User talk:Δ/20110201

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Signpost: 31 January 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:20, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Fair use images as icons

Many times in reviewing your High use NFCC report, I've found files that are being used as icons. Example; see the 1961 VFL Grand Final table here. These uses aren't legitimate, as they fail WP:NFCC as decorative fair use of course. I also believe I've never found a case where there was a specific rationale for one of these uses. Sometimes there are blanket rationales, attempting to cover lots of uses in a single article with one rationale, but never individual rationales for each of these (non-compliant) uses. I understand why people are doing it; lots of web sites out there reporting on sporting events use logos in this way. It is fair use, but it is not acceptable here.

Some I'm wondering, is it possible to develop a tool that can investigate a non-free image's use, and see if there is a corresponding size flag associated with it, i.e. [[File:foo.png|40px]] and evaluate the size parameter to see if it is <= to a given size, say 60px?

I think there's quite a number of these sorts of uses across the project, and it would be nice to have a tool to identify such non-compliant uses. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:10, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

WebCiteBOT Replacement Task Force

I have recently started a WebCiteBOT Replacement Task Force to help coordinate an effort to get a new WebCiteBOT to combat WP:LINKROT. Last November 2010, you had gotten an initial bot running for this task. I would like to cordially invite you to give your input on the software part of this project as well as other parts, if you are interested. Thanks. - Hydroxonium (H3O+) 15:25, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I have a simi-working script the only issue is I trigger a rate limit by webcite whenever I run in en-mass. ΔT The only constant 16:01, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
That's great you have something running. Thanks. The task force page is setup here. There's also a discussion on the talk page here about the software part of this task. Thanks very much. - Hydroxonium (H3O+) 16:38, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Ilomilo

As regards [1], the image now has a fair use rationale. For some reason, the deletable image caption isn't displaying on the page. In any case, I believe the template needs removed, yes? –xenotalk 15:52, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Ive removed it, Ive been focused on dating the templates (I have not been adding them) to assist in removing stale uses like this. Once I get the remainder of the uses deleted/dated maintenance on them should be trivial, and we will not have them linger on pages for years. ΔT The only constant 15:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. –xenotalk 15:58, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
  • In Situ Media also not displaying caption warning about deletion. –xenotalk 15:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
    • I'm guessing the problem with these not displaying has to do with the way the infobox templates formats the images. Do you mind looking into it? –xenotalk 15:58, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
      • I'm a programmer and templates give me nightmares, that spaghetti code looks like monkeys sitting at a typewriter. ΔT The only constant 15:59, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
        • FYI. Cheers, –xenotalk 16:03, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Cleanup tweak suggestion

In this edit, you replaced a one deletable caption with another one. However, neither one showed up, because without the "|thumb" formatting, the caption was invisible. Do you want to add that as part of your cleanup routine, or would that mess up more than it fixed? (Note: this is different than the questions above, as an infobox isn't involved.)--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:08, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

The odds are it would break something a lot of the time. You might want to raise the issue with the person who added the caption in the first place, I did not replace anything, all I did was date the template so that it would be sorted into the proper category. ΔT The only constant 16:14, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Wouldn't it make sense to check if the "deletable image caption" is still relevant, and if not, delete the caption (rather than dating it)? In Sarek's example, as well as Ilomilo, the FURs had already been added. [2] too. –xenotalk 16:31, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
You've resumed editing and are repeating the same types of edits (e.g. [3] [4] [5]) without answering the question I posed. You have a responsibility to verify that your edits "have not created any problems that a careful editor would be expected to detect." Checking that the image now has a FUR and then simply removing the undated caption, rather than dating it (thus creating work for others by putting them into the maintenance category) seems to fall under that responsibility. –xenotalk 19:34, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Dating an image caption creates no harm to the encyclopedia, and in fact helps the process. What he is doing does not generate a problem. Further, requiring that he view the status of the image in order to be allowed to date stamp the tag is improper. We have bots that date stamp things all the time, and we don't block them for date stamping something that's been fixed. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:45, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
  • I suppose you're technically correct, in that he's just moving an article from one erroneous category to another. So, while he's not creating a problem he is re-categorizing it: essentially committing a fairly useless edit that someone else (or he, as intimated below) will have to come along and fix later. –xenotalk 19:53, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Actually doing it the way Im doing is fairly simple, Im the only one working on this issue, (Im the one that got both the deletable image caption and ffdc to sort by date). I also am probably the only one who cleared the backlog from December and will probably be the only one to clear the January and future queues. Admins/user almost never check for captions when addressing deletion tags. Hell we have a backlog of 15k missing deleted images. As Hammersoft stated dating a tag is not causing any problems, once I get the backlog of old uses I will actually be adding these to AWB's genfix/auto date functionality. Yes this may introduce a second step, but once the process is fully implemented it will make things easier. ΔT The only constant 19:51, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
If you plan to come back to it, I suppose that's fine; I just thought that you might be able to program the script you're using to detect that the problem had been addressed and fix it on the first pass. –xenotalk 19:53, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
If only it was that simple, parsing wiki text is a bitch, and trying to find which image is associated with which caption is just a headache, there are just too many ways to invoke a file/caption that are not standardized. Right now Im just focusing on clearing the backlog of un-dated tags. ΔT The only constant 19:56, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Ok. I still have reservations about the "two-pass" system - but since you're the one doing the grunt work, I'll leave you to it. –xenotalk 19:58, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
if there is a valid date in any of the parameter that is used, (tag removed if its stale), otherwise I just date it. Ill then run back on the 8 or there about, to clean up the previous month. Doing it like that make involve a second step, but it ensures clarity, and may even prod some users who missed the first insertion to fix the problem. ΔT The only constant 20:01, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Webcite archival tool

I found your Webcite archival tool at tools:~betacommand/webcite.html and submitted a couple articles. I'm confused about how this tool works. Does it feed pages to a bot or does it edit articles? Thanks for the help. - Hydroxonium (H3O+) 09:22, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

It adds it to a queue that I review and then place at the top of my work queue for manual usage and review with my script. ΔT The only constant 16:36, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. The ones I added can be removed from your queue as they were just a test. - Hydroxonium (H3O+) 16:55, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of picture on Amb State Page

Hi, I had uploaded a picture on Amb State page. It has been proposed for deletion. It's my own work, belongs to me and I have mentioned in its description. Why has it been proposed for deletion and how can I dispute its deletion. You have recently added a date for deletion, 7th Feb 2011. Kindly remove the deletion tag and date because its copy rights are not disputed, I added this historically significant picture from my own family album. ThanksWikitanoli (talk) 16:06, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Can you please specific which image you are referring to? ΔT The only constant 16:36, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Delta Bot not picking up an SPI

Hi Delta,

I filed an SPI this morning using twinkle, but DeltaBot hasn't listed it on the appropriate SPI subpage despite it being open for two hours. If I'm not mistaken, the subpages get updated usually about every 15 minutes, so I'm a bit concerned. Is the bot down or did I mess up the report? Sailsbystars (talk) 15:58, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

That would be because someone decided to get creative [6] and in doing so caused a malfunction in the bot. ΔT The only constant 16:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Amb State Picture speedy deletion

Hi Triangle, I wrote to you about a speedy deletion template you had put up on a picture on Amb State page; and discussed it here but havent recieved any reply from you and the section I had edited in your talk page is also missing. The picture has no copy rights issues. Kindly remove the tag.cheers Wikitanoli (talk) 21:13, 6 February 2011 (UTC)115.186.169.98 (talk) 21:12, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1923_Darband,_PM_Amb_state_with_governer_of_Mecca_and_gov._of_Madinah.jpg This is the image im talking about. Wikitanoli (talk) 15:24, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

I never tagged the image for deletion: [7] I just dated an existing caption template on the page. Since the image is no longer up for deletion I removed the caption. ΔT The only constant 15:28, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, cheers Wikitanoli (talk) 00:16, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 February 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:55, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Reward for working WebCiteBot is $535.00

I just saw that Gunther Eysenbach of WebCitation.org raised the reward for a working WevCiteBot to $535.00. Please refer to the bounty board and the related discussion. You can find Gunther's email address here. Best regards. - Hydroxonium (H3O+) 20:48, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Webcite

Thanks for your work on this.   Will Beback  talk  01:09, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Unprotected main page images idea

Could you do an email list for this script of yours that picks up unprotected images on the main page? I'm thinking of soliciting admins that have quick email notification to submit their email addresses so that they can be on call to fix this when it comes up. Pinging the admin IRC channel seems another logical step, but I assume you've already thought of that.--Chaser (talk) 22:59, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

it already pings in #wikipedia-en-alerts , creating a mass email list is very doable, just not sure how I would keep track of whats been emailed about already, and it checks every 5 minutes. ΔT The only constant 01:48, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Kosal state movement

Thanks for your contribution to Kosal state movement. Skarmee (talk) 12:27, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 February 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:51, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Great work. Thanks

Golden wikipedia featured star.svg Valued Contributor Award Smiley.svg
You have been identified as a valued contributor and your efforts are appreciated. We are honored to present you with the Valued Contributor Award and we thank you for donating your time, expertise and effort to Wikipedia. Keep up the good work. Thanks. (more details)

I just wanted to say thank you very much for all your work on the WebCite stuff. The dead link thing has been a problem on Wikipedia for years, and it looks like you got it solved. So I humbly bow to your superior programming skills. Thanks very much. - Hydroxonium (H3O+) 22:28, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

WebCite

Hi,

you said here that you are in contact with webcitation.org. How is that progressing? I ask this since I think using WebCite would be the best solution for Wikipedias problems with WP:LINKROT. Additionally, we already have a bot for that. I would be interested to hear about the progress with that. Regards. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 23:59, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm just waiting on a response to my email, I already spoke with them on the phone, the only thing preventing full scale operations is their rate limit on any one single IP. ΔT The only constant 00:09, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Battle of Mughar Ridge

Hi, Why have you added the automatic references 1, 2 and 3? From an editor's point of view, as they mask the names of the references they could make it hard for anyone wishing to check these references. Could you please change them back? :) --Rskp (talk) 04:18, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Actually the only ref that had a pre-existing name was #2, and the reason it was renamed was because it did not have the exact same content as the other references with with same name (it was very minor and Ive fixed that). the other two refs where being repeated throughout the article without using the same named reference, and where instead just repeating the same text. So even though they had the same content they would not be linked together. I just named each group and used that to standardize the references. ΔT The only constant 04:32, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Δbot

Δbot is not working on SPI. Help? --Perseus8235 21:00, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

that would because someone screwed up [8], once that is fixed the bot will catch back up. ΔT The only constant 22:49, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Fair use in images

Refering to my previous message to you which is now neatly tucked away here, I note that I never received a reply from you. If you could comment it would be much appreciated. Hugahoody (talk) 16:53, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

To write a good non-free rationale for a file that one is not familiar with takes about 30+minutes, note one could copy/paste a crappy rationale quicker, but things should be done correctly. However someone familiar with subject/use of the file can write a similarly good rationale in about 5 minutes. Second, the requirement for files to meet the inclusion criteria rests with those who upload/use said non-free material. ΔT The only constant 17:13, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
PS what Hammersoft said is actually a summary of the very complex issue of the usage of non-free content. ΔT The only constant 17:15, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. With regard to copying rationales, I was refering to where an image was used for the same purpose across several articles. The logo for Grupo Santander being an example. The rationales are now the same, differing only in the name of the article they cover. Plus, they aren't crappy. Everyone's a winner. Hugahoody (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Actually, the usages on Banco Santander Brasil and Santander UK could be disputed. I really dont feel like getting into that argument right now, but other than the primary subject the logos are decorative. ΔT The only constant 18:44, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Nobody said anything about an argument. Hugahoody (talk) 18:47, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 February 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 17:19, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Sandbox 4

Would you regenerate the list in User:Δ/Sandbox 4? I think I got them all, but want to make sure that the ones I left alone really need those helium.com links. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:36, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done ΔT The only constant 00:42, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

False positive for Betacommandbot3

Hi. On #wikipedia-bag today on Freenode, Betacommandbot3 gave us:

BetacommandBot3: Template:Botany edited by User:Shakiestone; ; http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=416002695&oldid=405775507

Seems like a false positive. - Richard Cavell (talk) 08:02, 26 February 2011 (UTC)