User talk:Pi.1415926535

GLX

Do you have any plans to head up to Phase II of the MBTA Green Line Extension for opening week next week? If so, I'd actually like to meet up somewhere and exchange notes - you seem like you have a lot more knowledge than I do about the various rolling stock and some MBTA history and I'd love to learn more. Feel free to email me too. Thanks. The Boston Railfan (talk) 22:02, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Public Domain on Flickr

So, about the public domain. I am confused as to the proof that I need to provide to show that the file I'm trying to upload is indeed under public domain. There is a Flickr file that I would like help on uploading. This one is under public domain, but I remember uploading a similar file and that it needs to have proof of its status, which I could not find and therefore asked for the file to be deleted. If the author already listed the file under public domain, what other proof do I need to find?

And here's the file in case you are wondering: https://www.flickr.com/photos/digitalrailartist/51752268548 Davidng913 (talk) 14:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Davidng913: Please note the following text in the flickr description: Photographer unknown. Scanned from a 35mm Kodachrome slide owned by Digital Rail Artist. That means that the flickr uploader does not own the copyright - merely the physical copy - and does not actually have the legal authority to put the file in the public domain.

For files that are properly put in the public domain, please see the instructions at COM:PDM. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:28, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Pi.1415926535: Thanks for your help. The file now exists as File:Southern Pacific MK MK5000C 502.png on Commons. It is currently awaiting further review. If it is determined that it does not have the proper information that confirms that it's in the public domain, it can therefore be deleted and I will accept any possible penalties to my account, in relation to what happened with me abusing Flickr2Commons. Davidng913 (talk) 16:02, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

Hey he just made a new account https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/HoustonFootball Putitonamap98 (talk) 01:16, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Since you closed the previous deletion request for this user. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 19:55, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi Pi.1415926535, Just wanted to pop by and say thank you for deleting and redirecting those 2 files, I apologise for the edit summary but it becomes frustrating when you ask any admin to do something and 6-8 hours later it's still not done although that being said I don't expect admins to be here 24/7 or at my beckon call so maybe I should be more patient,
Anyway thanks again Pi it's always greatly appreciated,
Have a lovely day, Warmest Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 22:35, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

@Davey2010 Unfortunately, there's a major shortage of active admins on Commons, so it's often a while before anyone gets around to a task. For situations like that where it's not an emergency, I'd recommend just using {{Duplicate}} rather than posting. That puts it into the duplicates queue (which typically gets handled within a few days) so it won't get buried by drama on the admin boards. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:46, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Ah okay I wasn't aware of that, Okie dokie I'll use that in future, Maybe I'm relying on ANI more than I need too tbh, Anyway thanks again for your help Pi, Take care, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 23:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Two Words: Alternate History.

Alternate history is literally history reimagined by someone - either by you, either by me, or someone else totally. So I am confused; why did you remove my Alternate History files regarding UK electoral maps? I literally had "Alternate History" in the title of these files. Your reason is also invalidated, it's not nonsense. I had an entire lore explaining into the depths of what had happened in this map. What is the exact purpose of deleting such files?

Oh, and also, the italicized texts mean the article provided above is under speedy deletion and I am currently contesting on it. Arandompersonlol (talk) 06:13, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

@Arandompersonlol: Commons has a defined scope that requires that all files must be realistically useful for an educational purpose.; it is not a webhost for your personal content. In past discussions, the community voted for the deletion of maps like these. Similarly, Wikipedia explicitly disallows hoaxes and disallows non-Wikipedia content such as personal writings and games. Neither site is the place to host your personal fictional works; it will always be deleted here. Please go find somewhere else to host your lore. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:37, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Il fiore delle mille e una notte

The film wasn't shot in Italy, and was shown for the first time at the Cannes Film Festival, so the PD-Italy template is wrong and the files are in copyright violation. OswaldLR (talk) 00:23, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

@OswaldLR The film not being shot in Italy is irrelevant; per the link in the license template, the "country of origin" is the country of publication, not where it was shot. The showing at Cannes is a bit more complicated, but I suspect it does not change the country of origin either. Speedy deletion is only for files whose deletion is uncontroversial, like obvious copyright violations. For more complex cases like this, please nominate the files for deletion rather than tagging them for speedy deletion. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:30, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Ok so maybe I'm not understanding what "country of origin" means. The film was not shot in Italy, wasn't shown in Italy first and is a coproduction between Italy and France. So how can you say its country of origin is Italy? OswaldLR (talk) 00:42, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

@OswaldLR There is a potential discussion about what exactly constitutes "publication" in this case, and whether the showing at Cannes makes it French for the purposes of copyright. That is a complex subject that needs to be discussed in a DR. As I said before, speedy deletion is only for obvious copyright violations, which this absolutely is not.

More significantly, your listed reason in the speedy deletion tags was completely and unquestionably false. This is a great example of why you should take the time to read the relevant document, which is linked in {{PD-Italy}}, before tagging files for deletion. Per Article 5, section 4: The country of origin shall be considered to be: (a) in the case of works first published in a country of the Union, that country; in the case of works published simultaneously in several countries of the Union which grant different terms of protection, the country whose legislation grants the shortest term of protection. The location that the film was shot is irrelevant. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:44, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Ok thanks, it seems on Commons the PD-Italy license has a different interpretation than in italian Wiki, where it's clearly written that it applies to photos shot in Italy. OswaldLR (talk) 23:00, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

@OswaldLR Hi guys, I can clarify this aspect. On it.wiki they consider the Italian law only for PD-Italy, which counts "20 years from shooting" a picture (for simple photos and still frames), while on Commons we consider Berne convention, and the 20 for PD are calculated from the publication date (which can be much later).

The country of origin is, on Commons, the country of first publication (there are exceptions, but the concept comes from Berne's convention again). The Italian law specifies that the works can be PD after 20 years also if the author is Italian. This explains the differences between the two projects. Here the copyright holder was Italian, and even the producer (thus the copyright was registered in Italy, and French copyright law has nothing to do with it, otherwise we should rediscuss the copyright of many US movies): the country of origin is clearly Italy. HTH Ruthven (msg) 15:24, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

File:Argentina Female Countryball.png

How on earth was this countryball an "advert" ? Especially not to the level of an undiscussed speedy. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:11, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley: Every other upload by this user was spam and/or copyvio (VFC only allows listing one reason). I doubt it was the user's own work, nor do I particularly care about a spammer's unused personal image, but I can undelete and DR if you'd prefer. Side note: {{Scans of correspondence from the West Gloucestershire Power Company in the 1940s}} seems to be adding some content categories to your userpage. It looks like that template has some intricate syntax, so I'll let you fix it rather than making a mess of it myself. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:30, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Block request

Hi, since you blocked Cat Simulator 2015, can you also block Cat Simulator 2015 2 as an alt. (there's also Cat Simulator 2015 3 but it's not registered on Commons) Thanks! --Nintendofan885^{T&Cs apply} 16:54, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

File:اليوم-الوطني-للشهيد--الجزائر.png

Hi,

Can i know the reason why you delete my own work? It's a photo illustration made by me from 0 using adobe photoshop, i don't see any violations Riad Salih (talk) 22:04, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

@Riad Salih Where is the image of the person from? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:16, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

made by me from : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A9morial_du_Martyr#/media/Fichier:Monument_of_the_Martyrs_06_Algiers.jpg

and you shouldn't request speedy deletation for the image directly at least nominate if for deletation and let's the community discuss it. Riad Salih (talk) 22:18, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

@Riad Salih I will undelete the file, but you need to properly indicate the source. The image of the statue was not your own work, and you must comply with its license. Additionally, you need to stop uploading AI-upscaled images. There are numerous issues with AI upscaling and it is not appropriate for Commons. (You adding your watermark is also unacceptable.) Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:24, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm not uploding AI upscalling images

I do my best to edit old pictures (espacilly photos of Algerian War martyrs) by enhancing the quality, find better resoultions, removing the scratches and noise and repairing missing parts with adobe photoshop and lightroom without using any AI service you can compare them with the old versions in wiki common you will find out that they are more visible and clean, and they don't affect the older photo or change the content or adding fake eyes or mouths or any parts of the body.

for the watermark I will not use it in the future. Riad Salih (talk) 22:35, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

The end result is the same: upscaling an image by any means inevitably results in details not present in the original (i.e, inaccuracies). Please also see COM:OVERWRITE - major edits should be uploaded as separate files. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:51, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for closing this old and difficult DR. Someone had to do it, one way or the other. -- Asclepias (talk) 13:36, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Amtrak Auto Train

Wouldn't it have been easier to just redirect it to Auto Train, as I have now done? Famartin (talk) 18:41, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

@Famartin: There was no need to create a duplicate category, nor is there any need to create two subcategories just for a single photo. Category:Road signs for Lorton station is equally ridiculous. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:59, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

You're making two false assumptions for which you have no proof: One, that other's won't make a similar assumption of it being Amtrak Auto Train vs Auto Train, and two, that there is only the one photo. Famartin (talk) 19:03, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

@Famartin: When you find enough photos to justify three new categories, please do let me know. Thus far, you have created those three categories for the single image. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:11, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Your images in your special file still show up as "Media needing categories as of 31 May 2021"

Glad I got your attention! Please fix. Thanks, Krok6kola (talk) 20:18, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

GE P42DC locomotives of Amtrak

There are 775 images of GE P42DC locomotives of Amtrak alone. How can you suggest diffusion isn't needed for this category? --DanTD (talk) 03:06, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

@DanTD: Diffusion is for when there is a way of subdivision that is useful for users - categories should be exactly as detailed as is useful, and no more. Dividing by individual (non-notable) locomotive is not useful, and it fact is anti-useful: users are much more likely to be looking for "a GE P42DC locomotive belonging to Amtrak" than "this specific GE P42DC locomotive belonging to Amtrak". (Imagine, for example, you're looking for a new infobox image for the GE Genesis article. Do you want to scroll through four pages of images, or do you want to open hundreds of subcategories?) While 775 images is a large category, there's no useful way to subdivide it. (Save of course for if there are any individually distinct units - for the toasters, we have Category:Amtrak 915 because it's preserved in a museum.)

If you want to sort the category, it'd be far more useful to simply add the proper by-number category to each image. That lets you do intersection searches for the rare cases they're needed. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:24, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Ahh, so just museum pieces. Got it. Now we just have to find out when the P42DC's are going to be retired, and make sure no future Amtrak locomotives are numbered 915 or 945. For the record, I really wasn't trying to suggest that any of the locomotives were more notable. I just wanted to sort them out. ----DanTD (talk) 12:37, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Category question

@Pi.1415926535: For Wikipedia I have created over 1,377 categories. Know on Wikimedia Commons I have created just a few, know for some weird reason I can not create categories for Wikimedia Commons. Why has this changed? Catfurball (talk) 21:26, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

@Catfurball: I'm not sure what you're saying. Are you saying that a technical issue is preventing you from creating categories on Commons? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:36, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

@Pi.1415926535: Yes. Catfurball (talk) 21:38, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

@Catfurball: You're not blocked in any manner, so there's no reason why you shouldn't be able to create categories. I would recommend posting at Commons:Village Pump, where others might be able to help you more than I can. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:09, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Armenian Church of the Holy Mother of God, Aleppo, 2010 (1).jpg

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 06:29, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

File:Gyroscope (6984564617).jpg

Hi, I don't understand why you deleted this. This should be OK, after the description is trimmed. Thanks, Yann (talk) 20:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

@Yann: Undeleted and cleaned up, thanks for the notice. I think it slipped in between when I checked the category and when I actually hit "delete" on VFC. Best, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:00, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Police escorted buses in San Francisco.webm

Re [1], I added it back to Category:San Francisco since Category:October 2012 in San Francisco is a niche category, based only on the date and location, not something that is in the main category tree. Isn't there a better category that the video could be added to? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:59, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mike Peel: I've added several additional categories. However, as uploader, you are in the best position to add specific categories to your files (rather than the broad Category:San Francisco, which is fully diffused into subcategories). For example, I had to use Street View to figure out the location, whereas you may have already known. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:03, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Sorry, this was archival media, I had no idea where it was from within San Francisco. Many thanks for finding the location and adding the categories! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:47, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mike Peel: I understand - it can be hard to remember that far back. I actually keep a log of every single place I photograph; after a dozen years it's 70 pages long. It's saved me a lot of time searching through years of photos for one specific shot. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:36, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Sock duplicate of your upload tagged

Fyi, File:Oregon Coast Historical Railway Museum, Coose Bay, OR. (21313286053).jpg -- Ooligan (talk) 19:16, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Wrong file deleted?

File:John Kerry official Secretary of State portrait.jpg appears to have been deleted instead of another one. This was pointed out at de:Wikipedia:Fragen_zur_Wikipedia#Löschung_eines_Bildes_auf_Commons. Enhancing999 (talk) 20:57, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

@Enhancing999: Thanks for the notice. I'm not sure how the original file got deleted. I'm going through CommonsDelinker global contributions and reverting all the removals of the file. Best, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:12, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

There is a derived image of those deleted that also should be deleted

You deleted the files on this nomination by myself but there is still one file that was listed on the nomination that should be deleted. This one: [:File:Angelica Chasin cropped.png]. Cheers! --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 23:52, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Wrongly deleted Category:Camera+Lens

Hi Pi.1415926535,

You've deleted [[:Category:Taken with Nikon corporation NIKON D3300 and Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR II]] and several other camera/lens categories after Commons:Categories for discussion/2016/08/Category:Taken with Nikon D300 and Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM + Hoya ND1000 filter + Hoya PRO1 Digital Circular Polarisation filters, but the consensus was not there.

If you read the last message by User:BMacZero, they actually say that images should be categorized as camera+lens and additional categories for whatever individual filter/accessory was used. Now The categories they mentioned should be used are deleted.

The examples that gave way to this discussion were ridiculous combinations of camera+lens+filter+accessories, but camera+lens is quite useful to assess how a given combination works and it is quite common (as this data is available as exif tags and eg [Commons:DtMediaWiki]] can automatically add the camera+lens category).

Please restore these categories.

Regards,

--Trougnouf (talk) 23:22, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@Trougnouf: BMacZero was the only participant in the CfD and the Village Pump thread who suggested keeping the camera+lens categories, rather than a full upmerge. You are welcome to start a new CfD or Village Pump discussion about the camera+lens categories, and I will not delete any more, but I do not think it is valuable to restore the categories. Intersection categories have to be considered carefully, because they remove files from the parent category. Someone who wants to look for images by a specific camera may not want to look through dozens of camera+lens categories.

If you wish to see camera+lens, the search function works fine for that. The search string incategory:"Taken_with_AF-S_DX_Nikkor_18-55mm_f/3.5-5.6G_VR_II" incategory:"Taken_with_Nikon_D3300" will find all images that would be in Category:Taken with Nikon corporation NIKON D3300 and Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR II.

If you want to restore that category, go ahead. But if you do, please title it Category:Taken with Nikon D3300 and Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR II for consistency with other categories. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:07, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I did not break up the camera and lens in my example mostly because I was just breaking the category names on the plus signs. I agree with Pi.1415926535 that almost any kind of category union should be achieved with searches or other tools that sit on top of the data rather than baking it into the category tree. – BMacZero (🗩) 02:18, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Sounds good enough to me, thank you for the responses and the incategory tip. I will keep the category deleted for now and (add a filter in dtMediaWiki to fix the naming issue and) recreate it if I upload more pictures from that camera. As far as I know the discussion was centered on overly specific combinations with "Camera with lens + accessories" and there doesn't seem to be an issue with "Category:Camera with lens" so I don't see the need to start a discussion. --Trougnouf (talk) 09:58, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Ellsworth Train line in Berkeley map.

Hi Pi.1415926535,

"The map incorrectly identifies the Ellsworth Line as being part of the Key Route system; it was in fact part of the East Bay Electric Lines."

I lived at Ellsworth and Deakin, 1 block away, and although I was there in the 1960s, I have seen both multiple maps, and pictures of THAT line, with the RED East Bay Electric Lines. I was wondering really about the line that went up Hopkins and stopped at The Alameda. Was there a train that ran up Enice? or was it just a bridge that got filled over for the Henry street remodel. The concrete is there for the bridge, but I cannot find any RED EBEL that ran up Eunice, No pictures, no map. I looked at the street carefully, and there is no indication of removed tracks. Again, thank you for your thoroughness in indicating that the Ellsworth line in Berkeley, that crossed Ashby, and continued to the campus of The University of California, is indeed a East Bay Electric Line, known as the Red trains.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/78/1927_East_Bay_Electric_Lines_and_Key_System_map.jpg

Here is the map of East Bay Electric for confirmation...

https://localwiki.org/oakland/East_Bay_Electric_Lines/_files/sp_elec.jpg/_info/

and I saw a photograph if a Red line car preparing to cross Ashby ( now a house! ), that came from the Halcyon Street station, and it had 3 round windows at the front, ( black and white photo ), confirming that it was a Red line train. 207.53.252.58 07:54, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the note! It doesn't appear there was ever a rail line on Eunice. The EBEL (and from 1941 to 1958, the Key System F line) ran on a private right-of-way on the west side of Henry. The tracks crossed Eunice on a bridge, while the traffic lanes met Eunice at grade. That looks to be due to the steep uphill grade on Eunice. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:51, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

File:Platform construction at Medford Tufts station (2), September 2020.jpg

File:Platform construction at Medford Tufts station (2), September 2020.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

B (talk) 18:10, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

accidentally calling your closure into question

I recently nominated File:Monica Elfriede Witt in uniform.jpg for deletion, citing your closure of this deletion discussion. I took your closure as precedent in the nomination, but it's apparently not as cut-and-dried as I thought and instead I've led to your closing being questioned. I'm not an expert on the matter, just basing my understanding on previous decisions, and would definitely like a consensus on this; not asking your to come down one way or another, but would you mind looking in on the discussion? Cheers, Fourthords | =Λ= | 20:38, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

@Fourthords: Thanks for reaching out. Unfortunately, I don't think I can be much help here. My close was based entirely on the lack of a source making it impossible to verify any possible routes to it being PD; I don't have any useful knowledge about the contractor issue in this discussion. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:49, 23 November 2023 (UTC)