Commons:Village pump
|
This page is used for discussions of the operations, technical issues, and policies of Wikimedia Commons. Recent sections with no replies for 7 days and sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=--~~~~}} may be archived; for old discussions, see the archives; the latest archive is Commons:Village pump/Archive/2024/02. Please note:
Purposes which do not meet the scope of this page:
Search archives: |
| Legend |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| Manual settings |
| When exceptions occur, please check the setting first. |
 Village pump in Rzeszów, Poland [add] | |||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
 |
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 7 days. |
February 06[edit]
February 07[edit]
Analog gradients[edit]
I'm trying to come up with an appropriate category for the printing technique at File:Helix, v.1, no.3.5, May 4, 1967 - DPLA - c5473574c42f7978da5186b4964c5fdd (back and front).jpg. Category:Color gradient is specifically under Category:Color in computer graphics, and the parent categories of Category:Gradient fields suggest a precise calculation. This file shows the use of applying a continuous shading of ink to some sort of printing press (probably offset) in 1967. (I've also seen it done with silk screening, but they wouldn't have silk-screened several thousand copies of a low-budget newspaper.) It's definitely a printing technique we should have an example of, and I wouldn't be surprised if we have others. - Jmabel ! talk 23:37, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel: You could make a new cat, perhaps "Category:Analog color gradient". The progression BIVROYGBIVR is very interesting. The color does seem somewhat offset in some places. There are defects in coloring the snakes behind Medusa's head. Presumably, the Seattle Public Library would have more examples from Helix on file. Sadly, artist Gary Eagle is no longer with us so we can't ask him. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:30, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- We have the full run of the Helix, minus a few pages that had clear copyright notices on some content (if it was less than a page, I've just redacted the relevant part, e.g. File:Helix, v.1, no.6, Jun. 23, 1967 - DPLA - 961d05f5a48a886514e066f36ac49228 (page 5).jpg).
- As for SPL: they don't necessarily know more than I do on this, but I am in touch with Paul Dorpat (who, sadly, is sliding into dementia but often can remember some relevant facts, but he's the one who gave SPL a complete run of the Helix), Art Chantry, and several other relevant people. On Gary Eagle, there's a fair chance that anything you found about him comes from me writing it, but maybe not; turns out he has a public-facing Facebook page down to the end, so that helped me track things down. - Jmabel ! talk 20:39, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmabel This is called "rainbow roll". Counterfeit Purses (talk) 17:03, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- And the English Wikipedia has a related-looking article at en:Split-fount inking. Omphalographer (talk) 19:16, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Counterfeit Purses and Omphalographer: thanks so much! - Jmabel ! talk 20:39, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Looks like the Helix used this a lot. I've been able to place a bunch of examples in the newly created Category:Split-fount inking just from going through their 1967 issues. A few combine this in interesting ways with other printing techniques, or make other unusual, clever use of it:
- And the English Wikipedia has a related-looking article at en:Split-fount inking. Omphalographer (talk) 19:16, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Jmabel ! talk 21:28, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- I once worked for a printer who occasionally used the technique on a Multi duplicator, but I never heard a name for it. He had to pause and wash up every few hundred impressions or else the gradients would diffuse into a murky mixture. The effect would probably be easier to manage on a press proper, with a wider fountain and better inking control.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 07:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- By the way, this now makes sense for me of the name of the (definitive) book on the Seattle poster art of this period, Split Fountain Hieroglyphics. - Jmabel ! talk 19:35, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- I once worked for a printer who occasionally used the technique on a Multi duplicator, but I never heard a name for it. He had to pause and wash up every few hundred impressions or else the gradients would diffuse into a murky mixture. The effect would probably be easier to manage on a press proper, with a wider fountain and better inking control.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 07:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Jmabel ! talk 21:28, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- There is that 1970s psychedelic hippie font again. We tried last time to come up with a name for the font so we could add a category. Can anyone suggest a temporary name, so we can have a category? --RAN (talk) 00:20, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- It's not really a "font", it's a style of lettering. Even on just the letter "e" there are a crazy number of variants between artists, and often even within the work of a single artist. - Jmabel ! talk 07:06, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
February 08[edit]
Double Vienna tram category[edit]
Category:Vienna tram type A. There seems to be two types A. The modern version and the historic version. I wanted to add Category:Trams with entrance gates, but this only applies to the old type tram. Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:05, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- It’s better to split it, no doubt. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 11:40, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Moved modern trams to Category:Vienna tram type ULF A. Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:59, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Hi, This file was on English Wikipedia with "from the painting by artist Frank Wright (1868-1924)", but I can't find any artist with these dates. There is a Category:Frank Wright (painter) (1860-1923). Is he the same person? Yann (talk) 12:17, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- At least the artist's signature in File:Frank Wright - Waitakeres - Sarjeant Gallery.jpg (lower left) looks quite similar. --Rosenzweig τ 14:06, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
HotCat notice[edit]
The edit notice on MediaWiki talk:Gadget-HotCat.js includes:
Talk pages in this namespace are generally not watched by many users. If you add a discussion here and are not using {{Edit request}}, please announce it at an appropriate location, such as Commons:Village pump.
This seems odd, but nonetheless please see: MediaWiki talk:Gadget-HotCat.js#Feature request: Ignore square brackets. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:10, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
AI drawings of specific people or logos that are unable to be uploaded[edit]
Is there a policy on creating ai drawings of people for which there do not exist any public domain images to be hosted here? For a long time this File:Kim Jong-Un Photorealistic-Sketch.jpg image was used for Kim Jong Un, and I imagine a lot more articles about people could have images if we did this. But it also risks being misleading or being disliked by users. I imagine the same could be done for logos but that would also run into issues of being misleading. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 19:35, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Immanuelle: the issues here are almost exactly the same as for original, non-photographic art by our own contributors. For people, it's hard to have something that is both reasonably accurate and not derivative of copyrighted work. (For logos, I think it is literally impossible.) For people, I don't think there is any clear consensus here. I personally would not encourage adding any large number such works until we hash out more of a consensus, but I'm also fully aware that the only way we will hash out a consensus is through the uploading of at least a small number of such works. - Jmabel ! talk 20:54, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Batch of wrong locations[edit]
Checking the location of a picture in the Ephesus region I found it was at a wrong spot. Then I found that probably all pictures of a set by one photographer, imported from Flickr, had the same location. At https://wikimap.toolforge.org/?wp=false&cluster=false&zoom=16&lat=037.920367&lon=0027.287292 one can find 128 of them. I would hope someone can delete them (the location, not the pictures, they are rather good and informative) in one fell swoop. Dosseman (talk) 19:53, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Can someone help with this deletion request[edit]
I made this deletion page Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dead Stream Swamp MI.jpg and I pasted the requested code in, but it still says something went wrong with the subpage.
The template says "Here is the full syntax again, in case you misplaced it:" which sounds like it should be giving the syntax to make the page, but apparently it is not doing so. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 19:59, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- You erroneously inserted {{Delete}} template into the request page. This template should be inserted into the image page. Ruslik (talk) 20:19, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- In the future, I strongly recommend using the "Nominate for deletion" tool rather than doing this by hand. - Jmabel ! talk 20:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Signature help[edit]
Can anyone make out the signature on the bottom panel of File:Helix, v.5, no.9, Dec. 12, 1968 - DPLA - b4b749b194d7f45676e4a241a7cce198 (page 20).jpg? "M. [something] 1968". Might even be someone pretty well known, because the one at upper left is by Gilbert Shelton, signing only as "Gilbert". PD because of lack of notice. - Jmabel ! talk 20:32, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- M. Jonson I think. --Rosenzweig τ 17:07, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Also see File:Helix, v.5, no.2, Oct. 24, 1968 - DPLA - adb7324343eb8cf6bd8c018d9b7e6fe7 (page 23).jpg (lower left). --Rosenzweig τ 17:13, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Rosenzweig: Thanks. Could be "Jonson", "Torson", or "Turson", but at least that eliminates some other possibilities like "Foxson". - Jmabel ! talk 20:43, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Can these media be uploaded here if they have watermarks[edit]
These photos are some of the only ones I have found of this particular type of dance. They come from 1949 so they are not protected by copyright in China, but they also have a watermark on them. So are they not allowed to be uploaded due to the watermarks? https://web.archive.org/web/20221014133012/https://k.sina.com.cn/article_5898468734_15f937d7e01901taf5.html#/ Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 23:42, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Immanuelle: watermarks are discouraged but not forbidden. In this case they could easily be cropped out without affecting the main subject at all, so scarcely impair the images’ usability. But are the photos also copyright-free in the USA? I believe they would have to have been free in China by 1995.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 07:29, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- I think you could find better sources where these photographs have no watermarks like: https://foto-history.livejournal.com/11923093.html 源義信 (talk) 00:24, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
February 09[edit]
Wikimedia blog on flickypedia[edit]
https://diff.wikimedia.org/2024/02/09/introducing-flickypedia-a-better-way-to-get-flickr-images-on-wikimedia-commons/ —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:09, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- I think this is premature. There are a number of unresolved issues discussed at Commons talk:Flickypedia. The statement "This flow has a little more friction than some other Flickr uploading tools, which is by design." underplays one of those issues, in that titles and captions must be entered manually, and are not prefilled from values in Flickr. Furthermore, it is not possible to copy the title from the first image in a set to the rest, with sequential number suffixes; and not possible to use the tool to copy the caption from the first image in a set to the rest (and then modify it in each case, if required). It is not even possible to sift+click to select a range of images - each must be clicked on individually (I'm currently trying to import a set of 91 pictures, and my RSI is bad enough as it is, thanks!). Colleagues will be aware that this functionality is present in our own upload wizard; and that such bulk selection and bulk population of caption/ description is also possible in the existing Flckr2Commons tool. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:10, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- +1 to Andy. For the common use case of copying over your own content from Flickr, the inability to easily copy titles and descriptions feels like a deliberately built-in defect. Ditto for bringing in materials like the ones I routinely copy from the Seattle Municipal Archives. - Jmabel ! talk 20:48, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Query media by category?[edit]
Hello,
In short I want to see all the videos in a category sorted by length longest to shortest. I remember there was a tool similar to PetScan (but older looking) that allowed you to do this, but I can't remember what it was. The results were tabular and it wasn't quickstatements, any of the commons.wikimedia search interfaces. Does anyone know what it was called or if I can do this with another tool? Edit: I've asked on Request a Query Carlinmack (talk) 15:52, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Solved! https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Request_a_query#Commons_Query_-_sort_videos_by_longest_to_shortest Carlinmack (talk) 18:46, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
February 10[edit]
Photoshopped image (Singdrossel.jpg)[edit]
Just came across File:Singdrossel.jpg, which looks rather odd. It has no information about how it was created (other than file metadata). What to do about it? Tag it? Delete it? --Njardarlogar (talk) 11:03, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- There seems to be quite a lot of information in the meta-data and I don't see why we should doubt the authorship. The only thing I find suspicious is that it lists "Software used: Adobe Photoshop CS2 Windows", but this is not uncommon for photographers. My guess is that they simply blurred the background and make it black and white because the subject (the bird) was deemed more important than the background and they wanted to emphasise it, this is no different than the people who completely remove backgrounds from images. Personally, I would've preferred for them to have uploaded the original and then the edited file, but as this was uploaded in March 2006 I somehow doubt that user "@William~commonswiki: " still has the original photograph. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 18:34, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- I don't doubt the authorship, it is just that we cannot tell what modifications have been made to the picture; and it looks strange. If you look at the lower body of the bird, you can see that there are two traces where two grass blades could have continued (the bird's feathers take on a green hue here). Perhaps the simplest explanation is that the bird has been selectively brightened and some of the grass cloned out. Yet it also looks like the bird could have been superimposed on the background. --Njardarlogar (talk) 20:32, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Njardarlogar: I've added a {{Retouched picture}} tag since it obviously applies. I don't think there's any cause to delete the file, especially since it's in use on several other projects. --bjh21 (talk) 20:56, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
February 11[edit]
SVG animations and animateMotion[edit]
Hello! Recently I created Elliptic orbit.svg. If you look at the file history, you will notice that there are two versions of the file. I normally use Firefox, and so only after submitting the first version I noticed that the animation does not work in Chrome. Afterwards I did find a solution to make it work in Chrome (i.e. the current version), however my solution made it no longer work in Firefox. Does anyone know how to make the animation work in every browser? --Grufo (talk) 08:33, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Sensual Image[edit]
Hello, I want to ask, is it allowed to upload sensual images of humans? As uploaded by User:Srakatundra? Thanks. Kuramochi Akihiko (talk) 08:47, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- These all are obvious copyright violations from some porn sites and should be deleted. -- Herbert Ortner (talk) 09:41, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Done User warned, all files deleted. Please post on COM:ANU next time. Yann (talk) 09:55, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Yann: They then uploaded File:Its my scandal 14.jpg and tagged it {{Db-g7}}. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:02, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Done Blocked indef. as VOA. It can't be said we didn't give a chance. Yann (talk) 16:18, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Yann: They then uploaded File:Its my scandal 14.jpg and tagged it {{Db-g7}}. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:02, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you to all of you. Kuramochi Akihiko (talk) 16:52, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
February 12[edit]
FYI: 2024: announcing the year of the OpenStreetMap vector maps[edit]
https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2024/02/11/2024-announcing-the-year-of-the-openstreetmap-vector-maps/
Huge news. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:17, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Wrong wikidata link to category[edit]
d:Q78093890 is a painting and does not match the locality of Category:Castle Place, Belfast. Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:19, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- It looks like a false match with an automated edit on Wikidata a few years ago. Because the name of the painting on Wikidata is the same as the geographical category on Commons (and the image of the painting is in the same category) a bot linked the painting to the geographical category. I'll clean this up when I get access to a PC later if another editor doesn't do it first (I'm on mobile at the moment and the Wikidata interface doesn't like mobile editing). From Hill To Shore (talk) 10:32, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Smiley.toerist and From Hill To Shore: Done in these edits and creation of d:Q124512332. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:09, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Smiley.toerist and From Hill To Shore:
Announcing the results of the UCoC Coordinating Committee Charter ratification vote[edit]
- You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language
Dear all,
Thank you everyone for following the progress of the Universal Code of Conduct. I am writing to you today to announce the outcome of the ratification vote on the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee Charter. 1746 contributors voted in this ratification vote with 1249 voters supporting the Charter and 420 voters not. The ratification vote process allowed for voters to provide comments about the Charter.
A report of voting statistics and a summary of voter comments will be published on Meta-wiki in the coming weeks.
Please look forward to hearing about the next steps soon.
On behalf of the UCoC Project team,
RamzyM (WMF) 18:23, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Transparency gone after resizing[edit]
Why is the transparency gone when using a downsized transparent png file? Is this always the case and is there any way to avoid it? I noticed this with this file. Original size has transparency, the smaller one linked under "other resolutions" does not. Thanks! Emberwit (talk) 18:32, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- That’s unexpected, yes. I would just grab the original image, though, and resize it offline myself. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 23:29, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Which sizes have the issue? When i looked it seemed like the smaller sizes were appropriately transparent Bawolff (talk) 08:46, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Seems resolved by now indeed, not sure what the issue was exactly. Thanks for your replies!--Emberwit (talk) 11:36, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
Final reminder on the technical needs survey[edit]
One last reminder that the voting on the Technical needs survey runs until the 15th of February. GPSLeo (talk) 18:39, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
What's going on with Commons:Deletion requests/mobile tracking?[edit]
A number of automated deletion scripts automatically add deletions of files uploaded by the mobile app to a list on this page. This page used to be archived weekly by User:CommonsMaintenanceBot, but it stopped doing so in September 2021. As a result, the page is now gigantic; it fails to render properly due to template inclusion limits, and editing it (e.g. when running those deletion scripts) can be slow.
Does this page still need to be kept around? Given that no one else seems to have noticed the rendering issues, it probably isn't serving any useful purpose. Failing that, can we get something set up to archive it again?
Omphalographer (talk) 20:34, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Pinging @Rillke as bot operator. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:15, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
February 13[edit]
Max upload size has increased to 5 GiB[edit]
Just a heads up, the maximum upload size is now 5 GiB. This only applies to server side upload and chunked upload including UploadWizard and scripts like User:Rillke/bigChunkedUpload.js. Chunked upload has a reputation for being flaky for very large uploads, so your mileage may vary if trying to upload a very large file. It does not affect uploads done via Special:Upload which still has a max size of 100MB. Technically the change also applies to upload by url, but I suspect uploads of this size would hit a timeout when using that method. Happy uploading. Bawolff (talk) 08:44, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- And for context on the limits. 4GB was a MediaWiki technical limitation that is now solved. 5GB is a storage layer technical limitation which we cannot surpass without significant reworking of the storage layer, which isn't likely to happen any time soon. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 09:46, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Retrieving Image Author and Submission Date for Wiki Loves Monuments UK[edit]
Hello Wikimedia Commons Community!
Background[edit]
I'm currently working on a project to visualize data from the Wiki Loves Monuments UK contest. My aim is to display the contributions of participants, focusing on the image author and the submission date of each entry from the years 2013 to 2023.
I am reaching out to seek your advice on whether I am retrieving the image author and submission date correctly and if there's a more efficient or accurate method to get all the image submission items for the competition.
Current Method[edit]
I have been using the Wikimedia Commons API to retrieve the image author and submission date. For each image URL obtained from Wikidata, I query the Commons API to extract the artist (image author) and dateTimeOriginal (submission date). Here is a simplified version of my approach:
- Query Wikidata for image submissions tagged with specific heritage designations relevant to the Wiki Loves Monuments contest.
- For each image URL retrieved, perform a query to the Wikimedia Commons API to fetch metadata, including the image author and submission date.
- Filter the images submitted during September of each year from 2013 to 2023, aligning with the contest period.
Below is the code for fetching the image author and submission date for the image item.
import requests
from urllib.parse import unquote
from bs4 import BeautifulSoup
import html
def get_wikimedia_commons_data(file_url):
# Extracting the file name from the URL
file_name = unquote(file_url.split('/')[-1])
# Wikimedia Commons API endpoint for fetching file information
commons_api_url = "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/api.php"
params = {
"action": "query",
"titles": f"File:{file_name}",
"prop": "imageinfo",
"iiprop": "extmetadata",
"format": "json"
}
response = requests.get(commons_api_url, params=params)
if response.status_code == 200:
data = response.json()
page = next(iter(data["query"]["pages"].values()))
if "imageinfo" in page:
imageinfo = page["imageinfo"][0]["extmetadata"]
author_html = imageinfo.get("Artist", {}).get("value", "N/A")
date = imageinfo.get("DateTimeOriginal", {}).get("value", "N/A")
# Unescaping HTML entities
author_html = html.unescape(author_html)
# Using BeautifulSoup to parse HTML and extract text
soup = BeautifulSoup(author_html, 'html.parser')
author = soup.get_text()
return author, date
return "N/A", "N/A"
Challenges[edit]
While I have been able to retrieve a significant amount of data, I am concerned about the accuracy and completeness of the information, especially considering the large scale of submissions to the contest.
Questions[edit]
So my questions are:
- Is there a more direct or reliable method to query for image submissions specifically tied to the Wiki Loves Monuments UK contest?
- Are there any best practices or tools recommended by the community for handling such data retrieval efficiently?
I would greatly appreciate any insights, suggestions, or examples of how others have approached similar tasks. Your expertise could significantly enhance the accuracy and impact of this project.
Thank you for your time and assistance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by UnChampignon (talk • contribs) 10:49, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
--UnChampignon (talk) 10:49, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Duplicate media[edit]
Hi, not sure if there is a better place to note this but:
- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flesh_And_The_Devil_(1927).webm
- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flesh_and_the_Devil_(1926).webm
Are the same media, one being Media of the Day and one being featured on enwiki. It would be good to merge them and keep both attributes. Many thanks Carlinmack (talk) 12:25, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Carlinmack: I've added links between them in the "other versions" section. They're different crops: you can see that at 2:10 where the "1926" version has quite a lot more of the picture on the left. That means they're not duplicates in terms of COM:DUPE. The "1927" version is possibly redundant, but a full deletion request would be required to remove it. --bjh21 (talk) 20:46, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
February 14[edit]
Youtube removed CC attributions in Sept 2021 - how to handle verification[edit]
According to Youtube documentation https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2797468 the Creative Commons Licesnes were discontinued September 2021 and required updates to video descriptions to indicate copyright if I read this correctly. This seems to imply that inaction would mean CC released videos would no longer have a CC license without the video owner updating their video description. Thus in cases where screenshots for images of individuals like File:Peter_Lawson_Jones_2017-02-09.jpg uploaded before these licenses were revoked may be compliant, but it is unclear since any structured verification was removed. How are the legacy images sourced via Youtube being verified to the licenses applied when they were uploaded? Should these all be marked {{subst:Npd}} or otherwise categorized in some way for a review for evidence of the license being accurate? Or what other considerations and indications should be done with these? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolfgang8741 (talk • contribs) 15:13, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- You're misreading that page. Nothing has changed with regards to video licensing; videos can still be uploaded with a CC-BY license, and that license appears below the video description.
- What was removed was an attributions page which was used by the YouTube video editor to automatically provide attribution for videos created from excerpts of other CC videos. This removal has already taken place, and YouTube now recommends that video authors now provide attribution in the description of a video, rather than using this separate page. Omphalographer (talk) 20:58, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
IIIF Manifests and bulk imports[edit]
Do we have a tool that will import a set of images with an IIIF Manifest, for example the 275 PD broadsides at [1]? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:11, 14 February 2024 (UTC)