku). Jeszcze raz dziękuję--keriM (talk) 09:45, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-07

MediaWiki message delivery 05:46, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Technical question

Hi Jarekt, could I ask you a technical question? I wanted to make a small layout change to {{Global maintenance category}}, but it doesn't work. But strangely this edit some times before was working. Have you an idea why? Is this a cache problem and I need just to wait or has it to to with /i18n? Thx a lot already and best Regards --W like wiki good to know 20:41, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

W like wiki, your small layout change is just to make administration or maintenance of Wikimedia Commons bold, and as far as I can tell it is working. The text looks bold to me. --Jarekt (talk) 22:50, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
Oh thx Jarek for your fast answer! Yes, it is just to make the link bold, but I see it only on the /i18n subpage bold, not in the parent page, do you   I tried also on an mobile device just to be sure that it has nothing to do with my cache, but still "unbold", hmm.. --W like wiki good to know 23:03, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
W like wiki, the main page does not see Template:Global maintenance category/i18n subpage but Template:Global maintenance category/i18n/en instead, so your change need to propagate there somehow. That might be a question for com:TAs. Translation extension works in a bit misterious way and I often do not understand it. --Jarekt (talk) 23:17, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
Oookay, I see! Thank you for the link to com:TA, i will ask there! A flower for you! --W like wiki good to know 23:23, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-08

MediaWiki message delivery 15:34, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-09

MediaWiki message delivery 19:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-10

MediaWiki message delivery 19:44, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Just wondering what the story is with File:Gaziantep Zeytin Tarlası IMG 9902.jpeg and why you've tagged it for speedy deletion as {{No license since}}?

Clearly there's an attempt to add a licence, and some automated piece of Lua has broken. It was moved from tr:WP, maybe that did it. Now there's a template call {{Self|GÖBL|cc-a-bp-4.0,3.0,2.5,2.0,1.0}} which is throwing up a Lua error 'Lua error: expandTemplate: template "cc-a-bp-4.0,3.0,2.5,2.0,1.0" does not exist.' That's clearly something broken at our end, not a real licensing issue. And never something that should be deleted without discussion, using the speedy process! Andy Dingley (talk) 02:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Andy Dingley, someone moved a file from some wikipedia, but did not change licenses. I was hoping the uploader would fix it. I guess I could have also tracked down which wikipedia it was and figure names of matching templates here, but it is really uploder's job. Lua error is not a software issue but deliberate attempt to stop Lua code and display error if a license template does not exist. I am currently working on fixing licenses in all the files that have this issue. --Jarekt (talk) 03:00, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
So the answer is to burn the file, without even raising it in our forum for such things, without making any effort to fix a mechanical problem? Andy Dingley (talk) 03:06, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
It is not mechanical problem, since someone uploaded a file with invalid license. The user should be aware that it is a bad upload. I can fix this file but do not want to be doing it for other uploads by the same user, who might be unaware of the issue. --Jarekt (talk) 03:15, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Fair enough, but it should have gone through a DR. As it is, speedy deletion seems to be getting used more and more as "simpler deletion", which is something it's never been intended for. Andy Dingley (talk) 03:45, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-11

MediaWiki message delivery 23:02, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-12

MediaWiki message delivery 17:37, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-13

MediaWiki message delivery 18:53, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-14

MediaWiki message delivery 03:33, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-15

MediaWiki message delivery 23:34, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-16

MediaWiki message delivery 23:26, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Module:No globals/doc has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this module, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Enhancing999 (talk) 22:08, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Please unprotect Module:No globals. The argument "heavily used" does not apply anymore. Taylor 49 (talk) 11:46, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Help!

Please see this notice and my talk page to see that I am suddenly the subject of threat of mass deletion of my photographs of scarecrows, on the spurious grounds that they are sculptures. They are effigies, and do not count as copyrightable artworks. (I have called them artworks on my images files, because it is my camera work which makes them so - otherwise they are just temporary effigies, made any old how, for fun).

This trend is extremely worrying, because there is no Commons policy to clarify this situation. If all scarecrow photographs can now suddenly be deleted due to one person's point of view that they are sculptures, then why are they picking only on my photography, and not on the photography of many thousands of effigies, e.g. Guy Fawkes Night effigies, which have been uploaded here since Commons started?

My photographs were taken in good faith that I was breaking no laws. I had the full knowledge and approval of the festival director, when photographing the Minskip scarecrows for Commons, and would be able to provide written evidence of that, by him, if required. I have not done that yet, as I had not thought that it was necessary.

But I would like to know why they are just picking on my photographs? If this is not a general policy, and all the other thousands of photographs of scarecrows and other effigies are to remain untouched by this person's opinion - then this looks like persecution of only my work, which would be rather strange, to say the least.

It is mostly my photography which is the art in this case. Most of the effigies are not artwork at all. Going to these festivals takes a huge amount of time, money and effort for me, since I have no car, and public transport in the UK is inadequate. It takes me a couple of weeks to edit my photographs to make them into artworks. And now my rights to photograph in a legal manner in the street in the UK are being violated, in my opinion. So please would you kindly have a look at the situation? I understand that it is permitted for me to ask an administrator to have a look. I have also asked administrator Mike Peel, but according to his contributions he is not around at present, so I am asking you as well. Thanks. Storye book (talk) 22:30, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-17

MediaWiki message delivery 20:25, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

File:Julien Bryan - Life - 47205.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Yann (talk) 17:27, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Yann (talk) 17:30, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Could I get you to spell "deprecated" correctly? You put "depreciated" (meaning to have lost value; is that a joke of sorts?). There are no "i"s in "deprecated". Thank you, —Uzume (talk) 02:25, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Uzume, sorry I had no clue what are you talking about until I read "Why is there confusion between depreciated and deprecated?" on stack exchange. I stand corrected. --Jarekt (talk) 02:59, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
@Jarekt: I was not aware there was widespread confusion there. Upon reading that thread, I suppose you could change it to "obsolete", since you "broke" it by turning it into an error. Thank you, —Uzume (talk) 10:48, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Please unprotect Module:No globals. The argument "heavily used" does not apply anymore. Taylor 49 (talk) 21:49, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Request

Hi Jarek, I have a great request (as always!:)) Could you please delete this low quality pic?. Ms Krystyna Kowalik-Bańczyk provided us with a high quality photo This cropped pic presents her in a most unfavorable way. The original uploader, Niegodzisie, consented to such a move. Thannks! Boston9 (talk) 19:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done Taylor 49 (talk) 21:49, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-18

MediaWiki message delivery 03:30, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your very speedy set up of the voting page for this month's photo contest. I love these contests! Magnolia677 (talk) 18:19, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-19

MediaWiki message delivery 16:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

File:Pepita - black custom doll - 43.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Adamant1 (talk) 04:53, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Can you check the history of this file? A ton of very weird statement were added by you. Multichill (talk) 20:05, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Multichill, that is very bizarre. The file is being used by Institution:Louvre, but I have no clue how it got connected to those statements. In 2022 I was adding digital representation of (P6243) based on SQL queries and Artwork template's "wikidata" parameters, but I do not see how this happen. Also it seems several other users were adding similar bad statements related to items in Louvre. I checked bunch of other photos on popular institution templates but did not see similar edits. --Jarekt (talk) 16:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi! This not my picture! Please, do not reverted my edit. Микола Василечко (talk) 19:03, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Микола Василечко Sorry about it. I and reverting bunch of license removals. If it is not yours than I nominated it for deletion. --Jarekt (talk) 19:05, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
This is the same camera I took pictures at university, but this not my photo. --Микола Василечко (talk) 19:08, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-20

MediaWiki message delivery 23:55, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-21

MediaWiki message delivery 23:01, 20 May 2024 (UTC)