Jump to content

Commons:Requests and votes

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from Commons:VOTE)
Translate this page
Shortcuts

This is the requests and votes page, a centralized place where you can keep track of ongoing user requests, and where you can comment and leave your vote. Any user is welcome to comment on these requests, and any logged in user is welcome to vote.

When requesting rights that do not need the support of the community (e.g. filemover) please go to Commons:Requests for rights!

How and where to apply for additional user rights on Commons

[edit]

All applications made on the above pages are automatically transcluded onto this page.

How to comment and vote

[edit]

Any logged-in user is welcome to vote and to comment on the requests below. Votes from unregistered users are not counted, but comments may still be made. If the nomination is successful, a bureaucrat will grant the relevant rights. However, the closing bureaucrat has discretion in judging community consensus, and the decision will not necessarily be based on the raw numbers. Among other things, the closing bureaucrat may take into account the strength of any arguments presented and the experience and knowledge of the commenting users. For example, the comments and votes of users who have zero or few contributions on Commons may at the bureaucrat's discretion be discounted.

It is preferable if you give reasons both for  Support votes or  Oppose ones as this will help the closing bureaucrat in their decision. Greater weight is given to argument, with supporting evidence if needed, than to a simple vote.

Purge the cache. Use the edit link below to edit the transcluded page.

Requests for Oversight rights

[edit]
watch

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Oversighters/Archive.

  • Please read Commons:Oversighters before voting here. Any logged in user may vote, although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

No current requests.

Requests for CheckUser rights

[edit]
watch

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Checkusers/Archive.

  • Please read Commons:Checkusers before posting or voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.


Lymantria

[edit]
Related requests:

Vote

Lymantria (talk · contributions (views) · deleted user contributions · recent activity (talk · project · deletion requests) · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)

Scheduled to end: 14:08, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

The three active Checkusers nominate Lymantria for the position of Checkuser.

We believe that they are highly qualified and well trusted and will be an excellent addition to the team as well as adding languages we do not have.

Lymantria became a Commons Administrator in 2011, with 29 positive votes of 30. They have 133,000 edits on Commons and 19,000 deletions. They are also very active on Wikidata, where they are an Admin, Bureaucrat, and Checkuser and have made almost two million edits.

Votes

[edit]

Comments

[edit]
Yes, certainly. There is a great deal of behind-the-scenes work. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:23, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can this checkuser handle such cases like the sockpuppets of Anonymous Hong Kong Photographer 1? 〈興華街〉📅❓ 09:13, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, that has not been a straightforward CU-request and it is clear why the complexity of this CU-request led to a discussion, which I think led to a good outcome. The complexity is not so much in the CU part itself (the sockpuppetry seems to be quite clearly visible), but in the judging if this sockpuppetry is to be considered disruptive or not (commons and wikidata do not have exactly the same standards on that), the deletion of uploads and the long history. I certainly would be able to take up such a case, but not without trying to discuss with my colleague checkusers and/or ask them for advice. All by all these tasks are meant to serve the community as well as possible and should not be solo projects.--Lymantria (talk) 13:25, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment No opposition, but I am wondering about your level of activity with only 13 admin actions during last month. Yann (talk) 09:20, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • I may not have been very active on the admin side (and I have been on holidays for a week during last month), I think my edit count shows that I am active at commons, be it that I am more active at wikidata. --Lymantria (talk) 13:27, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  1. no access to https://xtools.wmcloud.org/topedits/commons.wikimedia.org/Lymantria/4 .
  2. without that, then I found that there were fewer than 5 edits to all 4 Commons:Administrators' noticeboards in the last 3 years.
  3. https://xtools.wmcloud.org/topedits/commons.wikimedia.org/Lymantria/4/Requests%20for%20checkuser .--RoyZuo (talk) 20:55, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for bureaucratship

[edit]
watch

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Bureaucrats/Archive.

  • Please read Commons:Bureaucrats before posting or voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

No current requests.

Requests for adminship

[edit]
watch

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Administrators/Archive.

  • Please read Commons:Administrators before voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

No current requests.


DontCallMeLateForDinner

[edit]

This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.

Comments

Would you pass screenshots of these YouTube videos at the specified time

YouTube: "Mount Pleasant lost 2 goals to 1 against Harbour View in match week 22 of JPL (Time: 2m40s)

YouTube: "MultiVersus – Official Cinematic Trailer - "You're with Me!"" (Time: 2m07s)

YouTube: "FULL EPISODE: Can Timmy Escape A Video Game World?! (Time: 7m10s)

YouTube: "The FIRST Ever Episode of The Fairly OddParents 🧚‍♀️ in 5 Minutes! (Time: 1m05s)

YouTube: "Denzil Smith EXCLUSIVE: Life as Trinidad & Tobago’s No. 1 Goalkeeper!" (Time: 4m01s)  REAL 💬 ⬆   00:46, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done 1 oppose and no response to questions. --Bedivere (talk) 23:52, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Incall

[edit]

Comments

 Question How would you explain the licensing policy to a new user? All the Best -- Chuck Talk 20:15, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In simple terms. Commons only accepts freely licensed or public domain content. That means any file must be under a license that allows anyone to use, share, and modify it, as long as proper attribution is given. Common licenses include Creative Commons (e.g. CC BY or CC BY-SA). Incall talk 20:22, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can you elaborate on FOP? All the Best -- Chuck Talk 21:54, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Freedom of Panorama is a copyright exception that allows people to take and publish photos of buildings, sculptures, and artworks that are permanently located in public spaces without violating copyright laws. However, the scope of FOP varies significantly from country to country.
Examples: Europe
1) France — Limited Freedom of Panorama (France does not have full Freedom of Panorama. While taking photos of buildings in public spaces is allowed, publishing photos of copyrighted works considered a copyright infringement.)
2) Germany — Full Freedom of Panorama (In Germany, Freedom of Panorama is fully recognized. (You can take and publish photos of buildings, sculptures, and monuments located in public spaces.)
Examples: Central Asia (my region)
3) Tajikistan — Not ok (Although publishing photos of monuments and buildings in Tajikistan on Commons is prohibited, an image may be allowed if the copyrighted work is not the main subject of the photograph.)
4) Uzbekistan — Not ok (Same as above.) Incall talk 05:21, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question by Grand-Duc: please imagine yourself busy with YouTube video reviews. You come across educational material that fully exploits the opportunities given by the media format: acting humans, animations, subtitles and music. What do you need to verify to be able to say that the given Creative Commons license was legitimately applied to the file? Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 22:29, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    When reviewing a YouTube educational video claiming a Creative Commons license, I must verify that the uploader holds the rights to all components: video footage, music, animations, and subtitles. If third-party content is used, it must be under a compatible license or properly cleared. Proper attribution must be given, including the original author, license type, and source. The license should be clearly stated in the video or description. Finally, I check that no content (e. g. trademarks, personal likenesses and trade secret) outside copyright scope is improperly included under the CC license. Incall talk 05:24, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Requests for permission to run a bot

[edit]
watch

Before making a bot request, please read the new version of the Commons:Bots page. Read Commons:Bots#Information on bots and make sure you have added the required details to the bot's page. A good example can be found here.

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Bots/Archive.

Any user may comment on the merits of the request to run a bot. Please give reasons, as that makes it easier for the closing bureaucrat. Read Commons:Bots before commenting.

EUResourcesBot (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Operator: DaxServer (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Commons:Batch uploading/Official Journal of the European Union, later would be useful for Wikisource, like this one: File:Verdrag van Lissabon (Publicatieblad van de EU, 51e jrg. 9 mei 2008).pdf

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Continuous to backfill, regularly later on

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 12

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Programming language(s): Pywikibot, OpenRefine

-- DaxServer (talk) 18:22, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

I'll run a test-run once it has IPBE attached -- DaxServer (talk) 18:22, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BoreBot (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Operator: Borealex (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought:

  • download hundreds of files using a pywikibot with pre-generated description templates;
  • adding statement "captured with" (P4082) to structured data (code example).

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic/supervised

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): daily

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): ~6 edits per minute

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): N

Programming language(s): Python (using Pywikibot)

Borealex (talk) 21:34, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Little clarification about adding structured data: the bot will not randomly sort through the metadata of all files, but will process files from ready-made lists received via the SQL-request (from Quarry for example). Test run: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

What is that useful for? Is there any community consensus that this should be done a large scale? --Krd 13:36, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I definitely know of at least one practical use for captured with added statements — the ability to search for examples of photos from various cameras, smartphones, camera lenses, scanners etc. This may not be a native user-friendly search functionality yet, but it's already working to some extent. The ability to make such requests useful, for example, when comparing devices before purchase. Some photohosting sites, such as Flickr, have similar functionality. And as my first step, I would like to contribute to filling the Wikimedia Commons with such information.
Answering your second question, I assumed that bots already exist that, among other things, perform the function of adding statements from EXIF metadata (for example), and if I understand correctly, there is a consensus on adding structured data by bots. The original idea was to create and fill categories, but I abandoned it in favor of structured data, based on the discussion of the BotAdventures discussion, where structured data is also given priority in this case. I would also add that the main difference between my bot and others will be the manual compilation of file lists according to something like this flow — I add a new device on Wikidata or add information about the Camera Model, create an SQL query and run the bot based on it. Borealex (talk) 20:24, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think structured data shall be set by bot only if they are useful, and I'm not convinced that it is relevant in more that a few dozen cases which camera a photo has been taken with. I think there should be specific community consensus before this can be approved to be applied to all files. Krd 07:13, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. Could you tell me please where would it be more relevant and appropriate to discuss this? Structured data Discussion page or Village pump? Borealex (talk) 18:23, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure, perhaps chose one of it and leave a link to it on the other? Krd 05:03, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rkieferbot (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Operator: Rkieferbaum (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought:

Automatic or manually assisted: Semiautomatic (supervised).

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Weekly (after an initial drive to clear backlog.

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 12, usually fewer.

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Programming language(s): JavaScript for execution and python for building lists (until I'm comfortable and the logic is tested enough to run everything from python).

Rkieferbaum (talk) 16:49, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion
  • How many users are actually workung on manually checking {{GPS EXIF}}? How many cases have you seen where this was processed within a week? If nobody does it, the intermediate step would be just a waste of ressources? --Krd 07:09, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Krd: I initially added location tags directly from EXIF, but this led to friction a few times. Either because other users thought a given photo belonged in Category:Location not applicable or because they knew the location information in EXIF was wrong. Users would sometimes remove the added location tag, but SchlurcherBot will sometimes have added that location to SDC, and not all users will correct that or remove it. So I changed the contents of {{GPS EXIF}} to invite watchers to indicate if one of those two situations applies, and that can be done before location is added. Since I switched to this two-step process, I've been following tagged photos and I'd say that on maybe 0.5% of them, watchers will either add a location tag, "Location not applicable" or "Ambiguous location in EXIF" tags. This is in addition to me (and whoever else wants to) manually checking Category:Media with GPS EXIF before running the script to add location to those. I feel like this is a good balance between prudence and efficiency, but I'm happy to make adjustments. Rkieferbaum (talk) 14:14, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiwernerbot (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Operator: Wikiwerner (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Commons:Bots/Work requests#Monuments database in Russia

Automatic or manually assisted: automatic

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): one time run

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 12 edits/minute

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Programming language(s): Python/Pywikibot

Wikiwerner (talk) 14:47, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion
  • Why just not move files from WML categories to real ones? I don't think that redirects are needed. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:09, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The WLM/xxxx categories exist primarily to enable quick generation of photo 'galleries' for cultural heritage objects — a feature particularly useful for custom JS scripts. These categories are automatically added via the {{Cultural Heritage Russia}} template, meaning files can be removed simply by updating the template.
    As I understand it, the original design did not anticipate manual category creation (many remain redlinks). The assumption was that file lists could be fetched via the MediaWiki API. While not an elegant solution, it works.
    Unfortunately, these categories attract well-meaning enthusiasts who create them manually (even when redlinks suffice) and attempt to 'improve' them — for instance, by adding navbars (Template talk:Cultural Heritage Russia#Navigation_bar) — even if marked as technical or hidden.
    The ideal solution would be storing object numbers in Structured Data on Commons (SDC), allowing galleries to be dynamically generated from this metadata. The first step (adding numbers) is straightforward, but the retrieval mechanism remains unclear. If implemented, WLM/xxxx categories would become obsolete.
    Given this potential future improvement, I fail to see the urgency of the current redirect efforts. Olksolo (talk) 16:39, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Why Wikidata could not be used for same purpose? Cultural monuments should have both categories and identifiers. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:49, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Please, explain your idea, I didn't catch it... Olksolo (talk) 19:08, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    depicts statement provides Wikidata item, Wikidata item - both cultural monument ID and Commons category name (in plain English). Shouldn't these be enough for generating whatever gallery pages? EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:10, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Could you please provide an example of how to generate a gallery page for images depicting e.g. d:Q125067097?
    Another problem is that although cultural monuments SHOULD have categories and WD-items, they mostly still DO NOT have either. Meaningful category names for these monuments cannot be generated automatically — they require manual curation. Today we have over 224000 monuments in our database, but only 75410 have a WD item, and just 51612 have any category assigned. Few years ago, I started exporting data to Wikidata, but there are many obstacles in this process. We still cannot consider our data consistent, thus my bot exports not the entire bulk of data but small portions that volunteers deem reliable. Nevertheless this slow, careful approach still leads to backlash, making the whole effort seem pointless. Olksolo (talk) 19:17, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    So we need another bot that adds the WLM id tot the structured data? Wikiwerner (talk) 17:20, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CuratorBot (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Operator: DaxServer (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Commons:Batch uploading/Landesarchiv Baden-Württemberg

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): One-time run

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 10

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): N

Programming language(s): OpenRefine

-- DaxServer (talk) 17:36, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion
  • For latest test run: https://editgroups-commons.toolforge.org/b/OR/3249b63c509/ and other 4 at https://editgroups-commons.toolforge.org/?user=CuratorBot -- DaxServer (talk) 17:36, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Why is the Landesarchiv copyright holder of File:Mayer, Maximilian - LABW - Hauptstaatsarchiv Stuttgart M 707 Nr. 1001 -1.jpg, and why isn't this documented in the file page? Krd 17:41, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Pinging @TheImaCow for further details into the project -- DaxServer (talk) 18:00, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Per the Terms of Use (March 2025, section "Nutzungsbedingungen Online-Katalog"), all digitized archive material which is available online is either a) public domain, b) except from copyright protection as government work, or c) still protected by copyright. Where it is still protected by copyright, the archive has acquired the necessary rights to distribute it under CC-BY licence. The exact status of individual objects is generally not available, so we use CC-BY everywhere. It can be manually changed to public domain later, when applicable.
    A link to these terms of use is at the top in the "Licencing" template. Maybe the template could be improved so that this link is more prominently visible.
    Many collections where copyright matters state explicitly that objects where the copyright has not been transferred to the archive are not available digitally (e.g. here, bottom 4 paragraphs)
    The very recently updated/current version of the Terms of Use states these three categories +"in rare cases" permission is required for reuse. However, this update is from April 2025, we started this project in August last year, so more recently digitized material where such permission would potentially be required is not included in the upload. ~TheImaCow (talk) 19:33, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    In the example I mentioned above, File:Mayer, Maximilian - LABW - Hauptstaatsarchiv Stuttgart M 707 Nr. 1001 -1.jpg, the image is clearly marked as "copyright undetermined" at the source. Please elaborate. Krd 07:49, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Terms of use state

    Copyright Undetermined: Eine Weiterverwendung ist im Einzelfall zu prüfen. Es handelt sich um Archivgut, dessen Bestandteile rechtlich unterschiedlich sind. In den Archivalieneinheiten können enthalten sein a) gemeinfreie Werke, b) amtliche Werke, die gemäß § 5 UrhG vom Urheberrechtschutz ausgenommen sind, und c) Werke, für die das Land Baden-Württemberg übertragbare Verwertungsrechte innehat und für die insoweit eine CC-BY-Lizenz gewährt wird. Aufgrund dennoch ggf. noch bestehender Rechte Dritter ist eine Weiterverwendung im Einzelfall zu prüfen.

  • Meaning most files with this tag should be free, but there can be exceptions. To be sure, I checked the collections selected for upload and found these ones where "Copyright undetermined" is used. Rest is marked PD or CC.
    To be sure, we can leave them out from the upload.
    (Note that this distinction between PD/CC/undetermined is only there since a month or so)
copyright undetermined
  • A 25/1 Landgericht Freiburg: Normalia, Generalia, Strafverfahren, Bürgerliche Rechtspflege
    A 47/1 Staatsanwaltschaft beim Sondergericht Freiburg
    B 695/1 Landratsamt Donaueschingen
    B 700/1 Bezirksamt Engen
    B 701/1 Bezirksamt Ettenheim
    B 698/5 Landratsamt Emmendingen
    B 713/1 Landratsamt Kehl
    B 715/1 Landratsamt Konstanz
    B 725/1 Landratsamt Müllheim
    B 726/1 Landratsamt Neustadt
    B 717/2 Landratsamt Lahr
    B 719/1 Landratsamt Lörrach
    B 729/1 Bezirksamt Pfullendorf
    B 728/1 Landratsamt Offenburg
    B 733/1 Landratsamt Säckingen
    B 740/1 Bezirksamt Schopfheim
    B 747/1 Landratsamt Überlingen
    B 748/1 Landratsamt Villingen
    B 750/14 Landratsamt Waldshut
    G 1000/1 Landwirtschaftsämter und landwirtschaftliche Schulungseinrichtungen Kreis Waldshut
    K 345 Karten und Pläne aus Bezirks- und Landratsamtsbeständen
    T 1 (Zugang 1975/0001) T 1 Blankenhorn, Erich
    W 145/2 Sammlung Karl Fritz, Postkarten- und Bildsammlung
    W 251 Kriegsbriefsammlung Badische Zeitung Freiburg
    W 307 Sammlung Karl Fritz
    456 F 11 28. Infanterie-Division: Feld
    456 G Fotosammlung der Offiziere des XIV. Armeekorps
    EL 75 I Landesamt für Straßenwesen Baden-Württemberg
    FL 45/1 Wasserwirtschaftsamt Besigheim
    FAS H 1/1 T 1 Nachlass Albert Waldenspul: Glasplatten, Diapositive und Alben
    FAS H 1/1 T 3 Nachlass Albert Waldenspul: Fotosammlung
    J 151 Sammlung von Maueranschlägen
    J 170 Berichte von Gemeinden über die Kriegsereignisse 1945 und das Ausmaß der Zerstörungen im Zweiten Weltkrieg
    J 320 Sammlung von Fotographien "Aus dem Leben der Herzogin Wera (*1854, +1912)"
    M 700/3 Sammlung von Karten und Planfotografien
    M 703 Militärhistorische Bildersammlung
    M 707 Bildnissammlung I
    M 708 Bildnissammlung II
    M 709 Bildersammlung III
    K-LRA 91 Kreisbildstelle / Kreismedienzentrum Main-Tauber-Kreis

Here are the stats by license:

  • CC-BY 4.0 - 298437
  • CC PDM 1.0 - 76300
  • UND 1.0 - 216695
  • None - 35408 - assumed CC-BY 4.0 as it's the default

Thus the undetermined would be skipped -- DaxServer (talk) 13:29, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What about those already uploaded? Krd 17:39, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The document is below TOO, people skiing is PD-old-assumed. Portraits are probably PD-anon-70-EU, but I didn't look into that.
Delete those 5 to be sure~TheImaCow (talk) 21:17, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say I'd appreciated if you'd put speed deletion request on them. Which other problems do we have with the uploads? Please make another test run. Krd 07:06, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Krd I've done another test run: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10] - I do not think there are any further problems with the files. The one remaining in the list above, I've marked is in DR. -- DaxServer (talk) 13:39, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CobainBot (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Operator: Coet (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: This bot primarily uploads public domain images from the Generalitat de Catalunya Press Room to Wikimedia Commons.

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic with human supervision

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): daily runs, about 30 a day.

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 6/minute.

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Programming language(s): Python with Pywikibot, scripts are hosted on Toolforge

  • The bot ensures all uploaded images are in the public domain and comply with Commons' policies.
  • It adds appropriate categories and metadata to each upload.
  • A log of all uploads is maintained for review.


Coet (talk) 01:53, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion
  • Is it possible to deduce from metadata and add meaningful categories and `depicts` statements? --EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:39, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry, I'm not fluent English speaker and I used AI to translate my speech, but I didn't review its translation. Script does not add metadata.
    • My script is a remake from another one that was created by a cawiki-mate. Nowadays, the script is not designed to add metadata, and in principle, I do not intend to implement this feature.
    • Next time, I'll make sure to review more carefully what the AI provides.
    • NOTE: The script is entirely my own work, and it has been thoroughly reviewed and tested. No IA was involved. Coet (talk) 14:32, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Is AI really needed? :-) File names and descriptions contain names of politicians, this could be used to add proper categories and `depicts` statements in structural data. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:47, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Thank you for your message, EugeneZelenko. I appreciate your suggestion and had already considered implementing something similar. However, this requires time, as I would like the process to be dynamic while minimizing false positives. For this reason, I need to proceed cautiously to ensure accuracy and reliability. Coet (talk) 15:11, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      If this task could not be automated in near future, is there project dedicated to politicians, so participants could help with categorization and structured data? EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:49, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Of course, the community already does this periodically and also uses them in wiki articles. Coet (talk) 14:21, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      It'll be good idea to do this on regular basis, not periodically. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:36, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Coet: Please report current state. --Krd 07:03, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Железный капут (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Operator: MBH (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information), Iluvatar (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information), Well very well (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Hello! As one of the co-maintainers of the bot I request for it bot and rollback flags. The bot detects suspicious potentially vandalous edits (on Commons this also includes copyright issues), streams them onto a Discord server, and trusted users revert/rollback/RfD them through an interface. Bot is already running on Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian Wikipedias and Wikidata.

Automatic or manually assisted: Manually assisted

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Continuous

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): Few edits per day

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Programming language(s): C# and Python

Well very well (talk) 06:16, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion
@CptViraj Seems like for some reason here on Commons, when a user is linked in bot edits' descriptions that user gets pinged -- a behaviour that doesn't happen on ru/uk/bewiki or WD... Do you know what it may be caused by and would it be fixed with the bot flag? Well very well (talk) 13:01, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Well very well: Per T189040, notifications aren't sent for edit summary mentions if the edit is marked as bot edit (b), so yeah, this should be fixed with the bot flag. -- CptViraj (talk) 16:00, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It seems from subtasks of that task that just adding : to the start of link should remove the ping. I will go currently with this approach then. Well very well (talk) 17:32, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Edits adding speedy deletion tags should generally not be marked as bot, as they should not be hidden from watchlists. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 19:06, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Currently bot doesn't mark its edits as bot at all, so this shouldn't be a concern. Well very well (talk) 15:34, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have some concerns. The test edits that have been made are mostly speedy deletion nominations, which is outside of the bot task you have described, especially since the majority of the files were tagged for copyright reasons, not vandalism. Please revise the request to accurately describe what the bot is designed for and capable of doing. Additionally, the bot does not notify page creators of the speedy deletion tags. More broadly, this bot task appears to mostly have the effect of removing rollbacks and speedy deletion tags from a user's contributions & deleted contributions, where they can be easily monitored by administrators. This is important both to deal with bad reviewing and to be able to establish a history of accurate copyright tagging when applying for advanced rights. And while rollback-like tools like SWViewer and Twinkle make the Commons rollback right less important than it might have been in the past, this bot gives administrators no control over who may be using it. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 19:05, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@AntiCompositeNumber
Please revise the request to accurately describe what the bot is designed for and capable of doing.
Done.
Additionally, the bot does not notify page creators of the speedy deletion tags.
Ok, will be implemented, thanks!
More broadly, this bot task appears to mostly have the effect of removing rollbacks and speedy deletion tags from a user's contributions & deleted contributions, where they can be easily monitored by administrators. This is important both to deal with bad reviewing and to be able to establish a history of accurate copyright tagging when applying for advanced rights.
Well, you can use tool for searching through user's descriptions — for that reason the bot always includes the type of action (RfD/rollback/undo) and user who did it in its edit description.
And while rollback-like tools like SWViewer and Twinkle make the Commons rollback right less important than it might have been in the past, this bot gives administrators no control over who may be using it.
Hm... @MBH @Iluvatar Maybe we can make the bot take the users list from a wiki page, e.g. a subpage of bot userpage on Meta? In this case everyone could see the list and stewards could also edit it. Well very well (talk) 15:42, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Well very well: Please report current state. --Krd 07:03, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Requests for comment

[edit]
Centralized discussion
Template: View   ■ Discuss    ■ Edit   ■ Watch
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Requests_and_votes&oldid=907565236"