Miraheze Commons:Community noticeboard

From Miraheze Commons
Community noticeboard
Shortcut
COM:CN

This page is for community discussion.
Here you can:

  • Ask questions about Miraheze Commons
  • Discuss topics with the Miraheze Commons community and staff
  • Ask anything else that is not mentioned below

Please remember to:

  • End all your requests and comments using four tides - ~~~~
  • Talk in a calm, and respectful manner (we're all here to help each other after all)
  • Be descriptive of the problem

[edit source]

Proposal 1 of Logo of Miraheze Commons.

Any logo proposals? That'd be nice. Hispano76 (talk) 03:22, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

it is good R C Peña
That logo looks good! I say let's use it, thanks! Paladox (talk) 20:00, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
I think it should also be used as a favicon, as it will make it easier to distinguish which wiki we are on (this is very important for a user like me, who contributes on multiple wikis).--開拓者 (talk) 00:52, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
Done Paladox (talk) 00:55, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks.--開拓者 (talk) 02:37, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
It actually makes sense. The wiki is renamed, and a new logo is created. That's good. For all. Fungster (talk) 11:06, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you very much. Paladox Hispano76 (talk) 15:16, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

File Licensing[edit source]

Morning, everybody. I come to clarify which licenses are accepted in this Wiki. This is so that new users know beforehand if they have the right license and also to make some arrangements.

  • Are all Creative Commons licenses (CC0 to CC BY NC ND) accepted?
  • Is the Fair Use accepted?

Greetings Hispano76 (talk) 15:15, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Yes, might want to follow https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Licensing too. Paladox (talk) 15:29, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
Paladox Well, then all variants of Creative Commons licenses including "NoDerivative" will be accepted. Greetings. Hispano76 (talk) 15:41, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Consultation on probable "merger" between MediatecaWiki and CommonsWiki[edit source]

Hello, everybody. For some time now, I have been thinking about bringing all my images that are in my Mediateca wiki project to this Wiki for at least two reasons:

  • 1) To be able to use it in any Miraheze wiki including possible future projects of my own without having to be configured in GitHub
  • 2) To prevent the deletion of these images in case of inactivity (Not taken into account the issue of copyright although I try to prevent plagiarism)

I just have some doubts that I would like to ask before doing any Import step. The doubts are:

  • 3) Can I create categories "in Spanish" to categorize my images? for example categorize "File:Manuel Camacho Solis.jpg" in the categories "Personas", "Imágenes de Flickr " and "Imágenes bajo la licencia CC BY NC" or should they be in English?
  • 4) My license attribution and related templates Can they be in Spanish or do I have to translate them into English? for example Template:Flickr
  • 5) Am I free to create categories I want or should I stick to a categorization line here? Can I overcategorize my images?

(Consultation in spanish)

  • 6) Can I also categorize images that are hosted on Wikimedia Commons? for example File:Falta imagen logo.svg image is missing. This to have "quick" access to these images and listings so I won't forget them. --Hispano76 (talk) 02:33, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Custom licensing to prevent transfer to Commons[edit source]

Hello.
May I upload files deliberately licensed in a way preventing transfer to Wikimedia Commons on a technicality? In other words, essentially free but under such exact conditions that make hosting on Wikimedia Commons not possible with their current licensing system. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 20:13, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons does not accept CC BY NC, CC BY NC SA, CC BY ND and CC BY NC ND licenses because they are Non-Commercial and Non-Derived. You could opt for these licenses. Greetings. Hispano76 (talk) 22:08, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
Good to know! ZBlace (talk) 23:15, 25 January 2021 (UTC)


Wordmark[edit source]

I propose that we use the following as our new wordmark. What does people think?
CommonsWordmarkMockup.png
MacFan4000 (Talk Contribs) 20:33, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
That looks fine to me. It looks better than the larger version you posted on IRC. For clarity, this should be for $wgLogos, leaving the existing logo as the $wgLogo. Dmehus (talk) 20:59, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
it is better version¡ R C Peña 16:20, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Requested move[edit source]

Hello Miraheze Commons community, I uploaded the file File:PicsArt 06-30-04.19.06.png today but I somehow forgot to give a name to it. I even tried to move it after it was uploaded, but my action is throttled. So I request anyone else to move File:PicsArt 06-30-04.19.06.png to File:KawipediaLogoK.png. Thanks, ~ Mazzaz (talk) 11:04, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Pinging some users as it is urgent: Dmehus and Hispano76. ~ Mazzaz (talk) 11:08, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
This is done now! ~ Mazzaz (talk) 00:39, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Mazzaz Sorry that we missed this. That's fine that you moved it yourself, and just requested deletion of the trailing redirect, which I've now  done. Apologies for the delay. Dmehus (talk) 03:10, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Dmehus, no problem :) ~ Mazzaz (talk) 16:36, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

A few questions[edit source]

Hello everybody, I was just reviewing pages here on the Commons and as I did, the following questions popped up:

  1. What does one do for images without licensing? One approach I've been taking is to inform the user who uploaded the file that images on Commons require licensing/descriptions. Afterwards, would nominating it for deletion be appropriate?
  2. Are images of oneself that are used to self-promote one on other wikis allowed? I've stumbled upon uploaded images of people on Commons which have been uploaded by the person themselves and who use it to create articles on themselves to self-promote on other wikis. Technically speaking, they're using the uploaded image for self-promotion which isn't allowed on this wiki (albeit, they aren't promoting themselves here, they're doing so on other wikis). They per se aren't notable people, mostly just people who are trying to become social media influencers and upload themselves onto Commons. I've been thinking of asking them to upload such photos to the wiki in which they use the photo on, not on this one. These images generally tend to only be used on one wiki.
  3. What about orphaned images? Do they get deleted after a while or left there?
  4. Does notability matter when uploading an image in certain cases (e.g. people, businesses, etc)? I've read Miraheze Commons:Policies and found this "Sysops can delete a page that meets one of the following criteria: [...] Anything that violates what Miraheze Commons is not: [...] Any article that does not exceed the threshold of notability established by the content guide". Does this imply some sort of notability needs to be reached for you to write an article or upload an image? I understand this obviously probably doesn't apply to images of general items/places/animals/plants but would such apply to people, businesses, and other things? This sort of ties in with number 2 as most people uploading images to self-promote aren't notable, instead, they're small influencers/singers/etc., trying to promote themselves.

Thanks! Agent Isai (talk) 08:09, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Agent Isai AFAIK, we have no notability policies. For self-portraits, we should assume the uploader of said photograph is also the subject of the photograph, unless Google reverse image search says otherwise. Orphaned images are okay, in my opinion, as it's an image repository. Probably better to discuss these. Self-promotional images are fine, as it's an image repository. Again, key consideration here is mainly copyright. For your first question, inform the user, yes, but also try and do some background informational research to see if you can't source the source, essentially. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 06:19, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Wordmark[edit source]

Hello. How about this new Wordmark (which displays for Mobile and the new Vector, etc.) that shows Miraheze's default font (Ubuntu) and its logo https://static.miraheze.org/commonswiki/b/b7/Commonststlg.svg

And put:

  • wgWordmarkWidth = 145
  • Wordmark Height ($wgWordmarkHeight) = 35

This new logo has already been tested, and will likely be broader than the current one. YellowFrogger (talk) 04:04, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

The file you linked is in black and white and would not be a improvement over the current one, which is in color. Zppix (talk) 00:37, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Just to clarify this is X mark.svg Not done per discussion on Discord. Zppix (talk) 01:04, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

General Policies[edit source]

Hispano76 created a draft version of a policy page detailing general policies for Miraheze Commons. This is a place to discuss and vote on it. Feel free to suggest changes. MacFan4000 (Talk Contribs) 13:31, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Votes[edit source]

Discussion[edit source]

  • MacFan4000 Per my discussion with Reception123 earlier this year, and even last fall, I cannot support any draft policy that includes specific prohibitions on non-free licensing, since (a) Miraheze Commons is not Wikimedia Commons, but mainly because (b) Loginwiki has file uploads disabled, so Miraheze Commons is the only available venue to upload non-free media images (including the user's own copyrighted works or self-portraits of themselves). I'm looking to prepare an alternate, narrower scope Miraheze Commons in June or July (hopefully) that will address this, so I'd rather close this proposal as deferred until then, if at all possible. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 13:36, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
    MacFan4000, Dmehus, Of course I am in favor of being more permissive, if I remember correctly. My original idea in drafting that policy, especially on licenses and copyright was to propose and have it modified to fit the Commons project. The original content is based on more "strict" projects. Hispano76 (talk) 00:43, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
    @Dmehus: Any update on this? Agent Isai Talk to me! 04:39, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

StructuredDiscussion as a barrier in some instances[edit source]

I've realized that this extension has some bad impacts on the efficient administration of this wiki, but it's understandable given that there is some positive news that might be preferable. StructuredDiscussion extension shouldn't have an effect on all namespaces, as it breaks a few things, which are including but are not limited to the AjaxQuickDelete.js script which I was going through recently. Having the flow-board content model as the default CM of User talk pages breaks the Ajax delete script which makes it impossible for it to deliver a notification of the deletion to the user's talk page. There are also a few tools that might not work because of this default content model that all talk pages have.

Possible solution is that; What if we say $wgNamespaceContentModels should have all namespaces except User talk, File talk, etc.

What do you think of this? Chimobi (talk) 21:33, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

I would support disabling StructuredDiscussions outright, and if unfeasible, removing it as the default content model in all talk namespaces for which it is by default. StructuredDiscussions is non-standard, and provides a sub-optimal experience, which is particularly important considering its impact on compatibility with scripts from Wikimedia Commons. The reply tool is a much more suitable option in terms of providing that easy of use. — Arcversin (talk) 21:39, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
The StructuredDiscussions has a lot of significant benefits, so I would, unfortunately, not support removing it from Miraheze Commons, chiefly because the workflow of Miraheze Commons patrollers and administrators is not significant so as to require many automated messages. Even if it did, that script can be adapted without so much difficulty, I'm sure, to try another approach. Your compromise, Ugochimobi, while admirable, would provide a similar effect. One of the chief benefits of StructuredDiscussions is that it is not necessary to sign one's discussion posts, which is particularly helpful when users are renamed. Secondarily, and more philosophically, I quite like that Miraheze Commons does not simply replicate Meta Wiki in terms of its discussion systems, default settings, and the like. I would be open to considering another discussion system, provided that discussion system (a) had a similarly nice threading system to StructuredDiscussions and (b) did not require the leaving of static signatures. One potential option would be CommentStreams, but I have not explored whether that would work with your script or not. Dmehus (talk) 03:09, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
As per Arcversin, I would strongly support disabling StructuredDiscussions as the default for all talk pages. I would also support the ability to request StructuredDiscussions enabled on certain talk pages as requested by a user. While the extension was certainly meant to revolutionize the talk page in it's time, it is beginning to show it's age in various ways and is not really being even worked on. It has become highly inconvenient to have it break the script and overall many times acts sluggish and cannot support some features such as templates which reflect the name of the page. Agent Isai Talk to me! 03:15, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
As I said, I'd be open to exploring other discussion systems, but would not support moving to a wikitext based discussion system where talk page conventions require users sign their posts. That's one of the important considerations that distinguishes Miraheze Commons from Meta Wiki, and the argument that we even need to use Wikimedia Commons JavaScripts is rather weak. In other words, I would need to see much more compelling arguments to upend a discussion system on Miraheze Commons that has existed for years, particularly when the level of activity on Miraheze Commons is minimal. I'm not even certain we need to be notifying users on their user talk pages anyway. I would much rather use a deletion tagging system whereby non-accepted images are tagged for deletion and not deleted before a reasonable period of time (say, one week, at minimum). Dmehus (talk) 03:21, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

file transfer[edit source]

sorry, does anyone know how to transfer files that have been deleted on commons here ????