User talk:Prototyperspective

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Prototyperspective!

First steps tutorial

Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content).

You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki.

Getting help

More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks

Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities.
You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads.
Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~.
To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg.
You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account.
There are several tools to upload files.
Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful.

Made a mistake?

Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it.
Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 10:58, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Global Methane Budget 2017.jpg

File:Global Methane Budget 2017.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Copyright at source

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:04, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File tagging File:Early succession of the Cinder Cones methane seep.jpg

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Early succession of the Cinder Cones methane seep.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Ytoyoda (talk) 17:29, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I removed the {{No permission since}} note you added:

1. it does have license description and is not missing permission information 2. the license is Commons compatible and is CC BY 4.0 3. the pdf and html of the link in the source have this copyright information clearly visible 4. if for whatever reason a deletion is requested nevertheless please create a request for deletion

--Prototyperspective (talk) 20:27, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, I somehow missed it when I checked the link. Ytoyoda (talk) 22:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrol given

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. rubin16 (talk) 05:47, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

COM:AN/U

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User finds lots of “porn”, uncategorizes. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved.

-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 08:55, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Topless is not "Nude"

Please note that there is no nude person in photo File:Body painting - border-radius.jpg. Thank you. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:22, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ups, sorry. Thank you. Prototyperspective (talk) 22:24, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also dont remove categories from a file just yu because think that an simple nude image is porn. Move it a lower category or create a lower one instead of removing valid categories from a image like you did to hundreds of images in Category:Project "Geekography" by Exey Panteleev (nude portrayals of computer technology), especially when they have been dicussed to death in more than 50 pages in all of it´s aspects. Tm (talk) 17:10, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nude portrayals of Fake news like this, instead of removing valid categories. Tm (talk) 17:18, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Decentralized censorship on reddit via community moderation not based on subreddit rules (promotional posts are allowed and have a dedicated tag on rOpensource).png

File:Decentralized censorship on reddit via community moderation not based on subreddit rules (promotional posts are allowed and have a dedicated tag on rOpensource).png 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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Tet (talk) 14:55, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Categories like "Statistics until 2022" (etc)

I'm unsure of the value in adding a category that shows the final year shown in a chart. Such a category would require continual vigilance on the part of uploaders as the charts are updated. For example, File:20201211 Billion dollar events related to climate change - U.S. -en.svg will be updated every year, making its inclusion in Statistics until 2022 stale and inaccurate. Also, the inclusion of File:1960- Groundwater loss - depletion - Central Valley of California.svg in Statistics until 2020 is inaccurate, as it already contains data for 2021. I plan to delete those designations in those two files, unless you can explain why they should remain. RCraig09 (talk) 16:47, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How is it not valuable? What you described is the purpose of it: this way you could more easily find (via petscan or other means) which charts need updating. You can also use it to find the most-up-to-date chart(s).

Once a new version of a chart is uploaded, the category is changed. The until was meant as an inclusive until, so this is something to clarify anyway: does/should "until" mean 'data until year x' or 'data until including year x'? Prototyperspective (talk) 16:50, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I see the value in such categories, though they would require uploaders to be vigilant to change categories with each update.

Maybe a better title scheme would be Category:Charts showing data through 2022. The word "through" is less ambiguous than "until". RCraig09 (talk) 17:13, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, however other people can update the category as well if they don't do so themselves and most people don't update the statistical images that they upload (and if they do, it's likely they also are usually quite vigilant to change the category).

Good idea, that was one reason for why I kept it a redcategory – the other reason is that many charts of OWID and from other sources are missing there. I don't think a script could solve this so this would require some effort to categorize the charts appropriately. The earlier this is done – once implemented new charts would likely get quickly categorized into these, enabling users to refine search-results or make novel query...for example to filter out charts that are outdated by more than a decade.

The issue with "through 2022" is that it kind of reads as if the data was from start to end of 2022 but not from some point in the past to end of 2022. Do you have another idea or should there be a discussion at some WikiProject-like place on WMC? The images can be easily recategorized once a better name is found. I thought "Statistics" would be better than "Charts showing data" since it's shorter and more easily found since people likely enter Statistics into the HotCat input-box. What do you think about something like "Category:Charts showing data up to and including 2022"? Prototyperspective (talk) 17:29, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since the category would contain images of (visible) charts rather than (abstract) statistics, I think the best solution is to retain the word Charts. (I don't think most uploaders even use HotCat; I don't even know how.) Also, ...through... is appropriate, as it covers both charts starting in 2022 and charts starting before 2022—both interpretations are correct. (You may be confusing through (which is OK) with throughout (which is not OK).) I don't think others will share our enthusiasm for the idea, to the extent that we need to get wider input on minor issues like naming. I'm strongly leaning toward Category:Charts showing data through 2022. RCraig09 (talk) 17:44, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll move them to the category title you suggested. I'm not a native English speaker and when reading that title would think of the chart possibly being about 2022 only, not up to and including 2022 – however, maybe that's just me and it should be clear from whatever chart the cat is set on anyway. I'll add some category description that makes it clear. Thanks for your feedback! Prototyperspective (talk) 19:18, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

— Now I'm worried that too many charts will be placed into these categories. I would plan to put my 200-300+ charts into such categories. But if other editors put charts in these categories, there will be thousands and thousands and thousands of them—making the categories less useful (too big to manage).
— I'm considering user-specific categories, like Category:RCraig09 charts showing data through 2022—to keep the number of category members manageable. Do you know if there is any rule against making user-specific categories? RCraig09 (talk) 15:34, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This problem exists for countless categories – it's a general WMC problem.

That problem should be addressed by developers by adding features like enabling easily searching within a category, showing top or most recent charts at the top of the page, and so on.
It can also be addressed by simply making subcategories. The latter can be easily done with the cat-a-lot tool. It would be really nice if you could add your charts to these categories, I just haven't gotten to doing so. There can be multiple types of subcategories like "Environmental charts..." within "charts...by topic" and user-specific categories within "Charts showing data through 2022 by source". There are many user-specific categories (example 1, example 2).

Prototyperspective (talk) 15:45, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'll be adding my own user-specific sub-categories, then. You don't need to add my charts to the super-categories, as I will only change the file pages later. RCraig09 (talk) 16:11, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Communication-censorship on Twitter (preventing messages for no good reason).png

File:Communication-censorship on Twitter (preventing messages for no good reason).png 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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Dronebogus (talk) 01:06, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Decentralized censorship on reddit via community moderation not based on subreddit rules 01.png

And also:

Yours sincerely, Dronebogus (talk) 01:07, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Non-governmental_Internet_censorship_in_non-authoritarian_countries

Non-governmental Internet censorship in non-authoritarian countries has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Dronebogus (talk) 01:16, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fictional book cover for scifi children's book "13th prophecy" by Valentine Ermatinger (post-apocalyptic AI art).jpg

Yo, do you mind telling me how this is supposed to be fan art? Trade (talk) 21:15, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I thought it was because it was intentionally relating to the contents of the book. It intends to depict imagery of the book and is visually and conceptually somewhat similar to the actual book cover. However, I wasn't sure if that's fan art too. I'll just remove the category for now, somebody else could readd the category if it indeed is fan art which I'm not sure it is. "Fan art or fanart is artwork created by fans of a work of fiction [...]" matches the image but it does not display a character of it and is not unambiguously related to the book. Prototyperspective (talk) 21:30, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The entire reason i created the category was to help people to keep an eye out for potentially derivative works. Adding images of fictional characters created by the uploader largely defeats the purpose Trade (talk) 03:38, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Or at last use Category:AI-generated fictional characters instead Trade (talk) 03:43, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

About Category:Energy supply and the category structure of Category:Energy

Before we start an edit war about overcategorization (Category:Energy is a great-grandparent of Category:Energy supply, so your edit should be reversed again), perhaps we might discuss the broader problem with the category structure of Category:Energy: that subcategories are too hard to find, which might be the underlying problem you encountered and reacted to. Would you like to join the discussion on Category talk:Energy supply? Perhaps you have ideas to make the structure less complicated? JopkeB (talk) 03:31, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is only a great-grandparent to Energy supply via "Energy economics". However, Energy supply & distribution including Category:Energy transportation like physical power lines are not only related to it in terms of economics.

I thought that was quite obvious so didn't explain it in the edit summary. I don't think people consider it to not also be an issue of infrastructure and many other things so I don't think I need to elaborate further and probably the Wikipedia categorization got this right too. I also still think Category:Energy transportation should be directly in category Energy, not buried deep down in some nested subcategory, I added it to its parent category because you reverted that. Prototyperspective (talk) 11:31, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is best to copy your objections to the Talk page so that others can give reactions too. JopkeB (talk) 09:30, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

gibberish

I used clipdrop, but some still get blurry, I like creating art on Bing because it can emulate retro comics, AI dystopia comics is an example of why I can't erase it. Hyju (talk) 10:57, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's still better than with the gibberish text. One could modify it further with an image editor like GIMP or Photoshop, for example using the patchfix tool. Maybe one could also just cut it out and then use img2img or inpainting to restore it. Or use img2img but as a negative prompt add "text", "letters" and "gibberish". I just tried it with Clipdrop and while it does have some problems, it's better than with that gibberish text. I thought about also naming that image as one to keep but there also is a problem with the gun where there's this extra part that would also better be removed. Here is what I made with Clipdrop but I guess one could further edit it or use the cleanup tool anew. Still, I'd rather upload that as a new version than keeping the image as is (you can use the image I linked if you'd like to.) Prototyperspective (talk) 11:11, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the problem is that as I did with Bing, it is based on Dall-E, those that use img2img are based on Stable Diffusion and the result loses the retro style (especially the coloring), I was also going to erase the head and the ships. I would also delete the head and the ships, usually I ask for certain scenarios and they end up appearing as a title or speech bubblesHyju (talk) 12:47, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You need to specify things like that it should be in comics style and set a high image strength. If you can't make a better version you could just upload the one I linked above which is better than the existing image with gibberish. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:56, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried it and it comes out differently, I've noticed that the two systems operate differently, even with the same prompts, characters and styles even differ in appearance, Dall-E tends to be more faithful, I wanted to know what the GIMP tool is, I have a version of it on PC. Hyju (talk) 13:12, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, one needs to adjust the prompts when switching between generators to get similar results. In Stable Diffusion you should for example use more 'tags' rather than sentences. GIMP is just a free image editor and you can use the patch/heal tool (along with other tools of it if you have the skills) to fix issues. Prototyperspective (talk) 13:19, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I started using Dream by Wombo, since it doesn't have limited credits, but the "vintage comic" rendering can only be found on Bing, based on Stable Diffusion, characters like Tintin and Betty Boop don't even look like the originals, the Hergé style for example, it's more reminiscent of Peanuts, I haven't yet found one that uses Dall-E and has img2img, then I could make more changes, the lack of other features such as negative prompts also gets in the way. Hyju (talk) 14:04, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Hi, Please read Commons:Fan art, stop uploading and arguing ad nauseam about out of scope AI-generated fan art. Thanks, Yann (talk) 18:37, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is the original work of fiction if it is fan art? It is simple question that remains unanswered. If I misunderstood something, please explain it such as for example by quoting a specific part of that page. I'm clueless as to why somebody would think it's fan art. It isn't. And even if it is, that does not warrant deletion when the file is in use per COM:SCOPE. I argue because I address points and my points get ignored and/or misrepresented. It's not AI-generated fan art but maybe I'm wrong and wait for an answer to my simple question. Prototyperspective (talk) 18:40, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please do review Commons:Fan art and SCOPE. No need to spend time arguing and splitting hairs about definitions. Quite simply you may think such uploads fit the project, but the consensus is otherwise. I politely suggest you either find less contentious ways to contribute to Wikimedia Commons, or find other venues for your uploads that do not seem widely appreciated here. Cheers, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:06, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Those are not my uploads
I did. Per COM:INUSE for example the files are clearly to be kept. By the quote I asked about, the images referred to are clearly not fan art.
1. I may have misunderstood something so I'd appreciate an answer to my simple question. That page starts off with Fan art is a term describing unofficial artistic representations of elements or characters in an original work of fiction. What is the work of fiction here?
2. As far as I understood those images they are NOT based on works of fiction but drawings of an historical figure. Again, I may be wrong but just claiming things are fan art while they clearly aren't isn't enough to ignore the SCOPE policy alongside the educational value of those high-quality AI art images of which only a few had misgenerations and no valid deletion rationale has been provided.

Prototyperspective (talk) 22:43, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Burning city by AI 'Don't Play With Matches'.jpg

File:Burning city by AI 'Don't Play With Matches'.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:07, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:'Excuse me sir, where can I find the rings section?' – Fictional being placed into a contemporary realistic daily life setting.png

File:'Excuse me sir, where can I find the rings section?' – Fictional being placed into a contemporary realistic daily life setting.png 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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:02, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unexplained removal of apparently relevant category

On File:PANO1 dessin herisson panneau CFZ.jpg the author states the date of their creation of this cartoon. I saw you removed the category for the date of the cartoon. If you have a reason for doing so, it is not obvious to me. Thanks for your attention. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 23:53, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I added an explanation to some of the edits: it only shows a cartoon character but not a cartoon. Prototyperspective (talk) 23:55, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, If I understand correctly, you argue that the drawing is not a cartoon? I would have said it is. (Perhaps we should have some sort of definition at the parent category?) If you think the drawing isn't a cartoon, maybe moving categorization to "2011 drawings" or someting similar might be more useful than removing categorization by date of creation completely? Wondering, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:17, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is a cartoon character or a drawing in cartoon style but not a cartoon. The definition of the German WP may be a bit clearer in that regard than the linked article albeit that also makes it clear A cartoon is a graphic that tells a comic and/or satirical story in one image - usually with a punch line. Originally no words were used for the visual joke.. I didn't notice such a category existed but it seems like those images already were in that category with the image you linked being an exception…the category seems to be missing a whole lot of images if it is indeed meant to include all drawings made or published in that year. Prototyperspective (talk) 00:23, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Wizard with microdrones.jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Günther Frager (talk) 23:07, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Videos of films from 1990 in the public domain

Hi Prototyperspective, the name of the category is wrong and misleading, even with the extended category description. A file licensed under Creative Commons is copyrighted but never in the public domain. All files on Wikimedia Commons are either under a free license like CC BY(-SA) or under CC0 and at the earliest 70 years after the death of the photographer/author in the public domain. I suggest that you remove the part "in the public domain" if you want to categorize videos independent from the license. Raymond (talk) 16:46, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please also see the wikilink that explains this: Public domain#Public-domain-like licenses.

There is the term public domain for the license as well as the term public (adjective) domain as a broader concept (see domain). This one refers to the latter and you could consider it as a short form for "Videos of films from 1990 in the public domain or with public domain-like licenses" if you don't see what is meant with the broader concept domain there.

The whole point of these categories is the licenses which are all all WMC-compatible licenses which are PD, CCBY, CCBYSA, etc. Maybe the part could be removed since that is required for the files to be here anyway. Prototyperspective (talk) 16:50, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As non-native English speaker I was not aware of the broader concept and I am not sure that it is very wide known. Never read about that defition in German. Anyway. Removal of the part would reduce confusion like mine :-) Raymond (talk) 17:40, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll probably move (rename) the categories later to remove that part, thanks for the feedback. Alternatively I may ask about it somewhere (a problem with this solution is that people may think it also contains videos of short parts of film but these categories are meant to contain only videos of full-length films). Prototyperspective (talk) 17:47, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikibook

I posted examples of art I create on Bing and I think it could be included in the en:wikibooks:AI Art Generation Handbook, but I don't know how to put it there. Hyju (talk) 10:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The link doesn't work. I'm also making a WikiBook that is published as a work-in-progress but that's not the one you linked there. I don't add images on request or anything similar but only to illustrate existing & potential useful applications and methods to generate & improve AI art. I found the image of the enlarged ant useful and requested its undeletion. But other than that I'm not sure what the images could help illustrate even though they can be useful elsewhere. A missing example in the Wikibook would be a short comic made of AI-generated images. If you could make new images and make a comic with a coherent story and speech bubbles (or captions underneath), that would probably be added. You could also explain a potential application on the talk page of the Wikibook. Prototyperspective (talk) 10:18, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I messed up the link and fixed it, I still haven't been able to create panels that look good.Hyju (talk) 10:23, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It would probably be best if you added these panels to here: Wikibooks:AI Art Generation Handbook/Art Medium. Prototyperspective (talk) 10:31, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, I don't even know English very well, so it's difficult to write anything more than a more elaborate text. Hyju (talk) 10:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think what you have there could be enough for that page and just use a translator. Prototyperspective (talk) 10:43, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I made a version of the executive rhino and added it there Hyju (talk) 13:46, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Great but you also removed a row there, not sure if that was intentional (see the diff). Prototyperspective (talk) 14:52, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't intentional, I removed the word Javan because it couldn't pass the Bing filter. I saw that you took some art I sent, curiously, the African tribe was supposed to have a Native American appearance, the one I sent African didn't turn out as expected. Hyju (talk) 18:05, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I found the image by accident when searching for new AI-generated images and found it relatively high quality. Not entirely sure what you mean. In the image I used you used the term "prehistoric" which along with other indicators (the cat "Artistic restorations of prehistoric life (2020s)" and the clothing etc) suggests (or by definition means) that it depicts "ancient" humans. More details could be useful...for example the prompt if you still have it. Prototyperspective (talk) 10:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't save it, but I generated another one similar to these: ancient humans in stone age, highly realistic faces, matte painting, highly detailed, stone age scene, cave humans, trending on artstation, historical art comic vintage 1940s african american Hyju (talk) 11:05, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Send another paleoart, this time I sent the previous art and put it in [1]'s img2mg, it tries to decipher the prompts and you can use a magic prompt tool and generate a new prompt, that's what I used, I changed some things to suit suit what I wanted (vintage comic style, woman). Hyju (talk) 23:36, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't understand the arguments for deleting so many letters I've uploaded. Hyju (talk) 01:09, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Paleo-illustrations_by_Stegotyranno

Paleo-illustrations by Stegotyranno has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

FunkMonk (talk) 12:47, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:SCP-106.jpg

The file is explictly released under the terms of CC-BY-SA 3.0 like other site material on the SCP Wiki site is required to. You can see this notice at the very bottom of the website, as well as a "‡ Licensing / Citation" section near the bottom. I can understand that licensing information on the site can be difficult to find though.

The original image used on the article, way back in the day, was not actually CC and so a contest was held for artists to submit original alternatives which were CC and thus suitable for inclusion on the site. The image uploaded at File:SCP-106.jpg is the entry they ultimately replaced it with. I've added a link with the forum comment containing information in the source section to assist those in the future looking at sourcing for this file.

The information is noted here: https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/forum/t-232703/scp-106#post-4114303, where it is noted:

Congratulations to the winners of the SCP-106 Photography Contest held on r/scp!
The first image "106 Emergence", the second image "106 Door" and third image "106 Victim" were all won by Cinemamind, and each is released under CC-BY-SA 3.0.

The first link is to the SCP-106 Photography Contest announcement post on Reddit. This post explains that:

This Contest will revolve around SCP-106 "The Old Man" by DrGears. Of the three images on SCP-106's file, none are compliant with the license. All will need to be replaced. This is where you come in.

And in the "rules" section the following bullet points are relevant to image licensing.

Entries must be released under CC-BY-SA 3.0 More information on what this means can be found here.

Entries should not be perfect recreations of the original images in other mediums (3D modeling, painting, etc). Exact copies would just be plagiarism of the original artwork, which will place us in pretty much the same predicament. Simulate, not duplicate. (Does not apply to SCP-162 category)

Entrants must provide a CC-compliant or public domain source, or prove that they took the photo in question.

This links to the SCP-106 Photography Contest submission thread on Reddit.

Later, the "emergence" photo (File:SCP-106.jpg) was replaced with a different CC-BY-SA 3.0 image, this time created by MrKlay. In the forum post just below the previous one mentioned, you can see this update: https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/forum/t-232703/scp-106#post-4122121. Also being a submission for a SCP-106 image replacement, it was released under CC-BY-SA 3.0.

The artist also uploaded a copy to their ArtStation account, which is also linked. However, I don't think ArtStation has the ability to signify a license in their UI? Or it wasn't added for the entry. Would it be better to remove the link from the source section?

Regardless, this should provide enough overall context to show not just that the image is CC-BY-SA 3.0, but it was specifically created with the intention of being media under that license. aismallard (talk) 01:33, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thank you for these explanations. I'll link that from the file and retract the missing evidence note. The ArtStation link didn't have this license info and I thought the Wiki just hosted the file from there with the CCBY note at the bottom only referring to the texts or at least not also to this image. Prototyperspective (talk) 13:58, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COM:AN/U

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Prototyperspective and "AI Art Application and Improvements Handbook" on Wikibooks. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved.

The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:22, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Realistic_animals_by_DALL-E

Realistic animals by DALL-E has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Jmabel ! talk 19:29, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Science fantasy wizard flying into a base.jpg

File:Science fantasy wizard flying into a base.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 09:37, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:SciFantasy wizard commanding aircraft with gestures.jpg

File:SciFantasy wizard commanding aircraft with gestures.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 09:38, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wizard taking a mandatory trip.jpg

File:Wizard taking a mandatory trip.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 09:38, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:A wizard megacity with dark wizard (science fantasy).jpg

File:A wizard megacity with dark wizard (science fantasy).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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:14, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:'Proxima Centauri b, Earth Colony, Delta Complex' by AI.jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Adamant1 (talk) 15:32, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:Cyberpunk city with not enough funds to protect against the rising sea, using the polluted water for cooler air.jpg

And also:

File:Toxic acidic rain in the city, cyberpunk.png

Yours sincerely, Adamant1 (talk) 15:45, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Technical needs survey - Media dumps

Hello, Prototyperspective. Some time ago, you commented on this proposal, saying that you tended toward support (but it wasn't a clear support), and we had some conversation about it. Then, official voting hadn't started yet. Now, true votes are put on the new Votes section, instead of Discussion. Since your comment wasn't a clear vote, it remains in discussion. If you are truly convinced now, I would be thankeful if you give a Support vote to the proposal. Of course, I have no problem if you don't, or even if you vote against while giving some arguments. I'm telling you about it only because it was left as a kind of half-done vote, and I'd love know your final decision, if you want to. MGeog2022 (talk) 19:21, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reminding me, didn't think of checking whether my comment was moved as support to the Votes section. Will clarify there. Prototyperspective (talk) 21:46, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much :-) MGeog2022 (talk) 13:38, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Abraham Lincoln using a smartphone (anachronism).jpg

File:Abraham Lincoln using a smartphone (anachronism).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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Adamant1 (talk) 06:09, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Just a random question since it keeps coming up and seems like a particularly strong point of contention, but if artwork based on fictional representations of people from the 15th hundreds that were created by someone who is clearly a fan of them and time period doesn't count as fan art then what in your opinion would? Or is nothing fan art as long as it's created by an AI generator? Like if they were AI generated images of Marvel characters would that count as fan art or would you just give the images a pass "because AI"? Adamant1 (talk) 21:18, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See fan art and COM:FAN neither of these match what you think of as 'fan art' – even if it was both possible to be a "fan" of the depicted people and time period and the uploader to be such which are two things I doubt as well. Art depicting Marvel characters is fan art if not done by official artists / Marvel and it doesn't matter how that art is made in that regard. Prototyperspective (talk) 21:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:1973 Brazilian Grand Prix (Brasil Hoje n. 24).webm

Hello! I had to remove the Category:Videos without audio from File:1973 Brazilian Grand Prix (Brasil Hoje n. 24).webm due to this reason: the video has audio, but there's something wrong with the Commons player. Erick Soares3 (talk) 19:04, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know, that's why I added this cat so to enable a way to keep track of all the videos where the audio is removed or is there another category for that? Other videos in that cat have the same problem. Prototyperspective (talk) 19:36, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought keeping track of these could be useful since it would allow investigating what causes this problem or in the case that something needs to be done per video (such as converting the video somehow). I think it used to be the case for only some video uploads but now seems to be the case for all new video uploads so tracking those videos probably isn't useful. I'll remove the category also from the other videos once this problem has been solved. Prototyperspective (talk) 19:41, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that any specific Category would need to be worked with the Phabricator - unless they have any other way to track the videos. But since it seems to be an specific glitch with the Commons player, it wouldn't be necessary. Erick Soares3 (talk) 20:19, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

N2O Budget

Hi Prototyperspective, I have a question. You have uploaded the file Global Nitrous Oxide Budget 2020.png under the CC 4.0 license, but I could not find such a license on the website of the Global Carbon Project. I was offered help in creating an SVG graphic, but the license terms should be clear upfront. Can you help me further? Perhaps I have overlooked something. Thank you. --Mister Pommeroy (talk) 08:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know! This is really strange, I only upload things when I'm really sure they're CCBY or alike and this would be he first case where it isn't.

I looked up both the website and the study and both aren't CCBY now so I checked with the Wayback Machine if they were at the time that I uploaded it. It doesn't seem to be the case but I'll investigate a bit further. Two possible ways one could explain it is that I had some other similar study at the time that was CCBY and confused it with this one (unlikely) or that there's an issue with the Wayback Machine. However, what I found is this under CCBY-SA so at worst case I'll upload this as a new version. Would be great if you could make a SVG out of it. I'll investigate further and will, hopefully soon, upload the linked image as new version. Prototyperspective (talk) 10:21, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Prototyperspective, fyi File:International Policy Milestones by NOAA.png uploaded, as you requested. --Mister Pommeroy (talk) 12:48, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I'll let you know once I uploaded a new version of the image above. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:50, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded a new version but the earlier one should be fine as well. Maybe the study link previously linked to the print. If I recall correctly, I got it from the preprint which is CCBY but linked to the page with the image. The preprint is here. It uses the image without the CCBYSA icon. The image I just uploaded with the CCBY-SA icon can be found from the source site under "Images" in the bottom right. I think CCBY is much better than CCBYSA but I'm a bit unsure if they meant to license the image in the preprint under CCBY which would have been good. Somebody should ask them but for now I'll leave the version as is and change the license to CCBYSA and add a note about this to the file info (it could be that the prior version is CCBY but I don't know if it is). Prototyperspective (talk) 17:23, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Prototyperspective, the file is now available under file:Globales N2O Budget.svg, in English and German, thanks to Mrmw. --Mister Pommeroy (talk) 15:35, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks for notifying and thanks to Mrmw for creating it. I guess the file-uses would be good to replace with the SVG now. Prototyperspective (talk) 09:55, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Daily_life_and_common_experience

Category:Daily_life_and_common_experience has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

JopkeB (talk) 04:45, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Categorisation of videos

Thanks so much for categorising a bunch of videos I've imported from Youtube recently! Categories are a bit of an arcane art to me, I can never find exactly what the best categories are :P Suntooooth (talk) 21:06, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:AI-generated_paleoart_of_the_ancient_past

AI-generated paleoart of the ancient past has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

FunkMonk (talk) 09:40, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Demonstration of AI-restoration of prehistoric scenes - a dinosaur in a fern forest (Migmanychion).jpg

File:Demonstration of AI-restoration of prehistoric scenes - a dinosaur in a fern forest (Migmanychion).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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

FunkMonk (talk) 09:41, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Scene of ancient cave humans.jpg

File:Scene of ancient cave humans.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

FunkMonk (talk) 09:42, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Scene of ancient humans.jpg

File:Scene of ancient humans.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

FunkMonk (talk) 09:42, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Map categories by year

I am not so sure this is a good idea. Many of the maps are updated regularly. And people will often not be bothered to update the category year. --Timeshifter (talk) 23:14, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These cats are old and useful and if you see any that doesn't have the cat updated, change it. If you think keeping things up-to-date is valuable this is needed or useful. I didn't create these categories and people should change the cat and find outdated maps. Prototyperspective (talk) 00:09, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I guess if someone is actually using the categories to update maps, then that is a good thing. I think many maps get updated when someone notices the map getting old in the article. Or if the first uploader is keeping an eye on it. --Timeshifter (talk) 01:44, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Depictions_of_existing_technologies_decades_before_their_invention

Depictions of existing technologies decades before their invention has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Arlo James Barnes 03:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Map and regional seismic sections showing location of Nadir Crater.jpg

File:Map and regional seismic sections showing location of Nadir Crater.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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Mikenorton (talk) 09:43, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PDF books/files.

Thanks. FWIW, I've been mass-adding PDFs from directories that claim to be various "books from the US" to there without specifically filtering out the ones that are "files" instead of "books". I was actually intending to go back through and sort the "not actually a book" stuff next (letters, single issues of magazines, theses, etc) before working on fixing bargled names and metadata... actually looking them up. Jarnsax (talk) 07:36, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

Hi, why did you revert this? https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AAu_Petit_St_Thomas%2C_rue_du_Bac%2C_Paris._Tout_le_mois_de_d%C3%A9cembre%2C_grande_exposition_de_jouets%2C_livres_et_nouveaut%C3%A9s_pour_%C3%A9trennes.jpg&oldid=prev&diff=876388877 Best regards XoMEoX (talk) 12:15, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's not suitable to name this file "Canvas.jpg". And also the current name is fine. The missing reasons just means an extra time burden on file-mover to decline this inappropriate request. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:17, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This was the original title of the photo. Another user overwrote it with a completely different image and wrote a title for this image. I have reverted this. Now the title no longer matches the image. XoMEoX (talk) 15:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well the original title was inappropriate. Prototyperspective (talk) 15:04, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OWID removal

hi! you removed some without replacing them with a subcategory. please check your edits and rectify them.

RZuo (talk) 12:16, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because I was intending to replace them, seems like I can't do multiple cat changes at once with the tool. Did so now and will go through them further. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:19, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fog

Moin, you seem to overlook the fact that clouds are already counted among the weather phenomena. The category "fog and mist" is a subcategory of clouds. So to assign them to the weather phenomena is in fact an overcategorization. Therefore, I removed the category. My actions are in accordance with our guidelines. Lukas Beck (talk) 09:20, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, I didn't. I have explained it in the recent edit. Prototyperspective (talk) 09:21, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then adjust the supercategories of fog and mist accordingly. The way it is currently implemented, it is an overcategorization and still unsustainable. Kind regards Lukas Beck (talk) 09:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diagrams

Hi again. I noticed you are moving a broad range of images to diagram categories. I think you should move them to infographics categories: Category:Information graphics. It includes more than diagrams. You are including maps and charts too. Those are not diagrams. See this discussion:

Category:Diagrams - link at top goes here:
Commons:Categories for discussion/2021/01/Category:Diagrams - especially look at the comment from the native German speaker: Enyavar.

--Timeshifter (talk) 14:40, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wondered about this before creating the diagrams categories so I went here: Diagram#Gallery of diagram types which also includes statistical maps and charts. Information graphics would make the cat name even longer. All the files fit the definition "a symbolic representation of information using visualization techniques". I wasn't so sure about the best title or scope of the category but the files can easily be moved if necessary. However, if that Wikipedia article is wrong please edit it and if possible the name should be just a brief word not two long words "Information graphics". Choropleth map is in the cat "Statistical charts and diagrams". Prototyperspective (talk) 14:50, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There has been discussion on the Wikipedia page. Editors there have so far refused to change their incorrect definition regardless of the evidence that has been brought up so far. Maybe the info from the German guy, Enyavar, could change their mind. Feel like trying? I no longer have the time, health, or energy I used to have.

The most in-depth discussions are all linked from Commons:Categories for discussion/2021/01/Category:Diagrams. Admins in that discussion agree with the narrow definition of "diagram".

"Infographic" can be used in place of "information graphics". Infographic is in all the dictionaries now. It is the broad term that people should use. Not diagram. See dictionaries:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/infographic

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/diagram

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/diagram

--Timeshifter (talk) 15:42, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Infographic usually aren't referring to charts or choropleth maps but usually vertical files with text and illustrative images so I'm not sure if that really would be the better choice. It's also "intended to present information quickly and clearly" and this isn't really the case for the files here, they're just meant to visualize/communicate the data, not explain things using a few graphics. It's a problem these things are so badly defined/distinguished/established. I just don't think Infographic is the word actually widely used or understood throughout society for these kinds of images. Maybe one could call it "Data visualizations…". Maybe you could make another post at this discussion? This page seems like the wrong place to discuss it. I'll think about it further another time if it's not resolved earlier. Prototyperspective (talk) 15:58, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Charts" are listed here:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/infographic

"Maps themselves can be considered a form of infographics, but may also be a component of a larger infographic. Design Tip: Choosing the right visualization approach for your data is key." - That quote is from here:

Infographics and Data Visualization. From the design lab of University of Wisconsin–Madison.

See also: Choropleth Infographics Archives.

"Graphics" might satisfy. It has been around an even longer time, and people know the name. It is a totally vague term. Which may be just what is needed for a category name. For example, change

Category:Our World in Data diagrams about healthcare systems to

Category:Our World in Data graphics about healthcare systems

I could live with that. In any case, diagram is just not the right term in English. So please change it to something else. Anything else.

Graphics may not be the best term though. It includes photographs, computer gaming graphics, etc.. Those are definitely not infographics. See:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/graphic

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/graphics

I still think infographics is the best compromise for a broad category of informative non-lifelike images. People have heard the term. There is a discussion on graphics categories here:

Commons:Categories for discussion/2016/02/Category:Graphics

--Timeshifter (talk) 16:57, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Statistical graphics maybe? But it's also so long. Again infographics are usually explanatory texts with lots of illustrative graphics, it's not really the right term also because it's too broad and includes nonstatistical things just like diagrams. Datagraphics would be better but also has downsides. I moved one category to "…graphics…" earlier and will move the other ones too to some new name for now then even though a later rename may be needed then. Prototyperspective (talk) 17:07, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See w:Infographics. I like it. I think the term is much more popular nowadays.

I think it is always good to pull maps into separate map categories. Those map categories can then be put under both map and infographic categories. I am going to do it now in one category to show you what I mean.

OK. Here is my example category:

Category:Our World in Data graphics about healthcare systems

I noticed you used "graphics" today on another category:

Category:Our World in Data graphics about natural disasters

--Timeshifter (talk) 18:15, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My previous comment on "graphics" was incomplete. I hadn't read far enough down the list of definitions here:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/graphic - read down: Adjective, Noun, Adjective combining form.

It's definitely too broad of a term.

You said infographics is "too broad and includes nonstatistical things". That's a good thing since it includes maps and diagrams (narrow English definition, not the German definition).

"Statistical graphics" wouldn't work for the same reason. It does not include nonstatistical stuff like maps and diagrams.

The thing about infographics is that it has an abstract informational element to it. That includes charts, graphs, diagrams, maps, "explanatory texts with lots of illustrative graphics", etc.. That does not include photographs (unless it is a photograph of charts, graphs, diagrams, maps, etc.) or cartoons or drawings from nature, etc.. We need this category for what we do on the Commons. No other term works as well.

We have statistics categories. See Category: Statistics. But that does not include maps and diagrams. Since neither contain statistics.

--Timeshifter (talk) 04:31, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not random maps but statistical maps. They display statistical data such as percentage change compared to previous year and sometimes binary yes/no data. Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2019/09/Category:Diagrams_by_subject Prototyperspective (talk) 10:31, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Some maps could be categorized under statistical categories.

There are very few categories with "statistical graphics" currently in the name. See category search results:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&search=Statistical+graphics&ns14=1&fulltext=Search&advanced=1

On the other hand I see the recent creation (May 25, 2024) of Category:Statistical graphics.

It is categorized under "Information graphics".

"Datagraphic" is a good idea. But it in not in the dictionary yet:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/datagraphic

We could start using the word datagraphic, and eventually it will make it to the dictionaries if enough people like it. Which may happen since it is a lot easier and shorter than "statistical graphics".

"Data graphics" is used in the real world. Do google searches of it. An example:

https://dtkaplan.github.io/Lessons-in-statistical-thinking/L02-Pointplots.html

I think "data graphics" should be used instead of "statistical graphics" on the Commons. It has the advantage of being able to shorten it to one word. Now or later. I am going to start using it. --Timeshifter (talk) 19:19, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that datagraphics or data graphics would probably be the best term but in these cases the categories would be named "Our World in Data datagraphics about…" so that's two times data in a row; maybe renaming to "OWID datagraphics…" would be better when leaving the redirects intact and clarifying the abbreviation in the cat description. That would also make the cat-names shorter which has multiple advantages, mainly regarding display on the cat pages. Prototyperspective (talk) 20:35, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like acronyms in category names. Many people don't know what they mean. And when scanning a list of categories (like a list of subcategories) it should be clear what they are. Without having to open the category first. Kind of defeats the purpose of a quick scan.

I was talking about using data graphics or datagraphics in general. For many category names, not just OWID ones.

But the OWID category name is a problem. Or not. We could just leave it as "Our World in Data graphics...". It's pretty clear the site is data based. So therefore the graphics are data based too. I suggest keeping it the way it is. I don't think the current OWID cat names are too long. --Timeshifter (talk) 21:09, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest adding many of the statistics subcategories to Category:Data graphics. See:

Category:Statistics

--Timeshifter (talk) 22:09, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bean's War Movie║Mr. Bean's Holiday (segment of the film).webm

File:Bean's War Movie║Mr. Bean's Holiday (segment of the film).webm 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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Yann (talk) 12:35, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Street drain in downtown LA during atmospheric river - February 2024 - Sarah Stierch.webm

Sorry for the name of the category that I have renamed since Category:Effects of February 2024 atmospheric rivers in California to be more general and according to similar categories for other storms.

Pierre cb (talk) 23:22, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks Prototyperspective (talk) 08:55, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting my edits

I have come to know that my edits in People of the United Kingdom are reverted by you, with the reason being "not "People of South America" or "People of Africa" so fix that first before adding this". I had fixed that issue before, but Joshbaumgartner reverted it, with the reasoning detailed at Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2023/06/Category:Wales#c-JopkeB-20240524161200-Joshbaumgartner-20240522173300. Please discuss with him before asking me again to fix the template. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 15:45, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Prototyperspective, Category:United Kingdom covers the entire sovereign state, including its constituent countries, crown dependencies, and overseas territories, thus it covers multiple continents. Josh (talk) 16:01, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know that. I have left a comment there. Not all people from the UK are from South America just because there are some crown dependencies and overseas territories – maybe you haven't yet read my comment at the thread Sbb1413 linked. Prototyperspective (talk) 16:03, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:AI-generated curious turtle; 'Stay Open to Life's Curiosities'.jpg

And also:

File:Cute animal generated by AI 'Mom calls me Precious'.jpg

Yours sincerely, Adamant1 (talk) 08:51, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:AI-generated curious turtle; 'Stay Open to Life's Curiosities'.jpg

And also:

File:Cute animal generated by AI 'Mom calls me Precious'.jpg

Yours sincerely, Adamant1 (talk) 08:51, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hecka cute pictures BTW. To the point that I almost feel bad for nominating them for deletion. If you want to argue that they should be kept due to the high quality I'd be totally fine with that. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:53, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit

Sorry, but I didn't know how to change the syntax in that case and thought it was more important to read your comment instead of just moving on to other things because it was screwed up. It's not that big of deal. If I ever do that feel free to revert or remove it. I could really care less. Adamant1 (talk) 11:21, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Subhas Sarkar

Hi. If you know the name of someone please don't add them to the Unidentified people category. A quick google search would have found his WP page and you could have added him to the correct category. Unidentified people is for when you cannot put a name to the people in the photo Gbawden (talk) 06:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was just taken care of categories like that not being in Category:People. The place from where they are moved to such cats should be Unidentified people or another category like that instead of the People category being cluttered with such cats since that cat is linked from the Main page / frontpage. Prototyperspective (talk) 11:19, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks I appreciate that. One of the tools I use to identify people (particularly Americans) is newspapers.com which is available from the WP library Gbawden (talk) 07:01, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Allow overwriting

Please see: Commons:Village pump/Proposals#"You cannot overwrite this file."

Template:Allow overwriting

I did not know of this. See thread. This may help in getting images updated. If the word gets out. --Timeshifter (talk) 18:25, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this would make much of a difference. For example because most people actually reaching the Commons page for the image (btw these are few) who would indeed upload a new version are already registered. It may be a good change but it wouldn't have much of an impact in regards to updating datagraphics. Prototyperspective (talk) 18:28, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of people click on images. If they saw a message at the top it might help: "Please log in and update image with a newer version of the image, if it exists". --Timeshifter (talk) 18:37, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what is suggested at the link. Maybe this message could be displayed for all images in a certain category but at the same time many would find it distracting or unwanted there, for example for datagraphics that are already well-updated or intentionally about an earlier year. Prototyperspective (talk) 18:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see that thread. It looks like we are all figuring out better ways right now. --Timeshifter (talk) 19:19, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sleeper cars (or not) on California Zephyr

I don't usually follow up renaming requests that I've declined, but I'd like to be sure I haven't missed something about File:Tour of Amtrak superliner sleeper car California Zephyr.webm. All the sources I can find say that the California Zephyr has seats cars, with an open saloon, and sleeper cars with separate roomettes and bedrooms. And this seems to be primarily a video of a sleeper car, matching the description at en:Superliner_(railcar)#Sleeping_cars and on https://www.seat61.com/UnitedStates.htm#what-are-amtrak-trains-like. So what am I missing? --bjh21 (talk) 14:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Category:California Zephyr (Amtrak train), I agree with how that cat is categorized. You can sleep in any bus or train with seats, that doesn't make it a sleeper train. Prototyperspective (talk) 14:26, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I checked again because I couldn't find more in earlier attempts to check the same and this clears up the confusion, I'll revert my changes and add the missing cats to the linked cat above. Thanks for asking, maybe I wouldn't have checked again any time soon otherwise! Prototyperspective (talk) 14:33, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anotation

We adjusted it to hopefully fix the issue you experienced.[2] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:41, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Klimaneutrale Produkte – kurzerklärt.webm edited

Hi!

As you correctly said, having cropped out parts of the video causes problems, so I blurred only the respective parts. I hope it is better now :)

Greetings --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 16:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, thank you! Prototyperspective (talk) 16:41, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Videos from YouTube where higher resolution is available at the source

Hi can you think of a better title for this category? Trade (talk) 18:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I didn't create this category...maybe "Videos from YouTube with a resolution lower than the source video" or "Videos imported from YouTube with lower resolution than at source" or something similar. Prototyperspective (talk) 18:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didnt meant to imply you made the category. Just seeking suggestions. Sry Trade (talk) 18:33, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, didn't think you were, I was just clarifying this...for example just in case somebody reads this and assumes I created this category. Prototyperspective (talk) 18:35, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on Category:Videos about firearms and gun control? I wanted to make a catch-all category for videos about gun control, second ammendment rights, mass shootings, gun violence, background checks, firearms legislation, open carry and similar. Not sure about the name Trade (talk) 03:48, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know of a better title...one could make a cat Videos about firearms and then have a subcat about firearms control/gun control. Prototyperspective (talk) 10:17, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think this video was created by the uploader? The recording looks like something by an amateur and not a professional camera man but the bizarre description throws me off. --Trade (talk) 03:32, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No idea, it seems like so. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:01, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OverWrite request

Hi there, thanks for thanking my upload of File:Vandalism Fighting Tools Wikipedia Ad.gif, could you overwrite this file to File:Qxz-ad86.gif as a newer version of the file? Thanks. Also I have requested at Commons:Overwriting existing files/Requests so if you could answer there that would be helpful as well. Myrealnamm (💬pros · ✏️cons) 14:25, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Motd/2024-10-10

Hi. Could you help me with this template? Should I add {{Media of the day|2024|10|10}} on the file page or this is work for admins? I chose this date because of the World Mental Health Day. THX Mechanik rowerowy (talk) 18:33, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, other editors will do that. You already did everything, thanks! It's a great choice and the description is good. Prototyperspective (talk) 20:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template added on the file page. Thanks again. Mechanik rowerowy (talk) 05:11, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your FPC votes

I recommend that you read through all of COM:FPC#Formal things and COM:IG before casting your vote. Featured pictures are chosen based on whether they are among the best pictures on Commons, not on whether they should appear on the Main Page. If the image you nominate doesn't get selected, please don't take it personally and don't start opposing multiple nominations. Our comments are focused on the art, not the artist. According to an excerpt of COM:PSS (a summarised version of COM:SCOPE), educational content is,

...content that could be used by Wikipedia, other Wikimedia projects, or other projects that provide knowledge, instruction or information.

Bird images are within the scope because they assist with species identification, behavior, habitat, anatomy, and scientific documentation. Don't refer to COM:SCOPE just because there are millions of broadly related pictures. Your current votes are disruptive and unhelpful, and you need to stop. If this is making you upset, consider taking a break, relaxing, or visiting another part of the site. If you continue disrupting Commons with your votes, the community will discuss whether or not you are fit to vote on FPC as a last resort. --Zzzs (talk) 16:19, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not on whether they should appear on the Main Page

I already learned that but that is not why I oppose these.

It's not about one image I nominated, all of the things I talked about are general things. My rationales and comments are all focused on the "art" – I'd say picture but it indeed seems like FP has become some kind of art critique contest.

Bird images are within the scope because Never said otherwise. They are very much in scope but simply aren't sufficiently educational to be FP is what I was saying. Prototyperspective (talk) 21:07, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Images of birds are very important. I'm not sure what your issue is with birds, but I adore them. Saying that bird photos are "not sufficiently educational to be FP" is warped thinking because these images are helpful to people who enjoy nature and bird watching, like myself. I seriously wonder what subject is FP-worthy to you. Please rethink this whole situation. Wolverine XI 21:21, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A diagram of the anatomy of birds or about bird cognition-related matters like the first media of Alex the talking parrot grabbing an object would be more educational. This helps explain what I mean with not sufficiently educational, this site is simply not a photography critique community

but a free media repository with a primary focus on educational media and the FP is really only a photography critique community at this point with extremely high standards for more-educational illustrations, diagrams, charts, and more so I just hold other images to the same very high standards that are also applied to these throughout the years and think there's enough of these among "featured" pictures by now while other are not even getting nominated. Prototyperspective (talk) 21:28, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About your nomination of low quality and captions in English, do you think people from Spain, Italy, Greece, Poland, Japan, and else, will find exctiting the "myelin sheath", "ach receptors" and "neurilemma", if they're not familiar with biology? Do you like File:Air conditioning unit as.svg? -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These things could be linked, possibly translated, in the description. It's not necessarily the native language terms that matter there, 1) one could do a Web search for these and find out what it is or quickly translate it using a dictionary and 2) depending on how interested one is in this it would suffice to know that these things are distinct things that have been given names rather than knowing what the native language term for these are. Also people could upload translated versions and e.g. include them in their Wikipedia, I count a whole 10 non-English Wikipedias including it (possibly because many people there can speak English and/or because they added a translated caption). That this image is already very useful even to non-English languages is demonstrated by that it's featured in many such Wikipedias for a long time. I will add these terms to the file description and improve multilingualism a bit. Prototyperspective (talk) 09:46, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COM:AN/U

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved.

SHB2000 (talk) 04:44, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Warning after AN/U discussion

Hi Prototypeperspective, you have promised to stop your disruptive votes on FPC and to open discussions about criteria of FPC in a more suitable place. I hope you will lead this dicussion with an understanding that opinions other than yours might also be valuable and show this understanding in the discussion. I saw you already had experience on Commons of holding an opinion that the majority opposes. It reminded me of the German joke about the person who hears a radio announcement about a "Geisterfahrer" on the Autobahn. I supporse you know the one I am referring to, if not, please ping me to tell you the whole joke. So next time you feel like there are hundreds of "Geisterfahrer", please do a quick reality check and ask other people on neutral ground. Take this as a warning not to continue behaviour others find disruptive after they tell you so. Kritzolina (talk) 05:27, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I voted four times using a new criteria, and maybe responded a bit too often in one nomination and already apologized multiple times. What more do you want? As for opinions, the majority of Germans probably had problematic opinions during the late 30s so I don't see much sense in that point in regards to having or expressing deviating opinions. Again, I already apologized and am a bit confused. Moreover, I already said I should have asked people on neutral grounds or third-parties or more generally to have discussed this instead of voting this way. Lastly, I immediately stopped the behavior when people told me so, they told me after my votes which was the time the ANU was opened. Prototyperspective (talk) 09:51, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with that I don't have an understanding that opinions other than yours might also be valuable, the opposite is the case. I guess I argued in a wrong style or replied too often clarifying or defending my disputed vote and, again, didn't continue with these votes after the discussions on my talk page and the voting pages. I saw this talk post first before the ANU closure so I thought it was meant as some kind of warning on top rather than part of its outcome. Maybe there could be an addition to the intro at the top of the FP page that unestablished criteria or criteria not clearly included in the intro should be discussed first before applied (multiple times at least) or similar things. Prototyperspective (talk) 10:10, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not asking you to do anything to atone for past behaviour. I am asking you to be a bit more aware of the ways others react to your behaviour in the future. And no, adding more rules and regulations is not the answer to every problem. This is a community run space, so working collaboratively is more important than following the rules. If rules seem to not cover something or seem strange to you, try asking for the opinions of others on how adress the issue at hand.

I will for the moment forgive your Nazi comparison, as I understand you were emotionally upset, not knowing I had closed the discussion on AN/U. But please also don't repeat this kind of comparison when talking about our self organizing online-community. It is highly inappropriate.

And yes, having a different opinion is perfectly alright and one should bring this as a new perspective into discussions. That is part of being collaborative. However, as you rightly pointed out, you did it in a "style" that was highly and unneccessarily disruptive. Try changing your approach, please so that others can clearly SEE you value their opinons. Thank you for reading this. Kritzolina (talk) 06:00, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Yes, I should have asked about it instead. It is not a Nazi comparison! I was making a point directly addressing point "holding an opinion that the majority opposes" that you wrote, I was not comparing to Nazis at all but sorry if the point wasn't clear despite of me writing so I don't see much sense in that point (as is / in principle). There may be a better example to name that is not much weaker or unclear but I couldn't think of another. I saw that you had a joke about when people have minority views and that is what got me upset so I briefly addressed the point behind this. Just meant to briefly clarify that it wasn't some kind of comparison. Maybe you're saying it's still inappropriate nevertheless but I think it's needed now for me to briefly clarify that it wasn't a comparison. Yes, okay, and thanks for the further elaboration. Prototyperspective (talk) 10:05, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cosmic Calendar – deep time and cosmic history as one year (time-lapse and annotations; 50MB version).gif

File:Cosmic Calendar – deep time and cosmic history as one year (time-lapse and annotations; 50MB version).gif is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:

CSD F9 (embedded data)

If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted).
All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log.
If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

العربية ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

ToadetteEdit (talk) 15:15, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wake up please

You add misformatted categories to deletion requests. Look how they look like... 186.175.164.3 08:13, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please be clearer what you mean, I found it: misplaced <noinclude> added via HotCat. Thanks, fixed the problem. Prototyperspective (talk) 11:32, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Explaining the Human Body by Deutsche Welle

Hi, thank you very much for helping to properly categorise these videos! If you have an idea for where we can use any of them on the Wikimedia projects, please feel free to add them on the respective pages! Gnom (talk) 11:46, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Net Migration 2020.png

Hi, the reason for removing the category there is because maps of immigration do not depict net migration, nor vice versa. Net migration is the balance of immigration and emigration. Therefore labelling this map as a map of immigration is not accurate. Komonzia (talk) 17:23, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not true: maps of net migration are maps of immigration. You could make a subcategory for these (e.g. World maps of net migration") and that subcategory would be in maps of immigration. Prototyperspective (talk) 17:33, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let me reword it from the context of the image we see: On a map of net migration, the colours we see indicate the number of people who have into each country (im-) minus the number who have moved out of it (em-). On maps of immigration, the number of emigrants are not indicated on the map (except for the countries they have immigrated into, assuming it is a country with data on the map). These are two different and separate things. On a map of immigration since 1990, one might see Estonia as having had some immigrants. That doesn't account for the fact that a huge portion of its population has (died or) left (emigrated) which would be visible on maps of emigration and net migration (dying not being relevant here). Conversely, and to demonstrate that the two concepts have separate distinct statistics, on a map of net migration, the United Arab Emirates might be close to zero on net migration statistics - but in reality has high immigration and high emigration. Komonzia (talk) 17:49, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good points but that doesn't change that it would still show immigration. Now it can also be more specifically about only maps that show immigration in the way you describe, the solution I'd suggest is adding a category description to the category that makes the narrower scope clear and creating a category "Migration maps of the world" that contains this image as well as the category and maps in Category:Emigration. Prototyperspective (talk) 18:23, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Motd and others

Please don't replace videos with any others in MOTD templates without good reasons. Like in Template:Motd/2024-09-04. First, vep.wikipedia still uses file - see vep:Šablon:Motd/2024-09. This video is not as bad as you say, so that it should be replaced with something else. Secondly, there are plenty of empty days on which you can post videos; there are no problems with choosing "empty" days, because there are not so many videos. I do a lot of work to filled the days, I upload my videos from Moscow or upload others or find another interesting videos from other users (from Russia and sometimes other countries); I make traslations to English. I will probably take some of the templates I created to my watchlist after your actions - for example, Template:Motd/2024-10-09. Please take into account that, in general, thanks for the your work on MOTD tempaltes, but I am not happy with 100% of your edits. If there is already a video for the day, then the only reason why the video can be replaced, is the problems with the video licenses themselves. Brateevsky {talk} 10:59, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I provided good reasons. No, that is not the only reason. vep Wikipedia needs to update if files are changed. You could readd it if you get this video to featured media. Prototyperspective (talk) 11:06, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Science_and_technology_timelines

Science and technology timelines has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs • uploads) 03:11, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Catheterization-labs-per-million-people.png

This is not a picture of a medical facility. Rathfelder (talk) 15:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But a map of them. Prototyperspective (talk) 15:11, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maps of Europe

Before undoing categorization, please read the instructions concerning the category "Maps of Europe" and place the file in question in appropriate sub-category. The file about sanctions concerning Russia has many subcategories for maps some of which should suit as subcategory of maps related to Europe. All files in "maps of Europe" should be placed in sub-categories. Periegetes (talk) 11:30, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is that you should have moved it to a subcategory instead of removing that category. Prototyperspective (talk) 11:39, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Annualised rate of change in age-standardised DALY rates for all causes excluding HIV-AIDS, natural disasters, and war and conflict, and SDI by country or territory, for 1990–2010 and 2010–19.jpg: Difference between revisions

This surely properly categorised in Category:2020-10 GBD study about the global burden of 369 diseases and injuries? Rathfelder (talk) 12:07, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, because not all of these are by region; for example this is a global statistic. The section header here is broken. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:10, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Health_by_stadium_of_life

Health by stadium of life has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

Rathfelder (talk) 14:27, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Child mortality

This is a subcategory of Category:Mortality Rathfelder (talk) 22:17, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How? (I wrote "unclear why it was removed" because I didn't find this cat set on it). Prototyperspective (talk) 22:30, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please clarify, I'd like to readd the cat. Also see this. Prototyperspective (talk) 16:58, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, Dear Filemover!

العربيَّة ∙ Deutsch ∙ español ∙ English ∙ français ∙ português ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（中国大陆）‎ ∙ 中文（台灣）‎ ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

Hi Prototyperspective, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{Rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
Please leave a redirect behind unless you have a valid reason not to do so. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references. Please see this section of the file rename guideline for more information.
Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

_Regards,Aafi ^(talk) 17:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AI art for historical scenes

AI art for historical scenes 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 gallery, 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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Carl Ha (talk) 21:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COM:AN/U

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved.

Adamant1 (talk) 04:20, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question/comment

Hi. Just to throw it out there, you seem like a perfectly fine person out of conversations having to do with AI and I think you make some good points about things a lot of the time, even in that area. You clearly get defensive and take it personal when talking about AI though. That's fine. Its your prerogative, but I feel like it just needlessly undermines the points your trying to make. Which again, I think are good sometimes, but no one is going to take you or what your saying seriously if keep couching things in personal commentary about everyone else is just ignorant and overly emotional. Again, its your prerogative if you want to keep taking it there. But I just think people more willing and able to consider your point of view if you skipped it and kept to the main points your trying to make about why AI artwork has value on here or whatever. Anyway, that's just my thought on it. Basic rhetorical techniques here on how to sell an idea to an audience. I think your good at getting your point across and sticking to the point in other areas. You just lose me when it comes AI generated artwork because of how you approach it. I really have no issue with you outside of that though. Adamant1 (talk) 21:00, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do get defensive sometimes because I try to address the points made and explain the points I made if I think they aren't refuted or substantially weakened with the points made. I was not saying everyone else is just ignorant and overly emotional. If I was being provocative then it wasn't intentional and I tried to be very clear and direct, not offensive or personal. What you said makes sense and I consider it even if I don't agree with how you described my commenting. I see an issue of people not considering points made and not explaining why they conclude things, directly raising this by explaining the risk this entails in direct terms is not meant to be condescending or anything but I'm certainly not saying my argumentation is optimal or anything and maybe I should spend more time to phrase things with a softer more positive attitude or just keep it short and simple like just asking for an explanation without going into any further details why I think such are important or missing. I already try to not get too involved in such discussions, maybe too little but at the same time there's really problematically relatively few other users participating in these. Prototyperspective (talk) 21:29, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand where your coming from. It's always frustrating for me when people don't provide valid arguments in deletion requests. Sometimes you have to step back, ask yourself if it ultimately matters that much, and take the lose. That's certainly something I have issues doing myself. Keeping it short and simple certainly helps. It's easy to lose thread and get to wrapped up in defending your position after a short paragraph or two instead of making a clear point. Just to throw it out there in case I wasn't clear about it, by "personal" I merely mean "about the person" instead of the topic. At the end of the day we are there to discuss AI generated artwork. Not have a meta discussion about how users of Commons feel about or how much knowledge they have of the subject. It's not so that those things are bad to discuss per se. It's just usually the wrong place and the wrong time. That's all.

Conversations are hard enough to follow on here as it is. If it were me there'd be a rule that every message has to be a certain amount of characters and direct relate to the topic. Otherwise the conversation just gets to hard to follow. I think you could maybe do it if your addressing a specific person and give a clear example of what they are saying or doing that is ignorant. I just don't think general personal grievances about participants is really helpful or adds anything though. Like "Hey Jeff G, I think your not considering blah blah blah. Here's why I think your wrong about it." I don't know, something like that maybe? At the of the day lot of this really doesn't matter and isn't worth the time or energy we put into it though. --Adamant1 (talk) 21:59, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

you.com

I have generated [Category:Images_generated_by_you.com]] and the [Category:You.com]] with the 2 pics. I have no idea, why you use [Category:Images generated by Stable Diffusion]] as next area. Are you sure, that you.com uses this? I dont know and rely on you. Gtx --Wortulo (talk) 17:16, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have noticed – thanks for creating the category and moving the two pics into it. It uses Stable Diffusion – see You.com#AI Tools which is why it's in that category (just like similar tools/platforms/websites). Prototyperspective (talk) 17:17, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I see. Thx again --Wortulo (talk) 17:33, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2023 voting is open!

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2023 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighteenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2023) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and top 5% of most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on 14 October 2024, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2022 Picture of the Year contest.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:02, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fantasy Art

I just completed and closed Commons:Categories for discussion/2022/02/Category:Fantasy Art - hopefully that'll help too. -- Deadstar (msg) 19:49, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

> no, people consuming or creating fantasy art showing

> fictional magic do not believe in supernatural magic

Probably true, they indeed do not believe in supernatural magic themselves, still they create or consume fiction where some characters do believe in it, or where such phenomena even occur. So the two topics indeed belong under "magic (supranatural)", and not under "magic (illusion)" AKA "scene magic". Possibly there are some works of fiction where "scene magic" appears, they belong under "scene magic" of course, but it is a very small minority. And "fantasy" per definition falls under "magic (supranatural)" irrespective of how deeply the creator believes in stuff ey writes. Taylor 49 (talk) 16:12, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As discussed and agreed in the linked CfD, they belong in neither. These are a third and arguably all of them belong into a category about magic broadly but I don't have an issue with it being turned into a disambiguation page. I never said it would belong under "magic (illusion)". Also supranatural is not the same as supernatural and the category is about the latter; fantasy art does not fit there because it is not about "supernatural belief" like I explained. Prototyperspective (talk) 16:31, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I created Category:Magic (fantasy) which may help? -- Deadstar (msg) 16:37, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It does help, still I believe that "fantasy" belongs under "supernatural", because in fantasy, stuff happens that is not possible in the real world. Taylor 49 (talk) 16:53, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I think that solves. As for the supernatural cat: one would have to first move the cat from "Magic (supernatural belief)" to "Magic (supernatural)" and that would need a new discussion. Prototyperspective (talk) 16:56, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Prototyperspective

File tagging File:Early succession of the Cinder Cones methane seep.jpg

Autopatrol given

COM:AN/U

Topless is not "Nude"

Categories like "Statistics until 2022" (etc)

Notification about possible deletion

File:Fictional book cover for scifi children's book "13th prophecy" by Valentine Ermatinger (post-apocalyptic AI art).jpg

About Category:Energy supply and the category structure of Category:Energy

gibberish

Warning

Unexplained removal of apparently relevant category

Notification about possible deletion

Category:Videos of films from 1990 in the public domain

Wikibook

COM:AN/U

Notification about possible deletion

Notification about possible deletion

Technical needs survey - Media dumps

Question

File:1973 Brazilian Grand Prix (Brasil Hoje n. 24).webm

N2O Budget

Categorisation of videos

Map categories by year

PDF books/files.

Revert

OWID removal

Fog

Diagrams

Reverting my edits

Notification about possible deletion

Notification about possible deletion

Edit

Category:Subhas Sarkar

Template:Allow overwriting

Sleeper cars (or not) on California Zephyr

Anotation

File:Klimaneutrale Produkte – kurzerklärt.webm edited

OverWrite request

Your FPC votes

COM:AN/U

Warning after AN/U discussion

Wake up please

Template:Motd and others

Maps of Europe

Welcome, Dear Filemover!

COM:AN/U

Question/comment

you.com

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2023 voting is open!

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2023 voting is open!

Fantasy Art

Navigation menu

Search