User talk:Auntof6

Archives 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Auntof6!

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.

Rd232 (talk) 14:29, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Tool problem? Template forms should be aligned

Hello Auntof6, I've just looked at this problem. I'm not sure, why there is that problem, but Jmabel (thanks to you) put them on the page by a tool named MediaWiki:CommonsDelinker.js which seems to know the parameter "reason" (on the tool page). Nevertheless, after putting the requests on that page, there were no such parameters anymore in the requests and the page showed errors because of missing reasons. As you see here, there were reasons with that parameter "reason" in the requests on the request page. What kind of problem has that tool with that parameter? And can you add the requests with the reasons on the page for the bot?

Why does the tool know the parameter "reason", but doesn’t transfer it to the target page? Has that parameter to be before the "user" parameter or what is the problem here? Other requests also use the parameter "3" instead of "reason" parameter which is shown with the same form on User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands/Category moves by Template:Editnotices/Page/User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands/Category moves. But as you can see on the page Category:12st Parkovy pereulok which shows the form of the request to transfer to the request page, there is always a "reason" parameter, not a parameter "3", and the parameter is shown to be always at the end of the requests on the category pages. Template:Move puts that form exactly this way on the category pages. In the editnotice, there is no parameter "reason", but the parameter "3", and it is before the "user" parameter on that page. Maybe the tool has a problem with the different request forms shown on different pages (by different templates) or with the different parameter names. It would be better to show only one form for those requests and always name the parameter "reason" with "reason" and not with "3", because Template:Move places the parameter on place 4 instead of 3 and the tool doesn’t show a parameter "3". Something has to be repaired here, maybe the tool, maybe one template, maybe both. The edit notice should be aligned with the move template to show the same form for the requests anyway. But I don’t know, if this repairs the tool problem. Greetings —176.1.18.204 07:40, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, IP user. I am aware of this issue because it happened to me when I tried to use the tool to transfer requests. Now when I transfer requests, I cut and paste them instead of using the tool. I don't know why the tool drops the reason parameter.

I just put those 4 requests back, copying the reasons from the category pages. The moves should start within an hour. -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:54, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, thanks, now everything worked fine, also on your page here, lol. Sorry to have put your talk page into that category. But funny to see the bot doing its work here. :-) I’d better have taken a permanent link here for the template look on that page.

Seems to be a bit tricky with the bot and the tool. I think, cut and paste is easier to do, an advantage is also that more than one can be moved at the same time (besides that tool issue). Anyone should care about the tool. The issue is known since at least 2020 already.

Do you think that the two templates should better be aligned (move template and editnotice)? Or doesn’t that matter? I don’t know, if that has anything to do with the tool or if that’s a problem otherwise with the different forms for the requests and the different names for parameter "reason" (although "3" is no name), shouldn’t that better have the same name in the requests?

By the way, I noticed that Template:Number cat/data and also Template:Number cat/layout are even more often transcluded than Template:Number cat (all over 57400 times), but only the latter is semi-protected since 2021 because of "widely used template". I can (potencially) edit those with effect on over 57000 pages, or any IP user could potencially vandalize 57000 pages at once. They should also better be semi-protected, shouldn't they? This is not the case for the documentation page which isn’t used by the template. Maybe more subpages of other templates are also transcluded that often, but unprotected. Normally, this can be seen directly only, when editing with IP.

It would be better, if Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections would be unprotected, but it’s protected since over 3 years now, so no unprotection or protection requests can be made anymore there since years, neither on the talk page, also protected, not good. That should be changed, but it’s not even possible anymore to discuss the issue there. —176.1.18.204 13:09, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

I am really not the best person to ask. I just use the tool. I don't know its inner workings.

As for the number cat subtemplates, you can ask for protection on the Blocks and protections noticeboard. I agree that protection would be good on those, but I prefer to have requests made on the pages designated for that, when such pages exist. That way there's a better record of the requests that if it's handled on an individual admin's talk page. :) -- Auntof6 (talk) 17:09, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

So that tool doesn't work correctly? I had no idea; I'll avoid using it in the future, but it probably should be turned off if it doesn't do what it's supposed to. I was just trying to clear some backlog. - Jmabel ! talk 17:29, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jmabel: A laudable goal, but yeah, it drops the reason when it adds the request to the main page. I haven't had time to try to dig into how it works and/or who supports it, so I've just been cutting and pasting. -- Auntof6 (talk) 17:32, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

That would be a good idea, to turn the tool off, if it doesn’t work correctly. But I don’t know, if it also has other functions than only this one. Anyway, thanks for your approach with the backlog there, Jmabel. On the talk page of the script Steinsplitter and Krinkle have been pinged, and I wrote that the problem with that is still existing. —176.1.17.42 17:52, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

Auntof6, I would have asked on the blocks and protections noticeboard, but as I wrote above, the noticeboard and also its talk page are already protected since 2 or 3 years now. There are no requests possible anymore since years by IP or new users, if it may be for protection or unprotection of any pages. The page has lost its function since years which is not good for the whole wiki. Therefore I started a request on the talk page of the user who protected the talk page, because the talk page of the admin who protected the function page, also is protected since years: really protection circles there. Link to that discussion FYI.

Maybe the function page can be split into 2 pages, so that the (un)protection function will work again for all IP and new users on a new page which then won’t be protected for such long periods. That discussion should then be continued elsewhere. First, my request there was just about unprotection of those long protected function pages. But until then, I can’t request anything on that function page, sorry to say. Long protections of such main function pages really are a problem for the wiki. —176.1.17.42 17:52, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

After reopening of the blocks and protections function page, I requested the protection of those two template subpages which are used that much (over 57.000 transclusions each). But nobody answered on it, and it only has been archieved after 5 days without any response. Now it’s there: Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections/Archive 42 #Template subpages. I don’t understand that. The pages are transcluded more often than the main template which is protected. What is the limit for transclusions, when they get protection? I didn’t find one. And why is the main template protected since many years, but the subpages don’t get protection? That’s not logical at all. Greetings —176.1.9.217 10:21, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Commons:Categories for discussion/2021/10/Category:Horseshoe Bay (Isle of Wight)

Thanks, I'd forgotten about this. But when you say "be sure to transclude the CFD", how do I do that? Or, rather, what did I do wrong last time? I imagine that I tried to follow the instructions. ITookSomePhotos (talk) 19:16, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

@ITookSomePhotos: I'm moving your question here, since closed CFDs aren't supposed to be edited.

When I say "transclude the page," I mean to add it to the discussion page for CFDs started in the same month. In this case, that page would be Commons:Categories for discussion/2021/10. If you edit that page (don't save anything, just edit it to see what's in it), you'll see that the individual requests are listed with curly brackets ({{ }}) instead of straight brackets ([[ ]]). That makes them be transcluded just like templates are transcluded, resulting in the request being listed on the page.

The other thing I did was add a level-3 heading.

There should be a link labeled "Nominate category for discussion" along the left side of the page when viewing a category. If you use that to create discussions, the transclusion and heading should be taken care of for you, as well as notifying the user who created the category.

If that doesn't answer your question, or if you have any other questions, feel free to ask. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:21, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Question about Template:PD-Canada-stamp

Hi. I noticed you edited "Template:PD-Canada-stamp" to add the main category for stamps of Canada. IMO a template like that shouldn't be forcing a top level category like that. So I removed that part from the template. But now it's causing an error with the files it's being used with. Do you happen to know how to fix it without adding the category back? --Adamant1 (talk) 12:00, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

@Adamant1: So that I don't have to look through pages to find the error you're talking about, could you give me an example? A link to a page with the error would be helpful, as well what the error is and where I can find it on the page. Yes, I might be able to figure that out myself, but it's more efficient if you give me the detail since you already know it. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 12:28, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

The errors below the license under the summary. File:1928 FIRST FLIGHT ALBANY NY TO MONTREAL PQ CANADA FAM 1 COVER back.jpg has it. "This documentation is transcluded from File..." and the files are red links. I don't think there was even a summary section like that to begin with before I edited the template but the links shouldn't be red regardless. --Adamant1 (talk) 12:35, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

@Adamant1: Thanks for the additional info. It looks like you removed a noinclude tag that should have stayed. I added it back. Do things look OK now? -- Auntof6 (talk) 12:46, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

It looks like it's fine now. Thanks for fixing it. --Adamant1 (talk) 22:53, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Category:Roman art at the collection of egyptian antiquities in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston

Hello Auntof6, thanks again for your big help with categories and renamings. I’ve been wondering about this misspelled, empty category. Normally, it should be Category:Roman art at the collection of Egyptian antiquities in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, and I nearly made a rename request for it, but it’s empty. Reading the category discussion as of 2023, there was nobody after the explanations of Choliamb who argumented for the category to stay and it’s still empty after 2 years. I thought about a speedy request, but I think an admin should decide, if it should be deleted or renamed (but then a file has to be found for that category). I don’t understand, why such a discussion is still open after nearly 2,5 years. I don’t see a disagreement after the discussion that the moved files should get back into the category. Then any file would have been moved in the meantime. Could you just take a look onto it? Or shall it be renamed anyway? Thank you. Greetings, —176.1.0.237 17:04, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi. I didn't argue for the category to be kept; I argued for its deletion. The category name was false to begin with: the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston has an Egyptian collection, and it has a Greek and Roman collection, and they are two different things. The files that were placed in this category were part of the Greek and Roman collection, NOT the Egyptian collection. The original uploader mislabeled them with file names that included words like "Egyptology", and then created a self-contradictory category to hold them; he was probably confused because some of these pieces of Roman sculpture were, at the time of his visit, temporarily displayed in a room that also contained Egyptian antiquities. In any case, after checking each one, I moved all 11 of the files that I found there to the proper categories for Greek and Roman antiquities, which is why it is now empty. There's no reason to rename this category; it should simply be deleted. Cheers, Choliamb (talk) 17:39, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Category deleted. A speedy request would have been okay, too (leaving the CFD template on the page so the admin would see it), because an admin would be deciding that, too. -- Auntof6 (talk) 20:25, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for deciding this. You’re right, an admin had to decide that anyway. I just thought that the discussion should be decided first, but perhaps that’s not so important in this case.

@Choliamb: My apologies for my misleading sentence above (bad English). I meant that there was nobody who argumented for the category to stay (after your explanations, why you moved the files and why they should be in other categories, but not in this one), and I should have placed brackets around "after the explanations of Choliamb", then there wouldn't have been that misunderstanding. Nobody wrote that the category should stay and nobody moved only one file back into it, so that it was empty for over 2 years, that’s what I meant. Greetings, —176.1.9.150 15:39, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Вікі любить пам'ятки 2025 в Україні / Wiki Loves Monuments 2025 in Ukraine

(text in English at the bottom)

Привіт!

З 1 по 31 жовтня (за київським часом) запрошуємо до участі в українській частині міжнародного фотоконкурсу «Вікі любить пам'ятки», метою якого є фотографування пам'яток історико-культурної спадщини України. Долучатися можуть усі охочі — як професійні фотографи, так і початківці. Журі визначить найкраще фото кожного регіону України, а 10 найкращих знімків пам’яток з усіх поданих будуть представляти Україну та її культурну спадщину на міжнародному етапі «Wiki Loves Monuments». Зі списками пам'яток можна ознайомитися тут.

Окрім основних номінацій, цього року у конкурсі є десять спеціальних номінацій та відзнак:

• «Відео»
• «Війна руйнує пам'ятки»
• «Елементи екстер'єру»
• «Єврейська спадщина» (включаючи караїмські пам'ятки)
• «Інтер'єри»
• «Німецька спадщина»
• «Польська спадщина»
• «Фотоплівка»
• «Визначні місця Харкова»
• та нова спецномінація цього року — «Пам'ятки дерев'яної архітектури України»

Усі конкурсанти та конкурсантки, яких відзначать у конкурсі, отримають сувеніри та цінні призи від ГО «Вікімедіа Україна», яка проводить фотоконкурс в Україні.

Важливо! Через російське вторгнення в Україну також довелося змінити умови: у більшості випадків тільки роботи зняті до 31 серпня 2025 року включно будуть прийматися на конкурс. Винятком є спецномінація «Інтер’єри» (фото всередині пам’яток можуть бути зроблені будь-коли без обмежень за часом створення) і знімки, зроблені на тимчасово окупованих територіях України.

Документування культурної спадщини завжди потрібне й корисне, але зараз — особливо важливе, адже пам'ятки перебувають під загрозою фізичного знищення через воєнні дії.

🔎Стежте за новинами проєкту у Facebook, Instagram або в блозі.

Приєднуйтеся!

Ви отримали це повідомлення, оскільки Ви брали участь в одному із фотоконкурсів «Вікімедіа Україна» чи допомагали (наприклад, редагували файли з цих конкурсів). Якщо Ви не хочете більше отримувати повідомлень про конкурс «Вікі любить пам'ятки», додайте свою сторінку користувача до відповідної категорії чи напишіть Оргкомітету. Дякуємо!

You have received this message, because you had uploaded pictures to one of the contests of Wikimedia Ukraine or helped (for example, edited files from these contests). If you do not speak Ukrainian, but you are interested in the contest, you can check out our page in English here. If you do not want to receive messages related to Wiki Loves Monuments — add your user page to this category or write to the Organising team. Thank you!

Мирного неба!

З повагою, Анатолій (обг.) від імені Оргкомітету «Вікі любить пам'ятки».18:22, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

RfA

Hello, I wanted to ask for your opinion. Do you think I should apply for adminship on Commons? Since you’re already an experienced administrator, your opinion is important to me. I have a good understanding of licensing rules (especially in Central Asian countries), and from time to time I participate in DR. After becoming an administrator I also plan to work on CSD and RfR. I am already an administrator on the kywiki, but there I mostly handle technical tasks and sometimes act as a mediator.

The main reason I’m considering requesting admin rights is that there are no administrators from my region — that is, from Central Asia. I could easily handle requests in languages such as Russian, Kyrgyz, and other related languages (see Robert Lindsay, p. 9). I will also ask other administrators for their opinions and summarize their feedback before deciding whether I should apply for adminship or not. Incall ^talk 16:49, 19 October 2025 (UTC)