User talk:Ghouston

Welcome to the Commons, Ghouston!

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file and our FAQ 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. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy. 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. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}} a For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

Yann 19:07, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

User rights

I've just marked you as an autopatroller and rollbacker, based on your trustworthy contributions (so others do not need to patrol your edits). If for some reason you do not want the rollback tool, let me know. --99of9 (talk) 05:11, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks 99of9 Ghouston (talk) 05:12, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Takes the Australian War Memorial

Hi. You're invited to Wikipedia Takes the Australian War Memorial on 25 August at the Australian War Memorial. --LauraHale (talk) 00:25, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Cornell Courts

Please don't continue to remove Category:Cornell Courts from Category:Apartment buildings without at least offering a reason! cmadler (talk) 12:30, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Ha, I didn't realise I had done it more than once. I don't think it needs to go there: student housing is a separate category from apartment buildings, and it's already classified as a subcategory of Category:Student housing. Ghouston (talk) 12:37, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Student housing is an unrelated consideration, because it refers to who the residents are or how they are selected, while Category:Apartment buildings or Category:Dormitories refer to the way it's set up and used. You can have student apartments (as here) or apartments open to the public. You can have college/university dormitories, but you can also have dormitories in a monastery, in the military (maybe still called "barracks"), in prisons, and corporate dormitories (offering an inexpensive place for employees to live). cmadler (talk) 13:19, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it could certainly be done that way, but at the moment there's an unwritten rule that they go in Category:Student housing alone. Look through the category, very few are also classified with the building type. Category:Retirement homes are the same. There's also a problem that Student housing is currently classified under Category:Accommodation buildings instead of Category:Residential buildings as for general apartments. I'd suggest if you want to change the way it's done, to start a discussion on Category:Student housing, and that either way, the unwritten rule should be a written note on the category page. Ghouston (talk) 22:26, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I've opened such a discussion. Thanks, cmadler (talk) 17:13, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, but I'd use the "Nominate for discussion" function in the Toolbox in the left menu. I'm not sure that anyone takes any notice of category talk pages. Ghouston (talk) 23:44, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

That's mainly for category name changes and deletions. I'll ask for opinions at the Village Pump. cmadler (talk) 10:32, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

MediaWiki.org rename request

Hi, I was just wondering if you could confirm that you made this rename request on mediawikiwiki? It's signed by an IP so I wanted to make sure. --Krenair ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:00, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I did. Thanks for taking a look at it. Ghouston (talk) 00:13, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

★ Your image has been reviewed and promoted ★ Congratulations! Cormorant-20070224-034.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

Train interiors

Hi, regarding this catalot set:

• (diff | hist) . . File:455739 Interior.jpg‎; 03:30 . . (+20)‎ . . ‎Ghouston (talk | contribs | block)‎ (Cat-a-lot: Moving from Category:British Rail Class 455 to Category:Train interiors of British Rail Class 455s) [rollback]

I thought I should let you know that the preferred way to do categorisation of UK train images is via {{subst:ukt|class|last 3 digits of #, XXX if unknown|TOC|livery|line|Optional field, put an i in it to indicate interior}}. This way all relevant categories are added. -mattbuck (Talk) 02:45, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Interesting, thanks. ghouston (talk) 02:51, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

File:Newport County SuperDragon, Newport Bus Station - geograph.org.uk - 1971043.jpg

As per the Edinburgh cows case, here's a challenge for you - find all the images of these 60 dragons on Commons and then slay them. Ultra7 (talk) 16:14, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Ha, do I look like a dragon slayer. I didn't even finish the cows. ghouston (talk) 21:20, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Well I came across another one, and that led me to a wikipedia article about them, SuperDragon - apparently they were inspired by the cows! Searching on that term I found a couple more, so I've started the category Category:SuperDragons to dump them in. Ultra7 (talk) 12:30, 7 March 2013 (UTC) And as soon as I did that, I found Category:Newport SuperDragons! Ultra7 (talk) 12:35, 7 March 2013 (UTC) (which as it turns out, only contained the two I found via Search). I'm starting to hate dragons.... Ultra7 (talk) 12:38, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

There were elephants too, which I did exterminate, and Penguins which are still out there. Naturally there was a conversation on village pump where the uploader asked if the penguins were ok, and the answer given was that they were fine, with the cows as a precedent. Later I asked again on village pump and they agreed that temporary exhibitions were not fine. ghouston (talk) 21:26, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Tugboat Recovery

You recategorised the ship as being built in the Netherlands. That is not entirely wrong, as the finishing of the ship had been done in Hardinxveld. But the hull comes from Damen in Gdynia, Poland. See http://www.vlootschouw.nl/2/index.php?menu=details&schip_id=1525&scheepsnaam=Recovery,%20Resource,%20Reclaim%20en%20Redoubt&scheepstypenafkorting=Shoalbuster&bouwjaar=&scheepstypen_id=39&lengte=1 Best regards, --Stunteltje (talk) 20:58, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I see. It made no sense to me that a ship constructed in a Netherlands shipyard was made in Poland. I guess it counts as constructed in both the Netherlands and Poland? ghouston (talk) 22:19, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Netherlands is implied by Hardinxveld, so I put it back how you had it. ghouston (talk) 23:34, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

I think you have the best solution. The hull - the ship itself - had been built in Poland - but an important part, the rest, in Hardinxveld. Mentioning the way you did is perfect. In most cases I am too lazy for that and stick to just the country of building of the hull. --Stunteltje (talk) 05:59, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Ships by location

I think you misinterprete te categorisation scheme. Please realise that there are two different routes: "Ships of" and "Ships in". So if you categorise Category:Ships by country in Category:Ships by location, this is not correct. Please see Foroa. Have to go out, will further look to it tonight. --Stunteltje (talk) 07:04, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

No, I wasn't suggesting that. Just that Ships by country is a pointless grouping of four other categories. They could be put directly into Category:Ships. ghouston (talk) 07:08, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Oh, you are referring to my edit of Category:Ships by country, not my comment on Category_talk:Ships_by_location. I did remove Category:Ships by country from Category:Ships by location, because as you say, it's incorrect. But I reverted my edit because I wondered if Foroa had some good reason for adding it. ghouston (talk) 07:20, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Odisha

Next time please feel free to use "Move" link. Your skeleton template immediately removed various translations :-)--Praveen:talk 15:37, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I didn't move it, I created a new one. I thought I should leave the old template in place. I had no idea what the proper translations were for the new name, so I left them out. But if you know how those languages should be handled, thanks for sorting it out. ghouston (talk) 23:56, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I also thought that the default "Odisha" would be fine for quite a few languages, and if using the default then the translation can be omitted. For other languages, I suspect some of them are transliterations of "Orissa" to their own alphabet, and they would need to be re-transliterated for "Odisha". The Indian lanaguages may have names of their own which could be carried across without change. ghouston (talk) 00:21, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

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. 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!

Affected:

• File:Pont-de-Recouvrance-20060523-035.jpg

And also:

• File:Pont-de-Recouvrance-20060523-036.jpg
• File:Pont-de-Recouvrance-20060523-040.jpg
• File:Pont-de-Recouvrance-20060523-041.jpg
• File:Pont-de-Recouvrance-20060523-061.jpg
• File:Pont-de-Recouvrance-20060523-071.jpg

Yours sincerely, VIGNERON (talk) 09:33, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:ANZ_banks_in_Australia

Category:ANZ_banks_in_Australia 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!

Mattinbgn (talk) 22:16, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Category:Apple microprocessors

Ghouston, I saw that you created Category:Apple microprocessors. Nice work. However, images related to the Apple A4 can probably also be in Category:ARM Cortex-A, as the A4 uses the Cortex-A8 microarchitecture. Images related to the Apple A5 and A5X can also be in Category:ARM Cortex-A, as the A5 and A5X use the Cortex-A9. The later A6, A6X, and A7 use custom microarchitectures that aren't Cortex-A microarchitectures. —RP88 (talk) 04:35, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. --ghouston (talk) 04:38, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Ten

So you found out one small number category that was slightly less messy than the rest, and you just had to make is as messy as the rest. Good job! (And of course, it had to be an admin.) -- Tuválkin ✉ 11:55, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you think I messed something up, which change are you objecting to precisely? And who is this admin you are speaking of?. --ghouston (talk) 11:58, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Apologies for mistaking you for an admin. -- Tuválkin ✉ 12:17, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Freeways

I see you merged Category:Freeways into Category:Controlled-access highways. In the U.S., at least, "freeway" is more specific than "controlled-access highway." It is distinct from at least two other types of controlled-access highway mostly found in the eastern part of the country: a "turnpike," which charges tolls, and a "parkway," which is more deliberately landscaped. - Jmabel ! talk 09:33, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

I haven't changed any US categories: there are still Category:Freeways in the United States‎, Category:Divided highways in the United States and Category:Highways in the United States, among others. Freeways in the US presumably still count as Category:Controlled-access highways, so can still be a subcategory of that. --ghouston (talk) 11:09, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Bay horses

Thank you for your help in the everlasting effort of cleaning out Flickr tag dump cats. However, you'll notice that none of the files you moves from Bays to Bay horses feature bay horses. In the future, feel free to use the super category Horses. It may be chuck full every now and then but it is regularly maintained. --Pitke (talk) 12:44, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I have no idea what a bay horse is. I assumed that adding "horse" would get them closer to the right category. --ghouston (talk) 21:27, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Vehicles

I am quite mystified by the category which includes railway locomotives - it doesnt make sense and I see no precedent - are you sure that such a category link is correct sats (talk) 10:34, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

You mean Category:Vehicles in Tasmania I guess? It follows because Category:Locomotives is a subcategory of Category:Motor vehicles. --ghouston (talk) 12:10, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

That is a no-brainer. sats (talk) 14:46, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Schemes and Diagrams

Diagrams have an axis, schemes not. Who has decided, that all schemes are now diagrams?--Kopiersperre (talk) 14:56, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Schemes ≠ diagrams

Scheme (or Schematics)

Diagram (or Graph)

It was me, and the people in Category talk:Schemas. I'm pleased that somebody at least has a definition, I was completely mystified about how Schemes/Schemas and Diagrams had been distinguished. However I don't think your definition is a standard one, in English at least. Do you have any citations for it? I think what you are calling a "Diagram" is usually called a "Chart", "Graph" or "Plot". Somebody has even removed Category:Charts from Category:Diagrams, which I disagree with. However it seems that the whole area is quite murky. --ghouston (talk) 22:11, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

I think Schematics is a more familiar word in English. But it still seems to refer to several different kinds of diagrams, if the Wikipedia page is any guide. --ghouston (talk) 22:32, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Maybe I've made a mistake as a non-native speaker. I think, we should differ between pure graphs and schematics.--Kopiersperre (talk) 17:50, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, they are worth separating. However Category:Diagrams by type already identifies quite a few different types of diagrams. There are existing categories for Category:Charts and Category:Plots, but perhaps oddly nothing for Category:Graphs. These can be separated from other types of diagrams. There's also a category Category:Schematic diagrams and it seems from its talk page that there was a failed attempt to merge it with "Category:Schemes". I'm not sure how easy it is to separate "schematic diagrams" from other types of diagrams (is a schematic diagram anything that isn't a plot/chart/graph?). "Graph" is an interesting word but it has at least two relevant meanings: A mathematical concept which can be drawn, en:Graph (mathematics), and en:Graph of a function. It should probably be a disambiguation in Commons like it is in en: Wikipedia. --ghouston (talk) 23:35, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Beach of Skotina.jpg

File:Beach of Skotina.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 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!

Miniapolis 13:45, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Could you please explain...

I see you have changed how some images were classified. Specifically you moved a heck of a lot of images from Category:Taken with Samsung GT-S7560M to Category:Taken with Samsung GT-S7560. One of your edit summaries says: "(redirect|Taken with Samsung GT-S7560 - it's probably a minor variant)"

Did you look at Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Taken with Samsung GT-S7560M prior to your efforts?

@Allo002: created Category:Photos by Geo Swan using a Samsung GT-S7560M and Category:User:Geo Swan/Taken with Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS10. I think that was uncooperative and wasteful of other contributor's efforts.

I think the {{delete}} tag should have been removed when the DR discussion closed as "keep". Geo Swan (talk) 03:43, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

No, sorry, I didn't notice that discussion. I could reverse the change if necessary. However I'm not really sure about it at the moment, since in general the categories for identical models (or identical except in unimportant ways) are generally combined. E.g., see all the Category:Canon Digital IXUS categories, where each camera has three names apparently for purely marketing reasons. Mobile phones are similar in that there are minor variants for different networks. If they should all be split, then it would take quite a lot of effort and there would be a lot of extra categories. Then without a consistent policy, somebody could come along later and combine them all again. There's also the reverse problem, that sometimes different models have the same Exif, e.g., see Category:Photos taken with Olympus Camedia. Presumably these could be split in some cases, where the uploader knows whether their camera is marked "C-1Z" or "D-150Z", but I think it would be a lot of trouble for no benefit. --ghouston (talk) 04:00, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

The issue about firmware is technically correct, in that the cameras differ in some way. However consider File:Caminia estate.JPG and File:Niederwald Denkmal Rüdesheim.jpg or File:Stortorget lund.jpg and File:Ala Archa 3.JPG, should these be put in separate categories too? I'd say not, because for every change that's visible in Exif, like these, there are probably many other firmware changes that aren't visible in Exif. It may be necessary to accept that there's a certain amount of variation in each camera model. The are also differences in photos produced by a camera in JPG vs processed from RAW, should they also have separate categories? --ghouston (talk) 04:40, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

• In my opinion, by far the simplest approach is to use whatever name the firmware embeds in the image. It seems to me that any other approach would have to rely on contributors having expertise in cameras. Inevitably their "expert" opinions could differ. Using the name embed in the exif requires no expertise. This approach is unambiguous. This approach could be performed by a robot.

You wrote: "There's also the reverse problem, that sometimes different models have the same Exif, ... Presumably these could be split in some cases, where the uploader knows whether their camera is ... but I think it would be a lot of trouble for no benefit." That's odd. I've never heard of this phenomenon. As you said, the images could all be left at the name in the exif. Or Category:Photos taken with Olympus Camedia could be the parent directory for subdirectories Category:Photos taken with Olympus Camedia C-1Z marked as Olympus Camedia and Category:Photos taken with Olympus Camedia D-150Z marked as Olympus Camedia. Geo Swan (talk) 03:28, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

The models can be linked to Wikipedia and Wikidata entries, like w:Samsung Galaxy S4. That gives the categories Category:Samsung Galaxy S4 and Category:Taken with Samsung Galaxy S4. Within that, there are over 20 different variants of that model. I'm inclined to call "Samsung Galaxy S4" a model and "Samsung Galaxy S4 GT-I9500‎" a model variant (Wikidata has no entries for model variants at present). I'm not going to bother creating all 20+ subcategories, but I'll leave them there if created by somebody else and let the bot try to populate them. --ghouston (talk) 04:23, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Category:Scanned with HP ScanJet 4600

Hi Ghouston. Your bot added three of my uploads to this category. If such categories are necessary at all, could you at least have your bot run through Category:Images by Volker Prasuhn in one action? Like that, it would affect my watchlist only once, not constantly over a few weeks. --Leyo 18:30, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

I think it's better to try to find 100 files randomly for each category, than to pick them all from one user, since it will give more variety. Also I wouldn't be surprised if more people complain about their watchlist getting 100 hits at once than complain about a few files per week. --ghouston (talk) 04:42, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Concerning the category mentioned above, (as the uploader) I am usually the only one who has these files on the watchlist. --Leyo 22:50, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps for this category, I was thinking of the general case. I'll see if I can fill this HP ScanJet 4600 category for you though. --ghouston (talk) 00:54, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Your bot ...

doesn't work correct. He set again wrong categories, now at File:Leuna, Kreypau -- um 1980 -- 4.jpg. He has set "Scanned with MS Scanner". "MS Scanner" is set be the scan software and wrong. The correct category "Scanned with Reflecta DigitDia 5000" was already set. Your bot should not set a second category of the same style. And please check why "MS Scanner" was set. It is a special name from Microsoft and does not depend to the scanner.--XRay ^talk 05:26, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll get rid of the "MS Scanner" category. The bot doesn't deal with software. --ghouston (talk) 05:29, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Your content in Netherlands Institute for Sound and Vision museum exhibition

Good afternoon,

My name is Lotte Baltussen, and I work at the Netherlands Institute for Sound and Vision. We are the archive of Dutch public broadcasters and hold many other types of audiovisual heritage as well. We have recently opened our new exhibition "3FM Presents: Your Serious Radio", which looks back at the last 50 years of pop music on the radio.

One of the interactives of our exhibition is a videomapping installation that depicts a teen room. When visitors enter the exhibition, they provide information that builds up their profile: their year of birth, gender and the favourite radio show, song, musical genre from their teens. This information is used to recreate their teen room; a sparse white space with 25 different elements such as a white bed, desk, and couch that are projected upon when a visitor activates his or her profile. We've divided the teen room into 10 time periods: 1965-1969, 1970-1974 and so forth.

In creating the videomapping, we have used countless free to use images, textures and patterns, among which is your upload of a Philips stereo. We'd like to thank you very much for making your content available and thus making it possible us to use it. You can find a complete overview of the content used here, a blog post about the whole process here and pictures of the videomapping here, so you can see your content in action.

Thanks again!

All best,

Lottebelice (talk) 11:24, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

You have been randomly selected to take a very short survey by the Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team!

https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_3wl7zNEQdp6z9Vb

This survey is intended to gauge community satisfaction with the technical support provided by the Wikimedia Foundation to Wikipedia, especially focusing on the needs of the core community. To learn more about this survey, please visit Research:Tech support satisfaction poll.

To opt-out of further notices concerning this survey, please remove your username from the subscription list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:51, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Category:Taken with Fujifilm FinePix JZ200

Hi Ghouston. The automatic Metadata of the camera reads FinePix JZ200/JZ210. Shouldn't we move your category to "Category:Taken with Fujifilm FinePix JZ200/JZ210" then? Although my cameria is a JZ200 I assume that a JZ210 would generate the same Metadata... Regards, --Gereon K. (talk) 23:21, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

OK, I renamed it Category:Taken with Fujifilm FinePix JZ200 / JZ210. --ghouston (talk) 03:50, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

File:Anne Nicol Gaylor.jpg

Hi Ghouston, I'm not sure if I'm leaving this in the correct place or not. Still pretty new here. The license for this photo belongs to the Freedom From Religion Foundation, who provided it to the NYT for the obit. Anne Gaylor founded FFRF, Paul Gaylor was her husband. NYT captioned the photo incorrectly, Paul took the photo, but it belongs to FFRF. I uploaded this photo at the request of FFRF creating an account, AndrewFFRF, belonging to FFRF to upload other files for use in articles. I have not edited any content of articles, but am simply providing files. Not only am I an employee of FFRF, but an attorney for FFRF. There is no copyright issue here.

Thanks, it looks like you found the best place: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Anne Nicol Gaylor.jpg. --ghouston (talk) 00:00, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Copies

What makes you think those old photos and the newspaper article were? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdogmad (talk • contribs) 19:02, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

--Jdogmad (talk) 19:03, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

About this: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Jdogmad? A photo or scan of an old document is a copy, and may violate any copyrights it may have. --ghouston (talk) 23:29, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

If you have any details about the original authors and publication, it may be possible to show that they are public domain. --ghouston (talk) 23:31, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Lucio Fontana

Sono un po' confuso perche' non capisco questo: se mi viene data, dal museo, la possibilità di fotografare un' opera, perché la mia foto non posso condividerla su wikipedia? non sto guadagnando nulla e non e' a scopo di lucro. Non capisco anche questo. La foto non e' mia? Grazie attendo risposta. Sono in buona fede e se non sarà possibile salvare le foto provvederò a cancellarle al più presto. --Pensierarte (talk) 13:28, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

It's possible to take photos of copyrighted works of art for personal study (the law may permit it, or the copyright holder won't know about it and can't take action). However Commons requires a proper license from the artist. --ghouston (talk) 23:15, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Ghouston!

Happy New Year!

Ghouston, a new year is like a blank book, the pen is in your hands. It is your chance to write a beautiful story for yourself! Happy New Year 2017. Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 18:18, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Minor barnstar
	Thank you very much for adding all the additional and/or missing categories to my latest car-photo-upload-binge! Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 05:46, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Nino Caruso.jpg

Hello Ghouston, I'm writing you about the file Nino Caruso.jpg The picture reported represent my father that passed away last january 19, He was a well known ceramist sculptor and i am trying to publish a page on the italian wikipedia community. Regarding the picture, was made by a friend: Niccolò Crisafi . Niccolò gave the picture to my father as a gift and was published on different art catalogues and books. My father own the picture and as he passed away the picture belong to me and my brother. I hope that this can help, differently please help me how to solve it. Regards

Stefano Caruso

Hi @Stefano:. Please put your explanation at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nino Caruso.jpg. The request will be reviewed by an administrator in a week or so. The problem with this kind of photo is that Commons only accepts files that can be used freely by anybody. Usually the copyright holder needs to release it with a suitable license, e.g., from Creative Commons. If the photograph was made by Niccolò Crisafi, then that's probably the copyright holder who would need to provide a license. Simply owning a copy of the photo isn't enough. --ghouston (talk) 01:32, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Administrator?

Any interest? I'm looking for suckers experienced candidates for RFA. lNeverCry 20:18, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, but the administrative tasks don't really appeal to me. Somebody made me a file mover a while ago and I haven't even used that. --ghouston (talk) 23:55, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

That's OK. I go by the law of averages: If I pester enough people I'll get an RFA going sooner or later... lNeverCry 00:31, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Ha Ha - I just noticed that I'm the one who made you a filemover when I was still an admin. lNeverCry 00:33, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Oh I remember, I made a rename request on something I'd uploaded with the wrong name. Hopefully I'll find something else to rename some day. --ghouston (talk) 00:37, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it. Have a good one. lNeverCry 00:57, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Add category

Hi Ghouston can you add category Taken with Sony Xperia V LT25i with your bot to all my pictures [1] located here and others? Greetings! --Kolega2357 (talk) 00:18, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

The bot would put them in Category:Taken with Sony Xperia V, but normally would ignore them because the category already has over 100 files. However, I suppose I can run it on all your uploads if you wish. --ghouston (talk) 00:27, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

That's right. I want from you to start bot. Thanks in advance. :) --Kolega2357 (talk) 00:32, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

OK, it's done. --ghouston (talk) 00:35, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much. :) --Kolega2357 (talk) 00:36, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Add category (2)

Hi there. Would it be possible to let your bot add Category:Taken with DJI FC300X to the uploads by Dronepicr, provided that a) it results from EXIF data (which applies for ~300 photos of overall ~1,500 uploads by this user), and b) the category isn't there already (which applies for ~200 out of these 300 photos). It's unfortunately rather tricky with VFC, Cat-a-lot etc., so that I cannot manage to complete it. Thanks. --A.Savin 15:04, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

And here too: Special:Contributions/Wuestenigel, should be at least ~100 photos with FC300X but without corresponding category. Thanks. --A.Savin 15:22, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

If I run it on these user's uploads, it will process all their files with Exif data, not only DJI FC300X. It won't add categories that are already present. They have maybe 6500 uploads in total, I suppose it can be done. --ghouston (talk) 01:17, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

I did all of Dronepicr's uploads, and the DJI FC300X uploads from Wuestenigel (just a small hack needed). --ghouston (talk) 02:05, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. --A.Savin 09:24, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Invalid equipment in Exit?

Hi, you added an "invalid equipment in Exif" tag to an image I uploaded:https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CARMA_MASER_timeStandard_1437.jpg

It looks like the problem is in the camera model field of the EXIF data. The field should contain: Canon PowerShot SX1 IS

The EXIF data was wrong in the image I uploaded. I didn't do it intentionally and I am surprised that it could even be done at all without editing the file directly, I use Paintshop Pro mostly and that doesn't provide a way to edit that field. Anyway, please do what you like with regard to this. If you would like I could upload a new image with that field corrected.

-Dave

Hi Dave, I suppose it was a bug in software that saved the file at some stage. Sometimes the metadata is bad because Mediawiki didn't import it correctly, but in this case it's bad in the original file. Some of the resolution fields also have strange values. I'm not sure that it's worth bothering to fix it, the "invalid equipment in Exif" is just a tracking category for files with this kind of damage. --ghouston (talk) 10:17, 28 June 2017 (UTC)