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/2024/11. 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. |
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 7 days. | |
March 26
Get QID from page title?
Currently running into a bit of a hiccup. I know there's Template:QID, which fetches the QID of the current page, and Template:GetQID which fetches the QID of the category's main topic. However, I want a template that gets the QID of a specified page's main topic. For example, {{getQIDfrompagename|Category:Minecraft}} which would return Q49740. Does this exist, or is there a potential alternate way of going about this? Thanks in advance.— Preceding unsigned comment added by OmegaFallon (talk • contribs) 16:06, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
Category:French-language surnames
I stumbled on this category today. Back in 2019 this category was created by Olybrius, apparently as a unilateral decision. Later that year :Surnames by ethnicity and/or nationality to Category:Surnames by ethnicity was performed. E4024 quite rightly queried this asking: Which ethnicity? What about Belgians, Swiss et al?
Today Arnout was moved by Abxbay out of Surnames to this category.
Surely, this is absolutely pointless and spurious. Surnames as a result of the mass diaspora are no longer pinned to any specific country, or language (if they ever were). I can see Chang existing in Surnames but the same name in Chinese characters also being in Chinese-language surnames. However that doesn't apply to French.
The surnames category was created in the first place for administrative universal filing identification reasons, it's no longer that, if its going to be separated out into the 6500 languages that exist in the world.
This whole system needs to be dismantled and reverted back to the simplicity of Category:Surnames as should all these other spurious categories (should they still exist). Broichmore (talk) 16:53, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
- Surnames are tightly connected to language. I’m sure you can come up with many exceptions, but those are… exceptions. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:06, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
- If you really want a flat category for surnames, then go ahead and do create and populate Category:Surnames (flat list) — nothing against that. Any attempt at dismantling will be met with the same opposition as any other vandalism attempt would. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:10, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
- @E4024: The United States which seems to dominate this project is full of people with French, Italian, and Spanish surnames, who cant speak those languages. So surnames are not tightly bound to language. As I hinted at earlier, that goes for Europe too, increasingly so. Must we be the slaves of too many cats whose only purpose is to satisfy OCD issues of people here with little or no imagination; at the expense of practicality.
- Again, with respect, the surnames category was created in the first place for gathering in one place like surnames (labels) for identification of specific individuals, if its going to be separated out into different languages; then it's no longer going to do that. It needs to be functional.
- What practical use, does French-language surnames serve, too someone who does not know that Duval is french? Broichmore (talk) 19:40, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
- I once compared some Commons curation activity I dislike to OCD, too, and that was cause for me to be blocked for a few days. As soon as I find the relevant diffs, I’ll open a section with your name on it in AN/U. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:06, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- Again, with all the respect you deserve, if you really want a flat category for surnames, then go ahead and do create and populate Category:Surnames (flat list). -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:07, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- No need to do that, the ‘’Surnames’’ cat is completely adequate already, understandable and efficient.
- Abxbay has still not commented why Arnout cant be in both ‘’Surnames’’ and ‘’ French-language surnames’’. They need to look again at their edits and include for both. Broichmore (talk) 11:28, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- It’s due to COM:OVERCAT. Which, regardless of how one feels about it, is set policy and one of the very basics of categorization. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:55, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- Too me Surnames is a different thing to French-language surnames, it certainly has a different usage. If that's not the case then com:overcat needs to be redifined. This is a good example of where sub-dividing things too far has become destructive, rather than practical. Go back to an exemplar of Martin", having it in one category has to be preferable to it being in several -language surname cats. Having it in ‘’ French-language surnames’’ answers no question, of why it is necessary to have it, in such a category. It's of no use use to anyone. Broichmore (talk) 12:12, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
- Ethnicity is an entirely different subject to surnames, which is complete in itself. Broichmore (talk) 12:06, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- Too me Surnames is a different thing to French-language surnames, it certainly has a different usage. If that's not the case then com:overcat needs to be redifined. This is a good example of where sub-dividing things too far has become destructive, rather than practical. Go back to an exemplar of Martin", having it in one category has to be preferable to it being in several -language surname cats. Having it in ‘’ French-language surnames’’ answers no question, of why it is necessary to have it, in such a category. It's of no use use to anyone. Broichmore (talk) 12:12, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
- It’s due to COM:OVERCAT. Which, regardless of how one feels about it, is set policy and one of the very basics of categorization. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:55, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- Even if the U.S. and the future Europe you dream about were indeed a monolingual melting pot, most surnames would still retain an etymology (especially so when the quaint U.S. custom of incomplete anglicization is in use), and that warrants separate categorization to allow each by-language cat yo have its own different parent cats. Furthermore, that glottofagic hellscape of yours, even if it were to take place, would not apply to the whole globe and would not retroactively apply to past eras of more widespread translation/assimilation of “foreign” surnames — and Commons needs to cover those situations, too. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:31, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- Category:Martin (surname) is a member of eleven different subcategories along with being in Category:Surnames. There is no English page nor any source for any of this and Wikidata only has English, French, German, and Spanish so I could start by removing Category:Italian-language surnames, Category:Surnames from Ireland, Category:Scottish surnames, Category:Swedish-language surnames, and leaving it to a fight about Category:Surnames from Spain (which is separate and distinct from Category:Spanish-language surnames), Category:English-language surnames, Category:French-language surnames (which is broken down into the individual department of France without any sources) and so on? How much ridiculous pointless time needs to be wasted policing guessing games about which department of France does the Martin surname come from, especially when it looked like this lunacy before the first round of "you can't made a category of every surname in Argentina" made sense? Ricky81682 (talk) 07:55, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- Sure, but is this about surnames by language, as the section title suggests, or about surnames by country and subdivision thereof? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 09:45, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm speaking about the general categorization point. Swedish-language isn't sourced and the sourcing is me hunting around on Wikidata since there is no Martin (surname) page on English or somewhere else where this is clear. The fact that this isn't something settled is why the Arnout fight above is going to become common and something that will require CFDs and discussions and the question is whether this is worth it in terms of the larger project. Ricky81682 (talk) 23:16, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
- Sure, but is this about surnames by language, as the section title suggests, or about surnames by country and subdivision thereof? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 09:45, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
- The Normans and their surnames invalidated that premise as far back as 1066. Their surnames are worldwide. Etymology as far as a databank is concerned is merely another label. We cover that already with a multitude of Country (origin) labels. The Martin surname just goes to reinforce that view, being a Norman name brought to England, that possibly may well have derived from Norse or Scandic roots; even the Romans lay some claims to its roots. Broichmore (talk) 11:47, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- Category:Martin (surname) is a member of eleven different subcategories along with being in Category:Surnames. There is no English page nor any source for any of this and Wikidata only has English, French, German, and Spanish so I could start by removing Category:Italian-language surnames, Category:Surnames from Ireland, Category:Scottish surnames, Category:Swedish-language surnames, and leaving it to a fight about Category:Surnames from Spain (which is separate and distinct from Category:Spanish-language surnames), Category:English-language surnames, Category:French-language surnames (which is broken down into the individual department of France without any sources) and so on? How much ridiculous pointless time needs to be wasted policing guessing games about which department of France does the Martin surname come from, especially when it looked like this lunacy before the first round of "you can't made a category of every surname in Argentina" made sense? Ricky81682 (talk) 07:55, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- Don't put words in my mouth. I'm not dismantling any useless system, that’s why I’ve brought up the issue, I‘m promoting the use of common sense, cats should serve a practical purpose. Broichmore (talk) 12:00, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- We have Commons:Categories for discussion/2021/05/Category:English-language surnames coming from French ongoing based on Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/11/Category:Surnames by original language. And we have Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/10/Category:Surnames by country too. It seems like it's clear that nationality is not a logical criteria nor was "original language" but I don't see the distinction between that and language other than I guess "original language" is one layer removed from "language." Personally, I think categorizing surnames is odd enough as I can't think of a great media categorization where everyone with the last name Category:Shah (surname) for example (not subcategorized) belongs in one place. This is less logical than trying to provide an image of "French people" which is already weird enough. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 21:22, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
- I started a discussion about Commons:Categories for discussion/2023/03/Category:Surnames by ethnicity. People can debate whether surnames by language makes better sense but I see both as solving a non-existent problem by creating new pointless silliness like the above debate about Arnout. Ricky81682 (talk) 21:32, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
- Perhaps I misunderstand your point. I find individuals grouped by surnames handy when looking for a particular engraver (for example) many of whom are identified only by surname only on a piece of their work. Same for ships, grouped by the same name. Broichmore (talk) 11:56, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- I don't have any issues with surnames in general. The question is whether we should have second-level categories or a flat list. It is when you get to surnames encountered in a specific US state or from a country (as opposed to in a country) is when this starts getting silly. Ricky81682 (talk) 08:02, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- both current systems on wikidata and commons trying to group people with the same names together are jokes, because they only consider latin-alphabet scenarios.
- Category:Yán (surname) corresponds to at least five different surnames 严、
言 、阎、闫、颜. they have the exact same pronunciation. - the same surname like
梁 have different pronunciations in different languages leading to different romanisations leung, liang, neo... which by its romanisation alone is considered different surnames in wd and commons systems because these systems only think in terms of latin. - then there is the problem about the names written with the same kanjis but have different pronunciations in japanese, because kanji have many ways of being pronounced in japanese. are they the same name because they have the same kanji or are they different because pronuncation is different?
- then some names are written with the same kanji but in different languages (hence different pronunciations), like a chinese and a japanese both named
俊雄 . an analogous problem is the english jean vs the french jean. are they the same name? - then there's naomi (hebrew) vs naomi (japanese), ben (short for benjamin) vs ben (
本 or 奔 or 賁...), Robert E. Lee vs Ang Lee... - instead of OCD trying to assign ethnicity/nationality/language/gender to a name, how about just put everything in either "surnames" or "given names"? dismantling this whole system? that at least solves some of your problems, but still not the problems about names of different origins having the same romanisation.
- (before you suggest creating kanji titled cats for kanji names, gentle reminder: there're 1000~3000 commonly used kanjis, and 30000~50000 occasionally used kanjis. often a kanji name consists of one or two kanjis but could be more. so 2-kanji permutations can easily go beyond 1000*1000=1 million, most of which would only contain a few or only one subcat. an analogous problem is whether Hailey, Hailee, Haleigh, Haley, Haylee, Hayleigh, Hayley, Haylie... these variants of a name are considered different names.) RZuo (talk) 20:29, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
- @RZuo: on the Wikidata side of this: they need to model even a badly conflated category that is actually in use. There is nothing internal to Wikidata preventing modeling distinct kanji/ideographs for distinct names, and in fact they probably would want to. - Jmabel ! talk 21:47, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oh, a second use of OCD as an insult. Did the rules change ever since I was blocked for this same reason? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:53, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- We currently have the following open CFDs: (1) Commons:Categories for discussion/2021/05/Category:English-language surnames coming from French, (2) Commons:Categories for discussion/2023/04/Category:Surnames in Louisiana, (3) Commons:Categories for discussion/2023/04/Category:Surnames from Belgium, (4) Commons:Categories for discussion/2023/03/Category:Surnames by ethnicity and (5) Commons:Categories for discussion/2023/03/Category:Surnames from Europe. There may be more. No one has started one about any of the surnames by language so presently I think all of these will fall to languages absent someone wanting a flat list under Surnames. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 19:34, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- @RZuo: : Wikidata is not limited to Latin script. On Wikidata, wikidata:Q837421 (严), wikidata:Q4538396 (阎), wikidata:Q15942501 (闫), and wikidata:Q6664314 (颜) are different items. There is no item for the moment for
言 as a surname, but I think this family name is quite rare. There are also different items for romanizations: wikidata:Q36931387 (Chang) is not the same item as wikidata:Q804909 (張 ). The same person can be linked to a name in sinogram and a romanized name. (See Ang Lee for example.) BrightRaven (talk) 11:29, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- @RZuo: : Wikidata is not limited to Latin script. On Wikidata, wikidata:Q837421 (严), wikidata:Q4538396 (阎), wikidata:Q15942501 (闫), and wikidata:Q6664314 (颜) are different items. There is no item for the moment for
- "different items for romanizations" is a problem by itself.
- are they the same surname? yes, a person with surname
張 romanised as zhang and another張 -person romanised as chang have the same surname, then why should they have a different item? - unless, wikidata wants to have a unique item for every romanisation of every non-latin name.--RZuo (talk) 11:58, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- On Wikidata, it is not a problem: a person named
張 in Chinese will be linked with item wikidata:Q804909 (張 ). If he is a Chinese-American known as Chang in English, he will also be linked with item wikidata:Q36931387 (Chang). Another person known as Zhang in English will be linked to wikidata:Q804909 (張 ) and wikidata:Q37263491 (Zhang). Again, look at the item Ang Lee. BrightRaven (talk) 14:02, 13 April 2023 (UTC)- It seems none of this relates to how Commons should handle these. If someone wants to propose the elimination or reorganization of these language surnames, they should start that. The main point is that this information/discussion is better suited for an English or any other language encyclopedia page rather than perhaps Wikidata and definitely rather than Commons which in theory should only care if these two pictures of someone with the last name Chang are the same person or related or just have the same last name so you can find the person you want to find media about. Ricky81682 (talk) 19:05, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- I would just like to stress the fact that the surname items of Wikidata are unambiguous and script-specific, so it would be possible to create a Commons category for each surname item. These categories would solve some of the problems picked out by RZuo. BrightRaven (talk) 11:13, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- @BrightRaven Yes, I can see that point. We have a separate discussion elsewhere about whether English-language is appropriate for categories but I could see an argument for separate pages for each script here. In either case, different projects have different capabilities. Ricky81682 (talk) 19:46, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- I would just like to stress the fact that the surname items of Wikidata are unambiguous and script-specific, so it would be possible to create a Commons category for each surname item. These categories would solve some of the problems picked out by RZuo. BrightRaven (talk) 11:13, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- It seems none of this relates to how Commons should handle these. If someone wants to propose the elimination or reorganization of these language surnames, they should start that. The main point is that this information/discussion is better suited for an English or any other language encyclopedia page rather than perhaps Wikidata and definitely rather than Commons which in theory should only care if these two pictures of someone with the last name Chang are the same person or related or just have the same last name so you can find the person you want to find media about. Ricky81682 (talk) 19:05, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- On Wikidata, it is not a problem: a person named
Names of former countries amid actual ones
There are names of former countries of Europe amid the names of actual ones in topic-category combinations and wikidata infoboxes re. Category:Science, compare eg. Wikidate infobox of Category:Science in Austria and the countries-list I set in above it (speaking of "Austria-Hungary", "Russian Empire"), etc.; see eg. Category:Science in Austria-Hungary where I changed the categories.
There should be a clear differentiation between old and new/actual states, otherwise next comes the "German Reich" into this ....14:06, 4 April 2023 (UTC) Hornstrandir1 (talk) 14:12, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- The {{Topic in country}} is absurd in this case. The list should be reachable by the parent category Science by country of location (although the latter is not divided by continent, and the continent breakdown is really confusing).
- For the implied request: where should Science in Yugoslavia and Science in ancient Rome go? OK, in Science in former countries of Europe, but that category should be linked from the list of modern countries or you get this confusion. Science in Bulgaria is in Science by country, while most others are in Science by country of location. What does the "by location" addition mean in this context?
- When creating such hierarchies, it would be very good to explain them, linking the description (by template) from categories concerned. Anybody uploading only a few files (or searching for one) will spend all to much time trying to understand it, or just give up.
- –LPfi (talk) 15:32, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, for your reply. I didn't make the "country by location" category and didn't want to change all of them before having talked to someone. As it is, It find the system which I found there this morning confusing myself. Shall I change all of them? I just don't know how to make such connected categories.Hornstrandir1 (talk) 19:04, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- Regrettably I neither know how to change templates like the ones we found in these pages|Hornstrandir1 (talk) 19:10, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- Editing the template is difficult, removing it is easy: just remove the line
- {{topic in country|science| Austria|sub=1}}
- However, as this is something that seems to be spreading to more or less all categories, removing it from a single one doesn't help much, and there may be a consensus (does anyone know where that was formed, or whether it's about individual users' actions).
- The category tree problems could hopefully still be fixed.
- –LPfi (talk) 20:00, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- Regrettably I neither know how to change templates like the ones we found in these pages|Hornstrandir1 (talk) 19:10, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, for your reply. I didn't make the "country by location" category and didn't want to change all of them before having talked to someone. As it is, It find the system which I found there this morning confusing myself. Shall I change all of them? I just don't know how to make such connected categories.Hornstrandir1 (talk) 19:04, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- much feedback has been given to User:Joshbaumgartner, including but not limited to Template talk:Topic by country/layout Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2022/12#1st_level_subcats_for_country_cats.
- i have reservation about his grand project of making these one-fits-all template.--RZuo (talk) 13:47, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- Me too. It is too confusing and unhistoric. I found now eg. also the "Japanese Empire" in the list; see eg.: Category:Science in Belgium Hornstrandir1 (talk) 20:36, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- @RZuo: Thanks for pinging me, perhaps I can help out here.
- @LPfi and Hornstrandir1: I am unclear as to what exactly the problem or desired fix are. Are we discussing a categorization issue, or is this to do with navigation? Is it to do with nesting former countries under current countries (or vice-versa), or about the names used for countries, or what exactly? I appreciate any feedback on this matter. Josh (talk) 20:45, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- Per LPfi's comment, "Editing the template is difficult, removing it is easy", yes, destruction is usually easier than construction. However, the template does number of different things (categorization and navigation), and so if you feel some categories need to be added, just add them in addition to the template. If you manually replace all of the valid categories and navigation in addition to the new categories you add, you can then delete the template as superfluous, but if you only add a few categories and then delete the template, you are removing the category from several categories it belongs in as well as removing the navigation boxes. Josh (talk) 20:54, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- I assume the original post was about mixing current and former countries. I noted a few additional problems, the main one that the category of former countries should be prominently linked from the per country page. This would help with the category hierarchy, which I find confused (I haven't studied it enough to suggest better solutions). For the template, yes you are right: I might have written too hastily, I should read the discussion on introducing it before critisising it. –LPfi (talk) 21:00, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- No worries really, constructive criticism is always welcome, and new perspectives without baggage from the past even more so. As for the mixing of current and former countries, I think the root here is that 'in' is a relationship by location and thus is indexed 'by country of location', as opposed to 'of' which is indexed 'by country', but under the 'science' topic, the 'former' countries are 'by former country', not 'by former country of location'. Of course, 'in' is a stand-in for 'of' functionally in this topic, so, the 'in' categories do not need to be subbed out to a 'by country of location' index at this time. This can be fixed in the data template simply by adding an indexin=country parameter to the science entry (I've done this now). Now, this will take some null edits or wait for the batch to catch up so won't immediately appear, but should be soon. Once they filter through with the update, you should be able to see them listed by indices narrowed down based on the status of the country (former, etc.). Josh (talk) 23:23, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- Though I appreciate that this template does look nice on first sight, I still think a "one-fits-all (countries)" template does not make really sense. Better make one regarding the continents.
- 1) There are even as we talk more than 170 (actual) countries in the world.
- 2) When we also take into account all former countries (hundreds and hundreds), this takes up much too much space in data storage.
- 3) Why is there actually this concentration on former Eastern Bloc countries (eg. German Democratic Republic - but no Federal Republic of Germany) and their predecessors?
- In my opinion the former countries should be removed from this general template (they are still there, see: Categpry:Science in Belgium). They could have a template of their own (for example re. science by continent by century). This could also be interesting then. Hornstrandir1 (talk) 18:05, 6 April 2023 (UTC).
- @Hornstrandir1: the present-day Bundesrepublik/Federal Republic of Germany remains the same state as West Germany during the time of division. Its territory has changed, but there is complete continuity in its legal system. - Jmabel ! talk 23:39, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- No worries really, constructive criticism is always welcome, and new perspectives without baggage from the past even more so. As for the mixing of current and former countries, I think the root here is that 'in' is a relationship by location and thus is indexed 'by country of location', as opposed to 'of' which is indexed 'by country', but under the 'science' topic, the 'former' countries are 'by former country', not 'by former country of location'. Of course, 'in' is a stand-in for 'of' functionally in this topic, so, the 'in' categories do not need to be subbed out to a 'by country of location' index at this time. This can be fixed in the data template simply by adding an indexin=country parameter to the science entry (I've done this now). Now, this will take some null edits or wait for the batch to catch up so won't immediately appear, but should be soon. Once they filter through with the update, you should be able to see them listed by indices narrowed down based on the status of the country (former, etc.). Josh (talk) 23:23, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- I assume the original post was about mixing current and former countries. I noted a few additional problems, the main one that the category of former countries should be prominently linked from the per country page. This would help with the category hierarchy, which I find confused (I haven't studied it enough to suggest better solutions). For the template, yes you are right: I might have written too hastily, I should read the discussion on introducing it before critisising it. –LPfi (talk) 21:00, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hornstrandir1's suggestion is pretty reasonable. it makes more sense to have one template for current countries without any former ones mixed in it. france and south korea are both in their fifth republics already, but we certainly dont divide most files according to those political statuses.
- still, one template to fit all and display everything taking up too much space on the page, is something i dont like.--RZuo (talk) 12:56, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
- And the former Federal Republic of Germany (before 1989) was nevertheless a different country with different borders.Hornstrandir1 (talk) 16:36, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
- You state that as a fact, but the identity problem is non-trivial in many cases; cf. w:Ship of Theseus. Is the US and Mexico different countries before 1977 and after? I don't think many people in either could identify why I chose that date (the city of Rio Rico was legally transferred from the US to Mexico that year) or would agree with that assertion. Such minor adjustments of borders happen all the time, and even more major adjustments, like the purchase of Alaska or the loss of Algeria, aren't considered changes of country; the French might consider the Fifth Republic (1959) a new country, but not France after the loss of Algeria (1962). The Federal Republic of Germany is legally continuous from 1949 to now, even if it absorbed East Germany.--Prosfilaes (talk) 00:53, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- And the former Federal Republic of Germany (before 1989) was nevertheless a different country with different borders.Hornstrandir1 (talk) 16:36, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
April 06
Thumbnail persistence
Is it just me, or are thumbnails really slow to update after a new upload of late? Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:10, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Adam Cuerden: It's not just you. - Jmabel ! talk 23:39, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- I uploaded a new version of File:Portrait of a nonbinary person by DALL-E 01.png 3 days ago and the preview on that page is still the old image. I tried clearing my cache on my computer, but that didn't fix it. Artisaurus (talk) 18:31, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Artisaurus: I believe I am seeing the latest, but that last difference was so small that it's hard to be sure in a 600x600 preview.
- Question: is the cleanup by DALL-E or by you? Because if it is really showing an image with a detectable amount of cleanup by a human, it is a bit misleading to say "created by DALL-E". - Jmabel ! talk 00:59, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Jmabel: Good point. I modified the description and author to make that more clear. The stuck thumbnail is the 1200px version (I have a retina display, which is why it's the 1200px thumbnail instead of the 600px thumbnail). You can see the small difference by comparing it with the 1201px thumbnail (look at the lips). Hope that helps! Artisaurus (talk) 04:01, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Artisaurus: To clarify: I could see the difference at an explicitly chosen resolution, but it is small enough that at the 600x600 I see by default, there is no way to tell whether that had updated, the difference is too small. Pretty consistently each caching issues eventually resolves correctly. I presume the tech people will eventually work out a proper solution. I don't see anything to be gained by dwelling on each individual time it may happen. - Jmabel ! talk 15:07, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Jmabel: Good point. I modified the description and author to make that more clear. The stuck thumbnail is the 1200px version (I have a retina display, which is why it's the 1200px thumbnail instead of the 600px thumbnail). You can see the small difference by comparing it with the 1201px thumbnail (look at the lips). Hope that helps! Artisaurus (talk) 04:01, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- I uploaded a new version of File:Portrait of a nonbinary person by DALL-E 01.png 3 days ago and the preview on that page is still the old image. I tried clearing my cache on my computer, but that didn't fix it. Artisaurus (talk) 18:31, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
Image Copyright tag type/ Exact tag to use.
If The Author/Source of a file indicates that for education purposes and not commercial and continues to say that No attribution required, Which I failed to identify yue exact tag to use, which class does it follow under? Or what exact tag can i use for this case? Africanaz (talk) 21:49, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Africanaz: I don't fully understand what you are asking, but if a file does not allow commercial reuse then it does not belong on Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 23:41, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Africanaz: Hi, and welcome. The reasoning for that is explained at Commons:Licensing/Justifications. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 10:56, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
April 07
April 09
Flag of the Vatican City
We've had some press coverage regarding File:Flag of the Vatican City.svg, as noted on enwiki: Wikipedia had the wrong Vatican City flag for years. Now incorrect flags are everywhere. Elizium23 (talk) 05:54, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
- @SajoR, @Roberto221, you may be interested per coats of arms. (su interés en los escudos católicos). Elizium23 (talk) 05:58, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Elizium23 Well I'll be...Roberto221 (talk) 07:26, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
April 10
Chenge license
There is user Yrellag who is modifying the licenses of various files without specifying anything in the subject of the modification, is this correct? eg. here but done many times --ZioNicco (talk) 17:03, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
- @ZioNicco and Yrellag: in this particular case, the work may well be public domain, but in general this is a bad idea. If the license was legitimate, we should leave things showing that the explicit granted license was GFDL. - Jmabel ! talk 17:19, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
April 11
Earth sciences (etc.) in Latin America - problematic
In my opinion, this category (.... "in Latin America"), is strange, because it reminds of colonialism, etc.
See eg. Category:Earth sciences in Mexico . As it is, it should especially not be integrated in templates, etc.Hornstrandir1 (talk) 20:25, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- What name do you propose instead? A category for this geographic region is definitely useful. GPSLeo (talk) 20:58, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
Notification of DMCA takedown demand — 1984 translation
In compliance with the provisions of the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), and at the instruction of the Wikimedia Foundation's legal counsel, one or more files have been deleted from Commons. Please note that this is an official action of the WMF office which should not be undone. If you have valid grounds for a counter-claim under the DMCA, please contact me.
The takedown can be read here.
Affected file(s):
To discuss this DMCA takedown, please go to COM:DMCA#1984 translation. Thank you! Joe Sutherland (WMF) (talk) 22:16, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- Out of curiosity, I did a quick search for George Orwell and we also appear to hold a Dutch version of 1984 (the book) published in 1984 (the year). File:1984 (IA 1984GeorgeOrwell1949).pdf. From Hill To Shore (talk) 22:54, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- Good catch, deleted. Yann (talk) 23:00, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
April 12
[Wiki Loves Africa] Webinar - Basics of Wikimedia Commons Categories
Dear Wikimedians,
Per popular demand and several requests, Christel, an avid photographer and super experienced contributor to Wikimedia Commons has volunteered to show us all there is to know about categories on Wikimedia Commons.
Kindly join us this Friday for a training on Categories as it concerns Wikimedia Commons:
Date: Friday, 14th April at 16h00 UTC – 17h00 UTC
Google Meet joining info: Video call link: https://meet.google.com/cvz-zogw-gec
Please share this invite with members of your community and interested parties.
NB: The language of instruction will be English and French. Thank you Wilson (talk) 14:15, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
Pictures of Silent films ?
I've been working upgrading hundreds of silent films on Wikipedia for the last 3-4 months and is amazed how much pictures, stills and poster that are available to put in these articles ― that is for American films. I don't find many pictures from other countries. Not even from great film nations like France, Italy, Russia, Britain, China or Germany. I've been working mostly on film from the 1910s and early 1920's. These movies are over 100 years old and a considerable amount of the copyright holders must have past away before 1953 (the 70 year old limit). On that background I wonder if it's possible for someone to find and upload more pictures of non-US films from the silent era (stills, posters, pictures from magazines etc, whole movies or movieclips).--Ezzex (talk) 18:56, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- You'd be surprised at how many authors of movies from the 1910s and 1920s lived beyond the 1950s. Yes, I could try to find more images of non-US films to upload, but again you'd be surprised at how long some of these authors lived. For example, the great Alice Guy-Blaché died in 1968, and her work goes back to the 1890s. If you have any suggestions as far as specific things you want me to search for, just let me know on my talk page. Abzeronow (talk) 19:16, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
What is this, where does it come from, why are >100 files automatically sorted in this category (including one of my photos despite being correctly geotagged), and why is it impossible to remove it? Thanks. --A.Savin 22:31, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- User:Multichill might have the answers.
- i guess it's set by {{Location}} and adding location of creation property will make it disappear.--RZuo (talk) 11:58, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- @A.Savin and RZuo: photographs should also have a named location in location of creation (P1071). To be able to expand the current coverage (about 8.2M) I'm adding a hidden tracker category to files that have coordinates, but no location of creation (P1071). You can add it to remove the tracker category.
- If the coordinates start with 50-53° and 3-7°, I put the image in category for the 1° by 1° box. These boxes cover the whole of the Netherlands and part of neighboring countries. This makes it easier to work on nearby images (for example 52° N, 4°E in my case).
- I'm doing a bit more data checking on Wikidata and OpenStreetMap. When that's done I plan to do some local reverse geocoding to add the named locations. The map here on the right gives an impression of how precise this will be. The holes don't mean the Wikidata link is missing, it's usually that we have multiple overlapping items which makes the tool that generates the map trip up. Multichill (talk) 18:18, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Multichill: Can you shrink the map or something so it doesn't take up half the screen and make it impossible to read other discussions? Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 18:39, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
April 13
Creating a large number of similarly-formatted categories automatically
I recently discovered that the "[year] in [country] by topic" categories were incorrectly categorized in the DMC of "[year] by country by topic" rather than the correct "[year] by topic by country". In short this now means I need to make hundreds of categories, going down to as low as Category:1700 by topic by country, which for example consists only of {{dmc|1700|topic|country}}
. Obviously I would really love to not have to manually create hundreds of categories. Any suggestions on how to automate this process? Thanks. OmegaFallon (talk) 02:29, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- @OmegaFallon Make a Commons:Bots/Work requests but you could also have not mandated it in the template. I suspect some of the very old ones will be singular categories as I highly doubt Category:1703 by topic by country will fill up beyond Russia but either way, work requests is best. Ricky81682 (talk) 19:15, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Call for early input on the proposed Movement Charter ratification methodology
Hello all,
The Movement Charter Drafting Committee (MCDC) is collecting early input from the Wikimedia movement on the proposed methodology for the ratification of the Movement Charter from April 10 to 28, 2023. Ratification of the Movement Charter is planned to take place in early 2024 according to the timeline.
There are six questions that the MCDC requests your input on. Please share your feedback by:
- Commenting on the Meta talk page
- Commenting on the Movement Strategy forum
- Joining the community conversation hours
Conversation hours
The MCDC also invites everyone interested in sharing their feedback on the proposed methodology to join the community conversation hours:
- Community conversation hour #1: 18 April at 10:00 UTC (your local time)
- Community conversation hour #2: 24 April at 17:00 UTC (your local time)
The language of conversation hours is English. Please comment if you need language support. Please note that language interpretation will be provided if at least 3 people expressed interest to participate in the following languages: Arabic, Mandarin Chinese, French, German, Indonesian, Japanese, Polish, Portuguese (Brazilian), Russian and Spanish.
On behalf of the Movement Charter Drafting Committee,
Zuz (WMF) (talk) 04:46, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
A dispute that so far only has comments from two of us, who are in complete disagreement. We need further participants. - Jmabel ! talk 15:23, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
A way to use #explode?
What the title says. I would like a way to use the functionality of the #explode function but it's sadly not enabled on Commons it seems. I've noticed that there are several string manipulation templates which seek to mimic the functionality of these, but I can't find one which does #explode. Specifically I'm looking to break a string into three parts with a specific separator, not just a comma or forward slash. OmegaFallon (talk) 22:17, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- Nevermind, I figured it out and it rules! This is so much better: {{AutoDMC}} OmegaFallon (talk) 22:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
April 14
File:Add_name_later_Halifax_11_February_2023_1.jpg or by it's updated name should the image showing in the file history not the main image showing; how can this be changed? Mtaylor848 (talk) 09:16, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Mtaylor848: Hi, and welcome. It looks fine to me. Please see COM:CACHE. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:32, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
This category should be renamed to Category:APIA Leichhardt ie., without the "Tigers" bit, as the club has been renamed accordingly in 2019. If somebody gets a bot onto it, this would be great. Thanks you. Oalexander (talk) 18:03, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Elections Committee: Call for New Members
Hello everyone,
The Wikimedia Foundation elections committee (Elections Committee) is, from today until April 24, seeking an additional 2–4 members to help facilitate the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustee (Board) selection process.
The 2024 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election is being planned. New members are invited to join the Elections Committee. The Elections Committee oversees the Board of Trustees community seat selection process. Join the committee and contribute your valuable skills and ideas to the Trustee selection process.
There are eight community- and affiliate-selected seats on the Wikimedia Foundation Board. The wider Wikimedia community votes for community members to occupy these seats. In 2024, the Elections Committee will oversee this selection process for the community- and affiliate-selected seats with expiring terms. This process will be supported by the Wikimedia Foundation.
Elections Committee members sign up for three-year terms and will be asked to sign a confidentiality agreement. Members can expect to contribute 2–5 hours per week before the selection process and 5–8 hours per week during the selection process.
As an Elections Committee member, you will be responsible for:
- Attending online meetings between now and the next election (mid-2024)
- Attending onboarding and online training in May–June 2023
- Working with the Committee to fulfill its other responsibilities
New members should have the following qualities:
- Fluency in English
- Responsiveness to email collaboration
- Knowledge of the movement and movement governance
If you would like to volunteer for this role, please submit your candidacy by April 24, 2023 23:59 AoE (Anywhere on Earth) on this Meta-Wiki page.
You can read the full announcement here. Thank you in advance for your interest! If you are not interested but know someone who might be, share this message with them. Please let me know if you have questions.
On behalf of the Elections Committee,
Zuz (WMF) (talk) 20:00, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Category explosion under a location category
@OmegaFallon: has created Template:AutoDMC which is creating a explosion of red-linked categories which add layers of complexity and duplication. For example, Category:2021 by city by month is a child and a subchild category.
It is similar with countries and continents so you end up with three of the same categories in each 'by month'. Category:2021 doesn't have the Category:2021 by location cat that will have these as well. Is everything supposed to be under a single location subcategory or should they be a main category? Since this is all buried within an automated template, it is difficult to even tell how to change. I started Commons:Village_pump/Proposals#Year_by_populated_place_category but got no eyes there. Ricky81682 (talk) 20:41, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- The way that it works is that {{Double MetaCat}} does a sort of XOR function, for the second and third parameters being a word meaning a location, such as "country" or "continent", etc. It then adds a category with the same name as the parent but with that word swapped out to location. The XOR-like functionality prevents nonsense such as "by country by location" or "by location by location". I added this sort of string-replacing functionality because I saw some similar categorization already in place before I developed all of this. Stuff like "[x] by country by year" was categorized under "[x] by location by year", and so I added that to my template. Apologies if this is not desired behavior, I was simply modeling off of what I saw.
- I also apologize if {{AutoDMC}}/{{Double MetaCat}} are unintuitive to use or modify. If you have any suggestions for how to clarify this for you and for other potential editors, I'd appreciate it. Obviously it is not a good scenario if I, and only I, understand the functionalities of my code, being that wikis are necessarily communally-worked-upon things. OmegaFallon (talk) 20:54, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- So is it useful for these redcats? Are they hints as to things that should exist? Should exist if we have relevant content? (this is how most year nav bars work)
- Otherwise we could always wrap the innards with
{{#ifexist: ... }}
and just show the link if there's already a cat there. - But really, orthogonal auto-linked redcats are right down on my list of things to worry about. "1952 in Rotherham" isn't something that interests me, but at least it has a clear definition and scope. I'll take the redcat just as much to show me that we have nothing on that, as something to worry about. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:53, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I don't really understand what you're saying here. OmegaFallon (talk) 22:23, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- This is awesome, please build even more complicated category structures intersecting even more unrelated concepts so I have to click through at least 10 level of Matryoshka categories before I find a extremely specific category with a single image in it. Multichill (talk) 22:20, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- I don't appreciate the sarcasm, but I suppose I understand your sentiment. I'll comment out the code that adds them for now. OmegaFallon (talk) 22:25, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- There, done. None of those "by location" or "by date" redlinks should show up. Apologies for simply following the format that I observed. OmegaFallon (talk) 22:29, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Ricky81682 @Multichill I suppose I should tag both of you. OmegaFallon (talk) 22:31, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
I won't use sarcasm. As I noted repeatedly on your talk page, examine your templates and made sure they work before throwing them into the mess. I have spent way too time checking over a hundred different templates for entire countries because edits like this screwed it all up. The fact that over a hundred categories were "wrong" because you read a policy (which is supposed to be descriptive not prescriptive) in your sole interpretation of what is correct, in contrast to the dozens of editors over a half dozen years who sorted it the "wrong" way, and leave piles of empty, deleted, and missing categories for fairly important things a giant mess that others are left to clean up tells me you'll continue to just creating piles and piles of redcats that do not exist, do not have any logical reason to exist, and repeatedly are recursive as hell because you mechanically can create these templates. You have never once thought for a single second whether you should be creating massive templates and reorganizing tens of thousands of images because you read one policy as entirely correct and just because you can create a template that then replicates downward destroying dozens and dozens of structures doesn't mean it has to be done or more importantly it has to be done with zero edit summaries and zero discussion with anyone. Take five minutes of humility over the literally hundreds and hundreds of categories that dozens of editors will waste time creating, deleting and moving around because you have forced this "location" scheme here.So what is your plan now? Are you going to keep it? Delete it?Do we all just wait around and stick with it because you don't even acknowledge the possibility that no one else wants this? Are you keep on ramming in new structures buried behind your cryptic as hell template? I have told you to use ifexist statements but that seems too complicated versus having a bot create hundreds of one-category categories that do nothing for anyone. You have created zero documentation pages and just keep on creating templates and subtemplates whenever you mess up. See Template talk:I18n over the six or so layers because you kept on live revising templates while breaking categories to fix it. I know the concept of previewing a template is completely foreign to you but do that just once. Maybe we should consider a template and category topic ban to get it through to you that this isn't actually that helpful. The point is I am halfway minded to suggest the deletion of this gigantic nonsense template and revert all of it because no one knows what it does and no one should have to solve that puzzle to sort images of a church in Slovakia taken in 2021.Ricky81682 (talk) 10:00, 15 April 2023 (UTC)- Okay, that wasn't required. My point is that this is stupid to have a double-categorization and the fact that I have zero interest in learning how the hell I would make the changes to fix this is annoying the hell out of everyone. Take a lesson from that but I see you have moved onto completely destroying every country by year template by forcing another massive template while the new template is massively incomplete on all the languages so you've broken a ton again and people will have to find out where they can write things in the various languages to use it. Congrats and thank you for the additional work. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:10, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- My goal with all the templates I've created is to have a centralized system for things to fall back onto so everything is automatically standardized. With DMC my idea was making it so that it was as simple as just putting in three parameters for the title, and then the template would do the rest. AutoDMC makes that even easier. But I suppose that having everything in a big black box, while technically convenient for the end user, is not, actually, simple or standardized. I am sorry for the mess that you seem to think I have created, although I disagree that I've made a mess. I saw double meta categories as confusing and often incorrectly used and I sought to make a template that would clear it up for people. If you think things would be better the old way, without any real standardization, without any clarifying notes, then delete my "mega template". I'm sorry for trying to help, I suppose? I guess even you realized how aggressive your reply was considering you strikethrough-d it, but even so, what exactly ever happened to assuming good faith? You seem to think I'm just fooling around, like I'm just here to screw things up because it's fun for me or I'm stupid or something like that. I made these templates because I found a need for them, I thought they would be useful, I thought they would help clean up the unstandardized, unclear mess that I saw. I think we'd be worse off without my template, but I also can acknowledge that there could very well be some huge flaws in it. So how about instead of butting heads and you suggesting we go full scorched Earth and just delete, we actually put our heads together and discuss what exactly you want me to do to improve this template to make it easier for you to use and overall better in your opinion. What, exactly, do you want me to do? If we can have a polite, collaborative, productive conversation on this, we might actually get something done together. Right now all we're doing is getting mad at each other on the internet. OmegaFallon (talk) 13:48, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- I am currently in the process of adding additional comments to my code to help make it easier for other people to understand. I will be doing this regardless of your response (though I suppose you might appreciate it) because it's honestly just best practice. OmegaFallon (talk) 14:22, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- My goal with all the templates I've created is to have a centralized system for things to fall back onto so everything is automatically standardized. With DMC my idea was making it so that it was as simple as just putting in three parameters for the title, and then the template would do the rest. AutoDMC makes that even easier. But I suppose that having everything in a big black box, while technically convenient for the end user, is not, actually, simple or standardized. I am sorry for the mess that you seem to think I have created, although I disagree that I've made a mess. I saw double meta categories as confusing and often incorrectly used and I sought to make a template that would clear it up for people. If you think things would be better the old way, without any real standardization, without any clarifying notes, then delete my "mega template". I'm sorry for trying to help, I suppose? I guess even you realized how aggressive your reply was considering you strikethrough-d it, but even so, what exactly ever happened to assuming good faith? You seem to think I'm just fooling around, like I'm just here to screw things up because it's fun for me or I'm stupid or something like that. I made these templates because I found a need for them, I thought they would be useful, I thought they would help clean up the unstandardized, unclear mess that I saw. I think we'd be worse off without my template, but I also can acknowledge that there could very well be some huge flaws in it. So how about instead of butting heads and you suggesting we go full scorched Earth and just delete, we actually put our heads together and discuss what exactly you want me to do to improve this template to make it easier for you to use and overall better in your opinion. What, exactly, do you want me to do? If we can have a polite, collaborative, productive conversation on this, we might actually get something done together. Right now all we're doing is getting mad at each other on the internet. OmegaFallon (talk) 13:48, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, that wasn't required. My point is that this is stupid to have a double-categorization and the fact that I have zero interest in learning how the hell I would make the changes to fix this is annoying the hell out of everyone. Take a lesson from that but I see you have moved onto completely destroying every country by year template by forcing another massive template while the new template is massively incomplete on all the languages so you've broken a ton again and people will have to find out where they can write things in the various languages to use it. Congrats and thank you for the additional work. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:10, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Ricky81682 @Multichill I suppose I should tag both of you. OmegaFallon (talk) 22:31, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- There, done. None of those "by location" or "by date" redlinks should show up. Apologies for simply following the format that I observed. OmegaFallon (talk) 22:29, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- I don't appreciate the sarcasm, but I suppose I understand your sentiment. I'll comment out the code that adds them for now. OmegaFallon (talk) 22:25, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- I get your point (hey, do I post about anything else) but that's population of the cats, not their existence.
- Of course, if yet another of the simplistic pinheads reads OVERCAT and decides to go on another editing crusade... Andy Dingley (talk) 22:33, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- It looks like Omega has done something to it so this could be a moot point. I have no idea what the nests of coding does but I suspect I'll be back when I found the next problem since this is all hidden behind a single megatemplate. I mean it's not like this isn't a volunteer project anyways. Omega, tell us what you want to do rather than quietly "fixing" things because that will just triple annoy me. If you want to force a location system, then suggest it and do it. If you don't, don't. If you are just screwing around and created it by accident, then do what I suggest and review your work. Ricky81682 (talk) 10:15, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Just to be clear: My slightly sarcastic remark is not aimed at any person, but the category system in general. The current category system is a bit of an anti-pattern: You can spend a lot of time doing very extensive and detailed categorization, but the end result is that nobody is able to find the files you categorized so well.
- We should have a system where spending time on curation of files should make the files more discoverable. More than 10 years ago I wrote User:Multichill/Next generation categories. Structured data is a step in the right direction, but still far from delivering it's promise. One of the key issues still need solving is that you want to add the most specific statement, maybe refine that statement like push it down the category tree and you want the system to automatically derive the less specific items. Using this old photo as an example:
- inception (P571) → 5 September 2004 and this should imply "September 2004", "2004", "2000s" etc.
- location of creation (P1071) → Grote Markt (Q947295) and this should also imply Haarlem (Q9920), North Holland (Q701) etc. (you see the little prototype that is on this image)
- depicts (P180) → Grote Kerk (Q1545193) and this should also imply church building (Q16970), religious building (Q24398318), etc.
- If we would get faceted search implemented with date and (named) location as facets, you can search for churches and drill down to photos of churches taken in the Netherlands in the 2000s and the example photo would show up. We're not there yet, but maybe someday. Multichill (talk) 12:23, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
April 15
Membership kind of cats, only current membership or everyone in history?
- Category:Association football players by team
- Category:Members of the House of Lords
- Category:Faculty of Harvard University
are cats like these supposed to include all members in history (current and former), or only current members?--RZuo (talk) 11:14, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- if they should include all members, then when the organisation is renamed, do we keep the info specific to the former names, or not?
- example, Category:APIA Leichhardt FC was renamed from APIA Leichhardt Tigers. should Category:Players of APIA Leichhardt Tigers (team members when it was named "Tigers") be kept as such or mixed into a new Category:Players of APIA Leichhardt that includes everyone in history?
- the same can happen to a renamed university, company, etc.--RZuo (talk) 11:19, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
@RZuo:
- Everyone in history.
- You can (but needn't) create subcats for older names.
Jmabel ! talk 15:46, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
Template by decade
How to add an arrow showing the next century ?
for example Category:Maps of the history of the Ottoman Empire in the 1890s doesn't show "1900s"
as an example Category:1490s maps of Turkey has an arrow towards "1500"
How to modify Template:MapHistoryOttomanDecade to have this blue arrow with a link ?
--Io Herodotus (talk) 11:35, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Io Herodotus: I gather that it is possible to do math in templates, though I've never done it myself. {{Years since}} is probably a good model. - Jmabel ! talk 15:55, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
This has been open since October 2019. Can someone close this off? - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 13:39, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
Regarding the 2006-present coat of arms of Cyprus
I have been unable to find any evidence that File:Coat of arms of Cyprus (2023).png is freely licensed, and that file may need to be deleted. Thankfully we have a backup file by User:Di_(they-them). Therefore, users need to replace that file with File:Coat of arms of Cyprus (2006).svg every instance it is used. Also, the coat of arms was not changed in 2023.