User talk:Adrignola

I watch discussion pages where I have recently left messages. Please reply in the same section to make discussion easier to follow.
If you leave a message on this page, I'll reply to it here.

User:Sleepisfortheweak local image uploads

I was going to talk to the Wikibookian but may have missed something, is there a reason why his images did not get moved to Commons ? File:Prox.jpg (2008, public domain) --Panic (discuss • contribs) 23:55, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, the thing is that any of the locally uploaded images prior to the permissions change have to be moved over by hand. I had pushed over many images, but we have several thousand to go and the tool I've used has become slower and less reliable (CommonsHelper). Plus, I have to be able to identify any images for categorization and also verify their copyright status before doing so. I hadn't done a good job of the latter when I first started, but now that I'm an admin on Commons I should "know better" so I can't do slipshod work (so that adds additional time). If you want me to prioritize that particular image or all his uploads (or any others), I can direct an effort toward them in particular. – Adrignola discuss 02:27, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Ho, I had thought that all had been moved, since I remember the long effort you made into that task and had not noticed any more activity in that area for a while. My attention was called to these images because some activity took place in one of these file description. I then looked at the user page and noticed your post, and so thought that licensing issues may have forced you to disregard them...

I do not think that the work must be prioritized, since the recent activity was vandalism. Thanks for the clarification. Can't the new inter-project admins give an helping hand in finishing off the task ? We could extend their capability into that field if useful. --Panic (discuss • contribs) 02:56, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Global sysops are only for anti-vandalism. They could choose to import images to Commons but their only permitted action following that would be to tag for deletion here or mark with {{nowcommons}}, not actually delete. Even if we all agreed to expand their scope, it is unlikely they'd remember more permissive rules at Wikibooks or be interested in working in that area. (Take a look at the large numbers of images at Wikipedia that ought to be at Commons, for instance.) – Adrignola discuss 04:22, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia's images

Concerning what you said in the above thread and since I do not have a presence at Wikipedia. Has Wikipedia implemented a policy in relation to images, similar to ours ? Can our transwiki requests be extended to include a move of the article's images to commons ?
I ask this questions because I was editing a wikibook that referenced another, the Lord of the Flies (BTW this project would benefit from a name change to something like Lord of the Flies Annotated) in any case I noted that the content of that project lacks basic information that is present at Wikipedia:Lord of the Flies including the book cover image (that is local to Wikipedia)... --Panic (discuss • contribs) 02:02, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

That book cover image is non-free and cannot be uploaded to Commons. You'd have to upload a local copy here with a fair use rationale. Wikipedia does not have a policy similar to ours beyond non-free image use. They still allow free files to be uploaded locally, making additional work for people having to move free images a second time over to Commons, rather than risk losing any editors whatsoever due to the inconvenience of having to apply for permission to upload non-free files locally (despite the need to understand the rules that go along with that). – Adrignola discuss 05:05, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

MiszaBot

Is it known why MiszaBot suddenly kicked back in here a couple of days ago? --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 07:40, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Should I assume that you believe that to be a good thing? The reason is that I unblocked the bot. Now, keep in mind that the bot was performing actions in the last year. However, the block log seems to indicate that it was blocked indefinitely since 2007. I cannot explain how the bot was able to edit prior to its stoppage in October or why the block didn't take effect until then. – Adrignola discuss 14:13, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

The block was applied to MiszaBot on 26 March 2007 as it was a vandal account created to impersonate the real MiszaBot (this is pre SUL so it was possible to create the account here separately). The vandal MiszaBot was renamed to a more appropriate name ("BLOCKED VANDAL 001") on 7 October 2007. Then a new account called MiszaBot was created on the same day. This is why it was able to operate between October 2007 and September 2011 despite appearing from the block log to be blocked - the entry in the block log referring to the now renamed account. Why it then stopped on 3 October 2011 is more of a mystery. There doesn't appear to be any block (either IP or account) locally or globally to explain it although shortly afterwards (on 13 October) it was blocked on en.wp as malfunctioning and remains blocked there. QU ^TalkQu 15:38, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Interesting. It stopped functioning on Wikinews at, I think, the same time it stopped here, and I've been meaning to look into why (but not getting around to it, of course). --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 16:05, 4 February 2012 (UTC)