Wikipedia talk:Upload/Archive/2009

Disabling Wikipedia upload else than Fair use
Now with unified login folks just need to log in to commons with their existing Wikipedia account, so uploading to commons is easier than ever. This form needs to be disabled for other than fair use, I am tired of tagging newly uploaded images for "copy to commons".--Kozuch (talk) 21:31, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


 * There are free images that are acceptable here but not on Commons: for example, an image that is public domain in the US under the pre-1923 rule, but not public domain in the life+70 country of origin. --Carnildo (talk) 01:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I do not know this form in detail, but is there a major problem in disabling the complementary Wikipedia upload for licences that are on Commons too? This would be a huge step in accessibility and usability of both projects.--Kozuch (talk) 10:41, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * There's already a big uploadtext that says "stop, please go to Commons". I don't think we need more than that; plus, Commons users can be quite unwelcoming. We can always transwiki appropriate images. Stifle (talk) 12:53, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you meant the normal size text "Uploading a free image or media file? Please consider creating an account or logging in at the Wikimedia Commons and uploading it there." on this page? An advice on "Uploading a file you created" is little bigger in font, but in my opinion both notices should be at least made in red to be more visible... said that, I am still for shutting these complementary uploads to Commons here on Wikipedia down... there is just no use for them any more.--Kozuch (talk) 22:38, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Trying to upload a file
I am trying to upload a non-free jpeg photograph. I hit the "Upload file" in the toolbox. I filled out the fair use rationale template and all other information. I hit the upload button but nothing happened, I think. Should the photo have shown up along with the information? Doesn't seem a file was created.

Thanks, Loveoandn (talk) 21:11, 1 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Your log shows you've uploaded File:Olivia Spencer Natalia Rivera Aitoro as Otalia.jpg. Is this the image you're talking about? --Carnildo (talk) 04:17, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I
Think we should add a link for uploading screenshots of Wikipedia (or other GFDL) liscences. What do you think. Nan oha A's Yu ri    Talk, My master 23:44, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Banning image licences identical to Commons on Wikipedia

 * Note. This discussion was started at Village pump (policy). See archive.

I want to propose banning uploading image under licences, that are also available on Commons. The unified login will today work for anyone who registered with Wikipedia on Commons too, so there is close to no barrier in redirecting folks to Common when possible.--Kozuch (talk) 17:47, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree. Especially for English wikipedia. The Commons is in English. --Timeshifter (talk) 18:07, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I can see why this would be brought up, but I'm not sure banning or preventing, as you say, is needed. The main thing that occurred to me when reading the idea was 'meta' images. By that I mean images relevant to Wikipedia, about content on Wikipedia. I've seen some of these uploaded here in the past, with text that reads something like 'uploaded to en-wiki because it illustrate $foo here and is little point uploading to Commons'. Examples are graphs or diagrams people produce illustrating review processes like GA/PR/FA. I doubt having to upload them to Commons instead would be "bad"; there's, well, probably little value in their being there though. –Whitehorse1 18:15, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * It doesn't hurt anything though. It is still an image stored on a server. And a few of the images might actually be useful to other-language wikipedias. Maybe only as models for their own graphs or diagrams. And vice-versa. See my reply farther down concerning special images that need to be protected. --Timeshifter (talk) 20:46, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

It would discourage some uploaders, however small a percentage, from contributing if they come to Wikipedia and then are told that they have to go to and learn another site. The maintenance involved in Template:movetocommons is slight. Postdlf (talk) 18:27, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Many images are deliberately uploaded from Commons so that they can be protected. This is done with interface images as well as those that appear on the Main Page. Preventing duplicate upload would prevent the local protection of images, leaving Wikipedia open to widespread vandalism. OrangeDog (talk • edits) 19:06, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Could we create a special upload page for administrators to copy stuff from the Commons, and then upload those copies to Wikipedia? This way people can still use the Commons images in other-language Wikipedias and Wikimedia projects. We could link to the special upload page only from administrator places such as the administrator FAQ pages, and so on. That way the average image uploader is unlikely to come upon the special upload page.


 * We could then change many of the links at Upload to link directly to the relevant Commons upload pages. This way there are no extra steps required as mentioned by Postdlf. --Timeshifter (talk) 20:42, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Bottom line, what's the problem we're trying to solve by banning content from being uploaded to Wikipedia that could be uploaded to Commons? Postdlf (talk) 20:44, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I have over 9000 edits on the Commons and over 17,000 on Wikipedia. There are SO many images that need to be categorized on the Commons. Every image having to be moved to the Commons is time lost that could be spent categorizing an image on the Commons. Plus bots are oftentimes a pain to use. :)


 * And I forgot the most important reason. Other-language wikipedias can use the Commons images, but not the English Wikipedia images. They will likely not even know of the English Wikipedia images. --Timeshifter (talk) 21:10, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * You know, we could fully automate that migration process (with as much or more accuracy than the typical manual process). Last time the idea was brought up though Commons people complained that they wouldn't be able to handle the influx.  Dragons flight (talk) 21:14, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

(unindent) Since then I think the Commons has come up with better ways to flag uncategorized, or redlink-categorized, images so that Commons editors can easily see what needs to be done. I remember seeing a link for that for awhile on the top of many Commons pages. I think it even counted down the images as they were categorized. Whatever it was, it worked well, and cleared up a lot of images needing categorization. Users did not have to hunt around for that link since it was on so many Commons pages. It may have been on all Commons pages at the top. I don't remember. --Timeshifter (talk) 02:47, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Having images here on Wikipedia with the same licence as Commons can provide is an issue in both terms of free access to information and extra work that has to be done to move such images to Commons by hand. I think the community should put bureaucracy to the side and act while either introducing fully automated bot for moveing images to Commons or redirecting uploads for the same licences directly to Commons.--Kozuch (talk) 16:46, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Upload Help
It probably says it somewhere, but can anyone just tell me how to upload an image to wikipedia? Please? That's all I want to do!


 * First, have a read through Upload which gives some useful advice on image types. Once you've worked out what type of image it is, go to the upload form and follow the instructions there to upload the image from your PC. Euryalus (talk) 10:49, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Free images and Commons
Should Wikipedia's upload pages be changed to more strongly encourage uploading to Commons? 17:31, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay; this is kind of a continuation of the discussion above but is slightly different, so I feel a new section is warranted.

As it stands, clicking "Entirely my own work" takes you to a page which strongly recommends uploading to Commons rather than here, but still allows you to upload images locally. My proposal is that this link be changed so that it goes to a page which briefly explains what Commons is and provides an "Upload" link which leads to the Commons upload page. It can also be explained that you don't even need to create another account, because of the unified login.

My feeling is that a blanket ban on uploading free images here is a Bad Thing. There are times when uploading an image here rather than Commons is important, as in the case of images needing protection. There would be no restriction on free image uploads... Special:Upload would work just as it does now, so that could be used to upload free images. Since the link to that page is kind of hidden on Upload, users who are uploading free images to Wikipedia because they should be should have the experience to find it, and new users will click the bigger button that says "Entirely my own work."

There are a fre reasons why I think that this would be beneficial:
 * It would help to slow down the number of images being added to Wikipedia which should be on Commons. Moving an image to Commons properly takes quite awhile (3–5 minutes apiece, or more if you are cleaning up the image description and categorizing it once it has been moved).
 * Moving images to Commons from Wikipedia takes time. Actually moving it is about 3–5 minutes. Cleaning up the new page at Commons usually takes another 3–5 to get categories properly added, etc. (this step is recommended, but not required, although it takes up the time of Commons users if it isn't checked by the mover). If the mover is an admin, they can take half a minute to delete the page... but if the mover isn't an admin, it takes half a minute to tag the page for deletion and then an admin needs 2 or 3 minutes to make sure that the licensing is correct and upload history is intact. All in all, I'd say that it takes anywhere between 5 and 7 minutes for all of theses steps to take place... about the time it takes to properly upload an image to Commons in the first place.
 * It would take virtually no additional time for uploaders. They'd see one more "intermediate" page, but otherwise the amount of time that it takes would be unchanged.

If this is done, it should be made clear both on the main upload page here and on the "intermediate" page that you do not need to create a new account to upload to Wikimedia Commons. This is because of the unified login, although we don't need to confuse newcomers by explaining that whole thing. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 17:22, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


 * If this will better encourage newbies to upload images to Commons, then I'm all for it. – Quadell (talk) 17:45, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm all for it, but I see one problem. Communication from Commons back to users on en.wp... —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 19:53, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Could you elaborate on that? I'm not quite sure what you're saying. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 20:00, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Many a time it occurs that too few or incorrect information has been provided. In that case users are notified on their Commons talk page, but many of the people using a facility as described above have little reason to ever visit their Commons talk page, and are thus unlikely to read any notifications. That results in a breakdown of communication and that will subsequently lead to disgruntled and/or confused users. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 20:45, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see what you're saying. I have two comments on this: First, once an image has been moved to Commons from here, this happens anyway. Second, perhaps a "Commons talkback" bot could be created which can detect what wiki the uploader uses most (maybe through something in preferences?) and leave a "you have new messages at Commons" note for them unless they choose not to have the bot do so. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 20:54, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * What about a Commons bot that places a template on the talk page of a new/infrequent uploader who is active on another project? It could tell people commenting to comment on that other project instead. This sort of thing is not just a problem with EN, there are projects that don't even allow local uploads at all. I support the proposal, BTW. ▫  Johnny Mr Nin ja 
 * Would it be possible for a bot to tell what project the user is most active on? And Commons has a lot of "automatic" notifications of deletion which wouldn't be able to see the template. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 13:42, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * First part:yes (I'm almost certain) there are tools already on toolserver for SUL that show you all activity. SUL only works for Wikis that you have previously visited, and it should be possible for a bot to see which wikis your SUL is for and compare activity. Second part: Yes, that would not be all-that helpful for automatic messages. ▫  Johnny Mr Nin ja  16:58, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Strong support—my opinion on this changed several times, but right now especially after unified login and impending move to CC, I believe that there's absolutely no reason to upload a free image to Wikipedia. IMO, it should even be taken a step further, and uploading free images to Wikipedia after relevant notices/warnings, should be considered vandalism. —Ynhockey (Talk) 09:13, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * OMG, did I read correctly, vandalism ?? Cenarium (talk) 15:17, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree with the general aims of the proposal, but I also see Rockfang's point about bureaucracy creep. The amount of instructions that are read is inversely proportional to the amount of instructions that exist. I think the current page does this job better than you give it credit for. Meanwhile, these extra pages would get in the way of veterans who know what they're doing and should be allowed to do it.HereToHelp (talk to me) 20:55, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that no matter how many warnings or notices are used, some people will still upload free images to Wikipedia in good faith... just considering it vandalism may be a bit much. Leaving a notice at the user's page about it seems reasonable, though. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 13:50, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I think leaving things the way they are now would be perfectly fine. There are people (like myself) that copy eligible images to Commons.  It's not that hard to do.  So to answer the RFC question, No.--Rockfang (talk) 17:05, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * But wouldn't it be better with this implemented? I mean, yes, it is easy to move images, but they'll never all be moved if people continue to upload images here when they should be there. Is there a problem with the proposal itself, or do you feel that it just isn't necessary. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 17:13, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * No, I don't think it would be better. If someone sees the "Upload file" link in the toolbox, they might expect to go straight to a page like Special:Upload where they can actually upload a file.  With the suggestion above, you'd have to click 3 links just to upload a file here.  It seems a bit much.  Where do we stop?  I mean are we gonna add 4th and 5th links to verify that people really, really sure that they'd rather upload the image here rather than Commons.  It reminds me of a *nix computer I had to use in the Navy once.  I had to click through 3 boxes to be really really sure I wanted to shut the thing down.  I agree that "they'll never all be moved", beecause not all of them need to be moved.  It is perfectly fine to have free images here.--Rockfang (talk) 18:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. I don't completely agree with you on this, but thank you for the clarification. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 18:25, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Not to comment on the rest of your post, but veterans would still be fully allowed to upload free images here intentionally by going straight to Special:Upload; this would just change the method that users clicking the big "entirely your own work" button would see. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 21:47, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Seems like a perfectly good idea to me. I recall actually being surprised at how easy it still is to upload free images locally.  When inexperienced users do that it just makes more work for contributors moving the files to commons.  —  Jake   Wartenberg  19:15, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Commons tends to be quite hostile to uploaders who don't add categories to their images. Stifle (talk) 18:10, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * What does that have to do with this? Commons has an easy category adder built in to Special:Upload. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 19:25, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Commons is an hostile place for new users, please don't take them there. Besides the cheerful and company welcome, it's incredibly difficult for new users to find the save page button, and they aggressively disallow mistakes by inexperienced users with vandal warnings (their abuse filters are much more restrictive than ours and do not use specific messages) . Thanks, Cenarium (talk) 15:17, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with several above that the Commons is an antagonistic place for new users. For this reason, I do not believe it's a good idea to more aggressively push editors there. Editors who are knowledgeable will/should go there anyway, and those who aren't shouldn't be pushed there. ÷seresin 07:13, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

How to add link sidebar toolbox ( Upload file-->Wikipedia:Upload)
How to add link sidebar toolbox ( Upload file-->Wikipedia:Upload)

Dear All I am from Bengali Wikipedia ans I am admin there. I want to create same approach to our wiki as English wiki sidebar Toolbox section Upload file link to Upload. How do you create that? Please explain. If any kind of change to be done in any MediaWiki page, please secify me. I want to create for only registar user can see the Upload file. Thanks in advance.- Jayanta Nath (Talk 18:46, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * MediaWiki:sidebar —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 09:29, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * That can't add it to the toolbox, however, just other sections like navigation or interaction. JavaScript or changes to MediaWiki's PHP would be needed for it to be in the toolbox, unless there's another system message that I'm missing. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 13:48, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Good point. For future references, you need to change "wgUploadNavigationUrl" for that in initialiseSettings.php, which requires a site request on bugzilla. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 14:39, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Why won't it upload?
I've tried several times to upload an image, but when I hit the upload button, nothing happens. Why? Mooretwin (talk) 19:17, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Could somebody help? Is it something to do with the settings on my PC?? Mooretwin (talk) 13:43, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that Wikipedia's image servers have been having some trouble lately, and that had caused some problems that made uploads impossible... but I thought it was fixed a few days ago. I'd try again in a few days. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 19:39, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Appreciate the reply. Mooretwin (talk) 20:12, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Upload a cover of a album
I'm trying to upload a cover of SafetySuit's album called Life Left To Go. Pecker3378 (Talk)

Can I upload the pages?


 * Please ask at Media copyright questions or Images for upload. See also: Upload/Non-free album cover --Timeshifter (talk) 12:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Granted permission..............now need help!
I have been granted permission to upload historical photos from the State Library of South Australia. They have provided me with an email and word document to publish the photos on the wikipedia page I have created. What category do I use and if someone questions the copyright permission, what do i need to do to prove the validity of it. I have all the contact information from the State Library of South Australia.

Lukeduk1980 (talk) 00:54, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Go to the main upload page and click the second bullet link: "The work of someone else, who has given permission to use it on Wikipedia or it is a work released under a free license" Andrewlp1991 (talk) 05:30, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Well they have given written permission to use the images on Wikipedia however, they have stated that they arn't "giving Wikipedia readers carte blanche to use, copy, redistribute the images as they see fit. What do I do? Does this mean I can not upload the files or is their a back-door solution where we can honor the State Library of South Australia request and still use the images for the Wikipedia article I have created. Any advice would be desired. Lukeduk1980 (talk) 20:55, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I still need some advice on this subject. Can anyone answer the above question concerning this issue? Lukeduk1980 (talk) 21:45, 9 December 2009 (UTC)


 * If the images can't be copied, modified, and redistributed, then they probably can't be uploaded here. The only possible exception is if the images meet the requirements for non-free content, in which case they can be copied and redistributed even if the library doesn't approve. --Carnildo (talk) 23:29, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Change in default parameters
We are planning to change what is shown as the default parameters for the " " template in the file upload summary. This means we are going to edit Upload. See discussion at Template talk:Information.

--David Göthberg (talk) 01:23, 31 December 2009 (UTC)