Commons:Village pump

Shortcut: COM:VP

• Community portal
  • introduction
• Help desk
• Village pump
  • copyright
  • proposals
  • technical
• Administrators' noticeboard
  • vandalism
  • user problems
  • blocks and protections

↓ Skip to table of contents ↓       ↓ Skip to discussions ↓       ↓ Skip to the last discussion ↓

COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES Commons Help desk Village pump (general discussion) Copyright Proposals Technical Graphics and photography discussion Photography critiques Image improvement Illustration workshop Map workshop Photography workshop Video and sound workshop Categories for discussion Undeletion requests Deletion requests Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard Translators' noticeboard Work requests for bots Contact administrators Vandalism User problems (Dispute resolution) Blocks and protections Bureaucrats' noticeboard CheckUser requests Oversight requests Telegram IRC webchat Commons mailing list (archive) Commons' bugs on Phabricator Welcome to the Village pump This page is used for discussions of the operations 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/2025/09. Please note: If you want to ask why unfree/non-commercial material is not allowed at Wikimedia Commons or if you want to suggest that allowing it would be a good thing, please do not comment here. It is probably pointless. One of Wikimedia Commons’ core principles is: "Only free content is allowed." This is a basic rule of the place, as inherent as the NPOV requirement on all Wikipedias. Have you read our FAQ? For changing the name of a file, see Commons:File renaming. Any answers you receive here are not legal advice and the responder cannot be held liable for them. If you have legal questions, we can try to help but our answers cannot replace those of a qualified professional (i.e. a lawyer). Your question will be answered here; please check back regularly. Please do not leave your email address or other contact information, as this page is widely visible across the internet and you are liable to receive spam. Purposes which do not meet the scope of this page: Please do not make deletion requests here: use the relevant process for it instead. For technical support and graphics talks (PNG, SVG, GIF, etc.), please post on the Graphics village pump. To ask for image improvement, see: Graphic Lab/Photography workshop for photographs. Graphic Lab/Map workshop for maps. Graphic Lab/Illustration workshop for other illustrations. To ask for video or audio improvement, see Commons:Graphic Lab/Video and sound workshop. For translation requests, please post at Commons:Requests for translation. For media requests, please post at Commons:File requests. For questions about copyright, technical matters, or help that does not relate to the general Commons community as well as proposals, please see the other discussion boards linked in the blue panel at the top. Search archives:     Start a new discussion

Legend
In the last hour
In the last day
In the last week
In the last month
More than one month
Manual settings
When exceptions occur, please check the setting first.

Village pump and gaslight at a meeting place in the village of Amstetten, Germany. [add]

Centralized discussion See also: Village pump/Proposals   ■ Archive Commons:Village pump/Proposals#Temporary account IP viewer policy (6 September 2025) User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands#Replace images with .svg version (5 August 2025) Category talk:Heroes' Cemetery in the Philippines#RfC: Cemetery name (18 July 2025) Discussion on Copyright law of North Korea (16 March 2025) Template: View   ■ Discuss    ■ Edit   ■ Watch

	SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 7 days.

September 11

How do I request a category move?

A few days ago I've requested that category:Sao Chingcha be moved by adding a template but nothing happened so I wanna know if I'm doing it correctly. [Also this page (Commons:Village pump) is Wikimedia Common's version of en:WP:Teahouse right? I'm not very familiar with Commons] 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 07:46, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Your template was correct.

But giant swing can quite often refer to other things (try google images), so i dont agree that the category for the thai structure should be moved. RoyZuo (talk) 12:38, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

@RoyZuo with utmost respect, I brought up the topic of renaming the article en:Giant Swing many times on English Wikipedia (en:Talk:Giant_Swing) all efforts ended with no consensus to move the page.

It's fine if Commons doesn't use the same naming scheme as on English Wikipedia. I just felt like bringing this up just in case. 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 06:30, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Now that I think about it, the reason is that a criteria to have a category on Commons is not the same as en:WP:note, oh well 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 02:09, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Commons doesn't have an exact equivalent of the Teahouse. - Jmabel ! talk 21:15, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

September 18

Burls and cankers

Hi, the categories Burls and Canker included each other, creating an endless loop. After scanning the articles en:Burl and en:Canker I have removed both from the other category as the former is about monstrous growth and the latter is about diseases. Not being a native speaker I prefer to have these edits checked. Thanks! → bertux 11:53, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

I think the way it is now with catseealso is fine. - Jmabel ! talk 19:42, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

There are many thousands of these endless loops to resolve at Commons:Database reports/Category cycles. I just don't think VP is a place to ask about one specific categorization. Prototyperspective (talk) 11:28, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

So I should have asked where to ask a simple question. Overkill? Bureaucracy? Btw, could you be bothered to give some hints about a more suitable place and how I could have known about the unsuitability of the Village pump and how I could have found that better place? → bertux 15:07, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I think it was a perfectly good place to ask. - Jmabel ! talk 20:46, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I would not ask the question or ask it at the talk page of the page I linked. That is because it is not so important to ask the entire community about it (overkill to make a thread here) and because there's countless of such cases if one goes through the page – I mean like many dozens of such questions. That's just my opinion. Prototyperspective (talk) 21:56, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

I think they wouldn't have asked if not for the language issue. I've definitely asked questions here that might look trivial for native English speakers, like questions about category naming, just because I wasn't 100% sure about the terminology. Nakonana (talk) 08:15, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Indeed. Also there is no Helpdesk at Commons so I chose the Village pump as the next best. As for the talk page: is it just my home wiki (nlwik) or does nobody read category talk? → bertux 15:42, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Just to let you know, there is a Help desk on Commons, see Commons:Help desk. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 16:01, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Oh. A Help desk, not a Helpdesk. Thanks! → bertux 10:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

September 19

CCTV material from problematic sources

The now-deleted full (18+ minutes) CCTV material depicting the killing of Iryna Zarutska has been uploaded from a source called WatchPeopleDie. I'd consider this source generally problematic with respect to COM:DIGNITY, meaning that material uploaded from there very likely violates it. I found Commons:Problematic_sources and Commons:Bad_sources but they are only about problematic/bad sources with respect to licensing, as far as I see. Should there be a similar list about sources problematic as to COM:DIGNITY? Is there such a list already?

Part of the background of this question is that some people argued that this material was released by reputable sources (authorities, police, government) and these would have been arguments that would really have strenghthened the position of those in favour keeping the file. But the immediate source of the material hosted on commons was not some authority or (reputable) news agency. If the material uploaded to WatchPeopleDie was originally released by some authority or reputable news agency is hard to track down but in the end: if there were official or reputable sources that released that material the material should have been taken directly from there. I don't think that Wikimedia commons (and ultimately Wikipedia) should be a hub for material from pages like WatchPeopleDie, no matter if relevant to recent events or ineligible for copyright. People can go there if interested.

I won't take part in the discussion much, but I'm interested in your opinion. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 07:58, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I can imagine that some people rather emphasize the historical component of this video, and disregard the importance of the source --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 09:35, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

"If the material uploaded to WatchPeopleDie was originally released by some authority or reputable news agency is hard to track down but in the end" The idea that the Charlotte Area Transit System had somehow lost any access to their own CCTVs and had the footage released without their consent by a third party is a bit far out i think Trade (talk) 17:14, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by "lost any access to their own CCTVs", but it's entirely plausible that the video was posted without the transit authority's knowledge or consent. Information security at these sorts of agencies is hardly airtight - and I would be much more astonished if they had authorized the publication of the video to that web site. Omphalographer (talk) 00:40, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdt4eLWaHsg (pause at 0:43 to avoid seeing the disturbing footage)

Feel free to be astonished at CATS. Unless you wish to argue that major American news networks are all conspiring together to cover up the origin of the video Trade (talk) 02:58, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

The video you linked to does not show the sensitive footage (her being stabbed and dying).

I don't really see reason to doubt that CATS gave the material to the third party (e.g. a news organisation) that released it themselves. But I doubt that they posted it directly to WatchPeopleDie. This is what my final point of the sentence you quoted was about: "[...] but in the end: if there were official or reputable sources that released that material the material should have been taken directly from there." The source which decided to release the material "fully" (including the sensitive footage) matters. Different news organisations weigh different aspects differently when deciding about how to release such material (human dignity, education, monetisation, politicisation, reach, ...) and not all of them align well with Wikimedia commons commitment to the depicted subject's moral rights (as expressed here Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_people#Moral_issues). This is especially important when people tend to delegate responsibility for these decisions upstream (to the source the material comes from). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 07:05, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Considering the name of the website and the fact that the footage had been heavily censored i doubt whoever uploader it had access to the original footage Trade (talk) 03:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Type of Women's dresses

I there a name/category for this type of dress? Multi layered around the shoulders with lots of buttons.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:07, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

en:WP:Reference desk/Humanities is probably a better place to ask this kind of question. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:12, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

September 20

Important discussion

See Commons talk:Country specific consent requirements#Take a picture column. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 00:29, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

It really isn't. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:15, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Media of the day (MOTD)

Hello, anyone interesting in taking over MOTD? I have been adding most of the MOTD for the past 2 months, but I am going on a break soon and will be busy starting next month.

I have already made sure that there are MOTDs until the end of this month, so you can starting adding the MOTDs for October. It should be quite straightforward since it consists of 4 steps:

1. Select a good quality, no known copyright issues, educationally useful, interesting audio/video file (I usually just choose one from Commons:Featured media, but others audios/videos are fine too)
2. Find an empty slot in Commons:Media of the day and add the file to it using {{Motd filename}}
3. Add an English (or other suitable languages) description to the description template using {{Motd description}} (optionally you can add some links to Wikipedia)
4. Add a {{Media of the day}} tag to the file page of the selected file

Thank you. Tvpuppy (talk) 21:21, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I've been adding most of the files before the last 2 months and will resume adding a few every now and then. I think for other users interested in contributing there it's important to emphasize that the videos featured there are supposed to be of high-quality (accurate, resolution, etc) and of somewhat global or international significance in some way. A good indication of quality for example is if it's used in a major article of a large Wikipedia.

By the way, the MOTD category is one of the best places to explore interesting high-quality videos and audios on Commons in a discovery kind of way: Feed to explore interesting content on Wikimedia Commons Prototyperspective (talk) 13:27, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Btw, thanks for your work on this. I remember years ago motd used to always be pretty boring, but lately i've been seeing plenty of really interesting things in MOTD. Bawolff (talk) 21:36, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

September 21

Palestine in "Countries of Asia" module/template

I started a discussion on moving Palestine from the partially recognised portion of the list of countries into the recognised section over at Template_talk:Countries_of_Asia#Palestine_again - ImStevan (talk) 13:36, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

How do you find copyright information about an archived newspaper photograph? What if the authors and news agencies are unreachable to you?

Hello, an administrator left notice asking for copyright permission related information on my talk page regarding two photographs relating to John Gacy Wayne that I've uploaded. Both of those photographs were borrowed from newspaper archived websites, which I added in the descriptions. With one of those photographs, the Chicago Tribune affiliated photographer had died in 2022 according to his colleague memorializing him in his blog.

The other photograph was borrowed from a 1980 Pittsburg Press article, which gave no names of authors or photographers. One issue with the Pittsburg Press is that it closed down in the 90s. If the wikipedia page is to believed, its remaining assets were purchased and absorbed by the Pittsburg Post-Gazette in 2011. Another version of the "Piest relatives at Gacy trial" photograph was used by a 1980 Noblesville Ledger article published on the same day. Like the Pittsburg Press article, the Noblesville Ledger article gave no names of authors or photographers beyond crediting the UPI photo agency. I'm not certain if the photograph is under the Pittsburg Press, Noblesville Ledger, or the UPI copyright, and the name of its photographer is completely lost to me.

Although my rough assumptions are that the copyright holders are the Chicago Tribune and UPI photos respectively, what should I do if I cannot find the copyright information or the holders are simply too inaccessible for me to reach? Randomuser335S (talk) 19:04, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

@Randomuser335S: Hi, You have to check the newspaper archives for a copyright notice. These can't be under a Creative Commons license, which didn't exist when these images were first published. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:30, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

I found the copyright information of ancestry.com copyright information of ancestry.com, the company that operates the Newspaper.com archives I took both photos from. Is this what I need to resolve the "permission notice" issue? Randomuser335S (talk) 00:05, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

• When you clip a news article or an image, add in the link from Ancestry, you can add it in other_versions= . Then others can look for copyright formalities on page 1. The image belongs to UPI and they did not comply with copyright formalities. I corrected the license. The Library of Congress researched and found that they did not register for copyrights, any image after 1989 would still be under an active copyright. --RAN (talk) 02:04, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

  Thanks, I greatly appreciate that help Randomuser335S (talk) 02:24, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

  • @Randomuser335S: it's hard to tell from the above what you do or don't know, but you might want to read Commons:Uploading works by a third party and also, for the complexity of U.S. copyright issues in respects where most other major countries are more straightforward, Commons:Hirtle chart. Also—you might want to look into this separately—press agencies such as AP and UPI often did not copyright their photographs, but it's not the easiest thing to research for an individual photo. You might search in the archives of Village pump/Copyright for several related discussions. - Jmabel ! talk 05:51, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Rules on categorizing arms of users

Are there rules on categorization of coats of arms of users?

I have uploaded a personal coat of arms for myself and I’m not sure if I should categorize it as though it is a regular coat of arms for all the elements, or abstain from categorization to avoid misleading people that it might be official. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 22:58, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

@Immanuelle Perhaps you can categorize it to Category:Coats of arms of users. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 23:28, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

I have already categorized it there. But I’m asking whether it should get categories for charges and other traits.

Arguments for inclusion: gives people a better idea of what a thing looks like and makes it easier to find svg assets

Arguments against inclusion: Someone might be searching for a real legally recognized coat of arms with a certain property. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 01:32, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Since there are hundreds of coats of arms of users, it would be possible to create categories like category:Coats of arms of users with pales gules. However, that might not be the most useful way to use your time in Commons. Pere prlpz (talk) 12:54, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Coats of arms of users must stand first in Category:Coats of arms of users, and may be categorized in heraldic categories; redoing user-specific heraldic categories, i.e. deploying parallel tree structures, would cause more confusion than anything else, similar to the problems caused by localized heraldic categories. --Kontributor 2K (talk) 13:10, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

September 22

Unpublished works USA

Somewhere there was a chart for what is PD. Unpublished works in the US is a special case. Protected for 120 years? I recently uploaded a lot of pictures from Belgian family albums (I have the inheritance rigths). I suppose that by the US definitions this is unpublished work. As I use the Cc-by-sa-4.0-heirs license, so the files are free for use. But theoreticaly they are unpublished. I have two questions: When I upload them in the Commons, is this a publication? And does the 120 year start counting then? Does the Unpublished works rule apply outside the US? example: File:Tours bridge 1924.jpg This is not PD in Europe, as the author has died in 1967. For the US it is probably PD, because it is before 1930. Or is it not PD because it is unpublished? Smiley.toerist (talk) 16:13, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

The somewhere for the chart might be there. In short, you want to know when your copyright ends in the US? It seems it would be 70 years pma, in 2038 for this photo. As copyright holder, you are publishing the photos on Commons. Each country has its own rules. -- Asclepias (talk) 17:05, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

• Uploading to Commons is a form of publication, since you are distributing a copy of the photo to the public.
• See first section of Commons:Hirtle chart or {{PD-US-unpublished}}. For works that are currently unpublished, works that were created by known author are protected 70 years from their death. If death date is not known or if the works were created anonymously/pseudonymously/for hire, then it is protected 120 years from the year of creation.
• This rule only applies in US, since different countries have their own laws regarding unpublished work. For example, according to COM:CRT/Belgium, like other EU countries, it appears unpublished works are copyrighted for an additional 25 years from their first publication, if the copyright term of the works have ended.
• For File:Tours bridge 1924.jpg, it is unpublished until now, but it is created by an author with a known death date, and the date is less than 70 years ago, so it will not qualify for {{PD-US-unpublished}}. Therefore, as Asclepias mentioned above, it will not be in PD in the US until 2038.

Tvpuppy (talk) 17:17, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

• If you inherited the copyrights then {{Cc-by-sa-4.0-heirs}} is valid, whether previously published or unpublished. People have been releasing old family albums since the beginning of Commons. --RAN (talk) 03:22, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Are there any statistics about the use of heirs licences? I seen to be the only one using them. There is an automatic Category:CC-BY-SA-4.0, but no Category:CC-BY-SA-Heirs.Smiley.toerist (talk) 17:48, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Here is a transclusion count of the template: [1] (or alternatively the full list of files that uses the template [2]), not sure how many of them are your uploads though. Tvpuppy (talk) 18:32, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Also, the template Heirs-license has over 17000 transclusions. I don't know if that includes also its use through other templates such as Cc-by-sa-4.0-heirs and others. -- Asclepias (talk) 19:44, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

I suspect there are a lot more heirs cases, but they are probably under Own work.Smiley.toerist (talk) 22:08, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

How to confirm the copyright here?

This file photo of a mayor came from this article. There is no apparent declaration of CC-BY-SA copyright. How does one decide in this case if the image is usable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingsacrificer (talk • contribs) 19:23, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Everything is protected by copyright until you have evidence of otherwise Trade (talk) 21:29, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

"Everything is protected…" => "Everything is presumed protected…" - Jmabel ! talk 22:01, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

• Clear case of copyright violation false license claim by the uploader; "©2025 CBC/Radio-Canada. All rights reserved." on source page. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:14, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Portrait of Pedro Sanchez / Nicolas Maduro has corrupted file page

I am not knowledgeable enough to figure out what the problem is, but something is not right with the description of this picture: File:Obisk španskega predsednika vlade v Sloveniji (53658605930) (cropped).jpg (current Prime Minister of Spain)

The description features another image, a portrait of Nicolás Maduro (current President of Venezuela); what is going on? TucanHolmes (talk) 20:53, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

An IP user messing around [3] it seems. Nakonana (talk) 21:32, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

A user account also. -- Asclepias (talk) 21:38, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Reverted to the initial description. -- Asclepias (talk) 21:38, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

By the way, the requirements of that source flickr account contradict its PD mark tag. "The use of photos is free of charge and allowed for non-commercial purposes. When using, it is obligatory to mention the author of the photo." -- Asclepias (talk) 23:41, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

a lot of people don't understand the licences, have the same issue with the Indian Foreign govt flickr where they have released the images for free-use by writing that down on their profile but the images themselves are licenced under ARR or NC-ND..In this case, that flickr profile is the official one for the Govt of Slovenia so the photographers are paid for by them so they own the rights, even the exif says "Slovenian Press Agency" ...they definitely meant for it to be released under cc-by-sharealike (thus the author of the photo request)...The Non-commercial rule has hurt wikimedia Commons the most cause over the 15 years of doing this, it has been hard to get majority of this officially run govt and organisation run flickr to understand why wikipedia needs the images to be released for commercial use even though we ourselves are non-commercial.. Stemoc 04:48, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

The person in the picture is definitely Pedro Sánchez. User:Siempreloco made several modifications I very strongly doubt their good faith. Mainly because one of them is changing "Pedro" (Peter) into "Perro" (dog), change resulting into an insult. In addition, changes to this file are the only activity of mentioned user in this project. B25es (talk) 13:42, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

September 24

Template question

A question, some of the page-header navboxes (Template:Countries of North America, for instance) don't display correctly on the "root" categories for some of the countries in them. Note for instance Category:United States, where it isn't showing the bold 'this is this category' for 'United States', because it links to Category:The United States, as most subcategories of Category:United States use "foo of the United States". I'm just wondering if there's any way to work around this aside from creating a fork of the template lacking "the" in that one? - The Bushranger (talk) 01:39, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

@The Bushranger: it should be possible in the template to determine that there is not prefix, and in that case not use "the". Might have to think about whether there is a suffix, not sure if that would need different handling, would have to look at a representative sample of places where the template is used. - Jmabel ! talk 03:16, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

@Jmabel: Category:United States for Template:Countries of the Americas, Category:Canary Islands for Template:Countries of Africa, to give two examples. - The Bushranger (talk) 03:18, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

@The Bushranger: Two cases is not a representative sample. What I'm saying is that besides coding the difference for the case of no prefix and no suffix, we need to look at a representative set of categories that have a suffix but no prefix to the country name, and make sure that none of those should have a leading "the". - Jmabel ! talk 04:15, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Is "Self-Portrait with Candles" in Google Art project in public domain?

Hello all, I noticed the painting "Self-Portrait with Candles" (c. 1906) by Lily Delissa Joseph‏ (died in 1940) is on Google Art project: [4]. Can this specific file be uploaded to Commons? Its resolution is higher than the resolution of the existing file. פעמי-עליון (talk) 20:01, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

@פעמי-עליון: I would think that is certainly PD everywhere. Is there anything that gives you any doubts? - Jmabel ! talk 20:22, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Jmabel maybe the photographer of the painting has copyrights? פעמי-עליון (talk) 20:47, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

@פעמי-עליון: To the best of my knowledge, there is no jurisdiction where the Sweat of the brow doctrine still persists. As far as Commons is concerned, we do not recognize any claim to a new copyright for an accurate reproduction of a two-dimensional work that is in the public domain. It is imaginable that some court in some country could at some future date rule otherwise, but that is true of anything in copyright law. - Jmabel ! talk 21:08, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Uploading is fine: it's the policy of the WMF and Commons that simple copies of two-dimensional artworks do not attract copyright even if they were made in a country that recognizes a "sweat of the brow" copyright.

As for being PD everywhere, it's not PD in Jamaica (life+95, the extension from life+50 to life+95 was explicitly made retroactive, and Jamaica didn't adopt the rule of the shorter term). Copyright appears to have expired in the rest of the world (Mexico is life+100, but the extension was not retroactive). --Carnildo (talk) 21:12, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you Jmabel and Carnildo!

I have another question in a very similar topic: do we consider pictures of two-dimensional artworks on not flat (but smooth) surfaces, like ancient jars, as PD? I mean pictures of paintings on jars like these: [5] [6] [7]. פעמי-עליון (talk) 11:52, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

@פעמי-עליון: generally considered three-dimensional, but an extreme enough closeup might be effectively flat. - Jmabel ! talk 19:45, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

September 25

1 second shorteŕ

When I view the video of the day the elapsed time shows a second off the time showing at the link R. Douglas McKay (talk) 00:55, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Please be specific – nobody will know which video you're referring to just 1 day after you started this thread. Are you referring to this video? And do you mean that the video duration shows 1:40 instead of 1:41 as in the preview? The displayed time elapsed seems accurate. In any case, this should be discussed at Commons:Village pump/Technical. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:46, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

The duration is rounded up, while the current timestamp is rounded down, because subseconds are a thing. As both do not share the same source of truth (the duration is often stored separately), this difference can occur. It is pretty common and not really a concern. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 21:00, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

I think that'll do as an answer..

Just got curious as why. R. Douglas McKay (talk) 21:20, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

How come the Category "Things named after camels" has 2.6 million files at level 3

How come Category:Things named after camels has 2.6 million files at level 3 ? see PetScan — Preceding unsigned comment added by JotaCartas (talk • contribs) 15:50, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Because of Category:Uploaded with VicuñaUploader. Strakhov (talk) 16:16, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

 Comment I literally laughed out loud over this. - Jmabel ! talk 19:17, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

At least my lack of memory served to make you have a good laugh 😂😂😂. Greetings JotaCartas (talk) 23:15, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

 Comment, see previous discussion at Commons:Village pump/Archive/2025/03#Why PetScan on Category:"Camels" returns 2'622'475 results ?. Tvpuppy (talk) 16:29, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

oops, sorry. I should have remembered, but it actually slipped my mind. Thanks JotaCartas (talk) 17:07, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Indeed, these things named after xyz categories are causing quite some issues. Mainly, it makes offtopic files show up in ways to view files in a category branch (the category and all its subcategories) – the deepcategory search operator can be used for that. So for example the wall of images shown by searching deepcategory:"Camels" is rendered useless due to the inclusion of files from that subcategory. There's several other types of categories like it, just usually with not as many files in them.

Deepcat view with options to filter cats with offtopic files

A solution assuming these categories stay and stay categorized in that cat as they are, would be to enable users to easily exclude that cat from the deepcategory view. At the top of that page it would show a list of subcats sorted by number of files included in the results. "Things named after camels" would probably be in the top 3 and the user would notice this and could simply click some X button to exclude them (or alternatively maybe use a premade filter that has common cats to exclude). On the right is an illustration of what I mean.

This solution is described at m:Community Wishlist/Wishes/In Commons category deepcategory view mode (wall of images), allow easily filtering offtopic subcats.
Prototyperspective (talk) 22:09, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Is there a particular reason Category:Uploaded with VicuñaUploader and Category:VicuñaUploader have to be connected to each other? Like why isn't it something that could be connected through a "see also" link or similar without the categories actually being linked? --Adamant1 (talk) 23:05, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

It only applies to this specific issue rather than the general case, but Category:VicuñaUploader probably shouldn't be in Category:Things named after camels. The vicuña is in the same family as camels, but to my knowledge it's not considered a camel (nor is the llama in the same family). Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:42, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

OK. I just removed it then. That seems like a good solution. --Adamant1 (talk) 00:45, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

September 26

Photo challenge July results

Vending machines: Entries • Votes • Scores

Rank	1	2	3
image
Title	Selecta vending machine in Chavannes-de-Bogis, Switzerland.	Ticket machines in the concourse of Nuremberg Central Station	Sake, øl og whisky i byen Fuji i Japan.
Author	W8Kp3mZr1j	Ermell	Odd Roar Aalborg
Score	11	8	6

Waterside structures: Entries • Votes • Scores

Rank	1	2	3
image
Title	De Adriaan Windmill in Haarlem, Netherlands	Seen on a tour of Norfolk Harbor, these massive dockside cranes will work on naval vessels.	Blick von der 580 Meter hohen Steilklippe „Cabo Girao“ auf die am Ufer liegenden Terrassenfelder in der Nähe der Ortschaft Câmara de Lobos auf Madeira.
Author	JoanaImages	JoannaPoe	Otto Domes
Score	15	14	13

Congratulations to JoanaImages, JoannaPoe, Otto Domes, W8Kp3mZr1j, Ermell and Odd Roar Aalborg. -- Jarekt (talk) 03:01, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

A huge thank you to the voters — I’m genuinely excited my photo was chosen! Thank you! JoanaImages (talk) 08:38, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Again, Internet Archive

I remember reading about Commons planning to extensively use Internet Archive to verify the origin and licensing status of media files. This is not my first comment here about this topic, so I hope I am not too annoying. The true reliability of Internet Archive is not publicly known, but there are reasons for great worry. See here, especially the comments section and the responses by a member of Archive's staff about backups and redundancy (backups are not a regular practice, storing 3 copies not feasible for our organization at this time, and our average drive-life is indeed short, that is most likely due to temperature and vibration in our datacenter, we do not employ dampening mechanisms; for this last one, please remember that both of their copies are in or near San Francisco...).

I've talked about this topic in Wikipedia's village pump (link). I'm not optimistic, but I think (and I'm not alone) that WMF can't rely on Internet Archive, and it needs its own archive, or some other external help, but Archive, as it is (unless it has changed a lot from 2016), doesn't seem to be a valid option for this purpose. You can also comment on this topic in Wikipedia's village pump, if you are interested MGeog2022 (talk) 13:29, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Your link is 10 years old and it is totally possible that their systems are different now. --Zache (talk) 13:58, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

I really hope so. What I worried me more was the way the person from Archive talked about it. An organization that claims to be built for the long-term, and an infrastructure that doesn't seem right even for the short-term, and talking about it without showing any worry. It's a miracle that Archive's contents are still there, given how things were back then (let's hope they are somewhat different now). MGeog2022 (talk) 14:06, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

I would imagine that some people have similar thoughts as you and have taken some measures to protect the integrity of the files. But I agree that long-term archiving is too often given too little consideration by people --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 14:57, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

The question is what we could do. Something like considering of backing up old US government content, for example? --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 14:58, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Thinking from a Wikimedia viewpoint, there are several things that could be done. In first place (I already talked about this on Wikipedia Village Pump), open discussion between WMF and Internet Archive to know how reliable Archive's storage is now (number and diverse location of copies, etc).

If the current situation can't be considered acceptable, then a solution is needed. I think about several possible options:

• Financial help from WMF to Internet Archive. Of course, this help has to be spent in improving (or even creating) backups of Archive's collections, and in no other purpose.
• Using Archive-It paid service (it is also run by Internet Archive, but it is known to follow standard backup rules) to store all WMF-related content currently in Archive, and any similar future content. By WMF-related, I mean any reference in any current version of a wiki article, or any use such as the proposed one for the original source of files in Commons. It would be fine to also include here any archived page from a WMF website, since some deleted wiki articles or media files can be of great historical interest.
• Partnering with Common Crawl (if that's possible) to use it as a reference repository, in place of Internet Archive. As a rule, Common Crawl does not store any media files, so this would be a problem for the Commons case.
• Creating, with WMF support, a new web archiving project (independent from WMF, but with financial support from it) with better backup policies, and focused on content considered important, including the WMF-related one, and probably more than that. That is, not storing nearly 200 PB as Archive does (!!!), but, for example, maybe 5 PB with 4 copies, making a total of 20 PB. This way, the truly important content could be truly preserved for future generations. Of course, this would need support from far more people and/or institutions than WMF and me :-)

I don't consider the option of WMF hosting its own archive of non-free content, since this has already been ruled out in the past. MGeog2022 (talk) 19:07, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

I think backing up several hundred petabytes needs to be done with the help of a professional company that helps with the infrastructure (how many hard disks would be needed for that, 7000 to 10000?). WMF focuses on the access to free knowledge. The question would be, what could be useful for the standpoint of WMF to investigate in this situation. Of course, a free world wide web is preferable, but the vast majority of the content is unfortunately not. Hmm, I think it could be a huge step to partner with the Internet Archive, but it could be too risky for WMF if there are some unclear legal circumstances at the IA. But I agree with you that this data must be safe/saved :) --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 19:38, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

IA and WMF already have some partnership agreements. Internet Archive is fully legal under US copyright law (fair use). If an author asks for pirated content to be deleted from Archive, it is deleted. Public legitimate webpages fall under fair use even if copyrighted (provided that they are used only for preservation or academical purposes). The legal problems they had were due to unorthodox interpretations of fair use, and both lawsuits are now settled. Let's hope they don't make legal mistakes any more, after this experience. MGeog2022 (talk) 10:05, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

IA serves up a lot of unambiguously copyrighted content; see https://archive.org/details/anime for a sample. Their project's stance on copyright is much closer to "we'll see what we can get away with" than the WMF's position of "only content that's really, truly freely licensed". Omphalographer (talk) 16:36, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

What you say is absolutely true, but it's still legal. The only legal obligation is to delete user-uploaded pirated content on request by the copyright holder, and Internet Archive complies with that. WMF's approach is more for protecting users from reusing copyvio files while thinking they are freely licensed/public domain, than for legal reasons. MGeog2022 (talk) 11:11, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

I remember reading about Commons planning to extensively use Internet Archive to verify the origin and licensing status of media files. @MGeog2022: I have an idea for a possible solution but what exactly are you talking about and why is it necessary to verify the origins and licensing status of media files in the instances that your referring to (whatever they are)? --Adamant1 (talk) 06:32, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

@Adamant1, I have nothing to do with that proposal, I only saw some mentions to it (see here), and I don't know about the details, but I think it's an excellent idea to prevent false positives in copyvio deletions (we need to care about keeping our legitimate content, as much as we care to delete the illegitimate files), as long as the place where the source pages are archived is reliable in the long term, and we don't have any evidence that Internet Archive is. MGeog2022 (talk) 09:58, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Hhhmmm well. My idea is to just archive a screenshot of the page with the license on here and then immediately nominate it for deletion as OOS COPYVIO but retain a link to the deleted on screenshot on the file page so it can still be checked by an admin if or when there's a need to. We have unlimited storage though. So I don't really see why we can't just archive proof of licensing ourselves. --Adamant1 (talk) 12:57, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

That could entail a crazy amount of work for admins, since we always have to check a page before deleting to make sure it's not someone with a bogus reason to delete a page. Sometimes that even requires checking the history. - Jmabel ! talk 02:02, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

A possible solution would be to do this in a proper way: having an option for including the licensing proof as an image, and that image would be hidden from public view from the beginning. The image would be captured by Wikimedia software, so it can't be a fake one, as it could be (and I'm sure in many cases would be) if uploaded by the user, so it would be of little utility, in addition to the workload it would create for the admins. My idea requires some work by WMF or voluntary source code contributors, but automatic archiving in Wayback Machine also does. MGeog2022 (talk) 11:08, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

We have unlimited storage though. By the way, we don't have unlimited storage (nobody has). Storing the screenshots would take negligible storage space, but it's an error to think about storage space as unlimited. At WMF, everything is stored at least 8 times in disk (2 production copies plus 2 backups, across 2 datacenters, and all of them in RAID disks, so this makes a total of 8 copies), and this is not a paranoid silly thing: it's the minimal standard for a serious organization that wishes to keep its data safe for the long term (very different from the awful situation Internet Archive had in 2016, I really hope it has changed since then). MGeog2022 (talk) 18:05, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

That's fair. I wasn't trying to say people could just endlessly upload 4K videos without a problem or anything. Obviously there's a limit to it. With the Internet Archive specifically, I'd be more concerned about them getting taken off line due to the repeated lawsuits they seem to keep losing. That's way more likely then them not having a proper back solution. Especially now with how things are going in the United States. Really, with how things are going right now I wouldn't be surprised if the WMF changes things on here somehow to shield themselves from potential legal issues. --Adamant1 (talk) 18:18, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Overcompressed OGG

We have {{Overcompressed JPEG}} do we have something for videos? See: File:Belgian campaigns in Africa (1914-1918).ogg --RAN (talk) 19:21, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

As it seems, no (see Category:Audio cleanup templates) --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 17:14, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Which apps are using Wikimedia Commons?

If you know of any, please list them here.

With apps, I'm referring to mobile apps, desktop applications, and Web-apps.
Of course, the many Wikimedia projects use Commons (+ by extension various apps that use Wikipedia or Wikidata) as does the Commons app but what else is there? For example, maybe there is some OpenStreetMap app that enables you to see images geolocated via file coordinates or categories to the specific region one is viewing?

Commons doesn't need to be used by any other project/software to be useful but it's still interesting in the context of why Wikimedia Commons is useful. Maybe a list of such apps could be created similar to d:Wikidata:Tools/Visualize data & d:Wikidata:Wikidata front ends.

One app that I hope will add support for Commons is the free software mobile app NewPipe. It's a very popular app so many people already have it installed and it already allows watching videos and listening to audios on decentralized FramaTube and the ChaosComputerClub media server for example. (More info about that at m:Community Wishlist/Wishes/Add support for Wikimedia Commons in the open source NewPipe media player app.) One could conveniently switch the site to Commons in the app with a tap and listen to e.g. spoken Wikipedia audios in the familiar app. Prototyperspective (talk) 23:47, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Prototyperspective, OsmAnd displays photos from Wikimedia Commons from wikidata=* and wikimedia_commons=*, MapComplete does the same, OrganicMaps and CoMaps provide links for the linked image/category. WikiShootMe allows users to upload photos on Wikimedia Commons or seeing existing photos about a Wikidata item. Wiki Loves Monuments app is doing quite the same. Una tantum (talk) 07:14, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

I don't know all these things by myself; this is a collective answer from the OpenStreetMapItalia Telegram group. :D --Una tantum (talk) 07:30, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

All web maps based on OSM-Wikidata Map Framework (ex. Open Etymology Map) show images from Commons linked by Wikidata or OpenStreetMap.

DecomissionedAircraftMap shows images from Commons linked by OSM. Danysan1 (talk) 10:21, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Any non-Wikimedia Mediawiki (Fandom etc.) that uses mw:InstantCommons can use Commons. MKFI (talk) 08:03, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Here a list. Una tantum (talk) 18:59, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

September 27

The same picture for two scientists

La même image est proposée pour représenter

• Pierre Laurent Wantzel
• Gaspard-Gustave de Coriolis

Le première vient de Mac Tutor mais elle n'est plus utilisée[8]

La seconde vient d'un périodique[[9] et nous en connaissons l'auteur.

Je pense que Coriolis est plus illustre que Wantzel et que l'illustration est plus probablement celle de Coriolis. Je vous laisse gérer la chose au mieux. HB (talk) 05:39, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

(In bad English)

The same picture is proposed to illustrate

• Pierre Laurent Wantzel
• Gaspard-Gustave de Coriolis

The first one comes from Mac Tutor but it's no more used[10]

The second one comes from a periodical and we know its author.

I think Coriolis was more famous than Wantzel. The picture is more probably Coriolis' one.

I let you fix it for the best.

HB (talk) 05:39, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

I put a deletion request on the image claiming to show Wantzel, the demonstration of it being likely erroneously identified got me convinced. / J'ai placé une demande de suppression d'image sur le fichier "Wantzel", la démonstration pourquoi l'identification est probablement erronée m'a convaincu. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 06:36, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

I've removed the file from all its uses, and also sent an email to the St Andrews University website from which this pic came (they too had the same pic for Coriolis as well!). Checked online and there don't appear to be any pictures of Wantzel anywhere; one French Maths History website with pics of nearly everyone they list, has a blank for Wantzel. - MPF (talk) 11:34, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Bad grammar in file renaming tag

When moving a file to a new name, the tag says "What should be the new filename?". While perfectly comprehensible, it is poor grammar and doesn't look good for the project. Can it be changed to "What should the new filename be?", please? - MPF (talk) 10:58, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

•  Support Geoffroi 23:52, 27 September 2025 (UTC)
• The second is probably more colloquial, so no objection to the move, but both are perfectly good grammar. Think of the first as a construct analogous to "What would be your choice?" - Jmabel ! talk 02:07, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

I wonder which one would be easier to understand for non-native speakers (if that's relevant). The current version has the verbs grouped together in one place, while the suggested version splits the verbs ("should ... be"). Verb splitting isn't a thing in some languages, as far as I know, so it might be a bit harder to understand maybe? Nakonana (talk) 11:26, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Election map rename requests

We have about 600 of these in Category:Media requiring renaming. They're all under Criterion #4 (harmonizing file names). This may involve a thousand or even several thousand images when the person requesting them is finished. I can help with them if the requests are thought to be valid. Can we get some review of these by administrators, filemovers, and anyone else who has experience with file moves? Thanks. Geoffroi 23:24, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

A large number of those look dubious to me: moves from a perfectly comprehensible name to a longer but slight better one, e.g. File:1989 Virginia gubernatorial election by Congressional District.svg => File:1989 Virginia gubernatorial election by Congressional District.svg, requested on the basis of harmonization. I haven't worked in the area enough to know whether harmonization here is important, but I can say that currently Category:Virginia gubernatorial election maps by congressional district (set) has 6 files and 4 different naming patterns, which does not sound to me like there is a strong consensus for a naming pattern. I certainly wouldn't fulfill requests on this basis myself. - Jmabel ! talk 02:16, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

September 28

Are these from the 1970s or contemporary made to look like the 1970s?

The images here, some have been loaded to Commons. They look like 1970s hairstyles, if so they are now in the public domain in Iran and therefore also the USA. We have no reciprocal copyright relationship with Iran and they are not signatories of the URAA. RAN (talk) 16:56, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

I don't think we can safely assume that these photos were taken in Iran, nor that they were published before 1995. The designer has lived in Paris since 1978. Omphalographer (talk) 20:35, 28 September 2025 (UTC)