Wikivoyage:WTS archive/Pub (temporary refuge)

Current Statistics
These statistics should update automatically as images are moved and tagged. Note that due to the way Mediawiki works it may take several minutes for changes to be reflected in the numbers below.

Number of files on wts:

Tagged files: Remaining files to tag (approximately):



Files with PD-author
Hi.

I moved the files with Template:PD-author into Category:PD-author files. My bot is currently sorting them in categories with "NowCommons", "Ignore" or "KeepLocal".

The tricky part is that unless there is an author and proof of permission the files will not be ok for Commons. If it is own work by the uploader the template should be PD-self.

If it is created by someone else the template should be and we need to be able to verify that "someone" released the file as PD.

It is probably going to be a slow job to check and fix all files but better here than the files just gets deleted on Commons in a few weeks. --MGA73 (talk) 09:33, 18 November 2012 (CET)


 * A lot of people didn't understand the difference between PD-author and PD-self, unfortunately. LtPowers (talk) 22:56, 18 November 2012 (CET)

I just noticed http://wikitravel.org/en/File:Portview.JPG has a "PD-creator" and the text there says: "This picture is not protected by copyright. The creator submitted it and has released all rights to it. This applies worldwide.". So it seems that wikitravel has used "PD-creator" as a "PD-self". --MGA73 (talk) 10:25, 4 January 2013 (CET)


 * The problem is that "PD-creator" tells that the creator has released the file to the public domain without telling who the creator is, so I have tagged a lot of those files with "no source". --Stefan2 (talk) 14:08, 4 January 2013 (CET)


 * Template says that "creator submitted it" (at least on Wikitravel) so I think that it suggest that the submitter/uploader is the creator. That is probably the reason that som many used that template. --MGA73 (talk) 14:13, 4 January 2013 (CET)


 * Ah, sorry, there are three templates (PD-self, PD-author and PD-creator). I mixed up PD-creator with PD-author. Yes, PD-creator tells that "the originator" released the file to the public domain, and I would interpret "the originator" as being the uploader. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:53, 4 January 2013 (CET)

Ready for a big upload to Commons?
Hi

As you know there are good reasons not to move files without good checking and there are good reasons to do so anyway.

I have prepared 2 categories:
 * Category:MTC-self-Information (all had a self template)
 * Category:MTC-self-Information 2 (some had a self template and others were added by my bot based on text like "Own work" etc.)

With files that have an information template, a self license and a move.

Unless someone objects I suggest that these files are moved in one big batch.

Everyone is ofcourse most welcome to do a quick scan for FOP issues and other problems before I move the files.

Doing it this way is faster but it also means that files are not placed in "Uploaded by xxx" on Commons. --MGA73 (talk) 15:46, 7 December 2012 (CET)
 * I suggest that you also check that the uploader's username appears somewhere on the file information page when creating these categories. For example, File:Congestion fee Stockholm-new.jpg has a different user's username on the file information page. Start with the easy cases and wait with the more difficult ones. --Stefan2 (talk) 16:25, 7 December 2012 (CET)
 * Or perhaps check that no username/user link other than that of the uploader appears on the file page...? Another WTS gnome (talk) 23:19, 7 December 2012 (CET)

en.wv-old deletions
Could someone head over and delete all the rubbish in ? It seems to be causing MGA73 some problems. Another WTS gnome (talk) 10:30, 8 December 2012 (CET)
 * Done --Atsirlin (talk) 12:26, 8 December 2012 (CET)

Images with no source / Files uploaded by Johnycanal
It looks like none of this user's images have source/author info. Other info is there -- a description and licensing info -- and almost all the images have EXIF info, usually from the same Canon camera. He's only made a couple of edits in the last five years though, and none in the last two, so I doubt we're going to be able to successfully contact him. Are there any grounds we could say this is own work, or treat as keep local? He has some good photos, and in a couple of cases, Commons doesn't have a better image. -Shaund (talk) 06:12, 9 December 2012 (CET)


 * The user talk page indicates that the user was in contact with editors here and added a license to most images: User talk:(WT-shared) Johnycanal. He also refers to the images as "my images" on his English talk page: en:User talk:(WT-en) Johnycanal. -- Ryan &bull; (talk) &bull; 06:42, 9 December 2012 (CET)


 * OK. I'm pretty confident that the images from the Canon camera, and some earlier images from a Toshiba camera, were taken by him. I've gone ahead and noted the images as "own work" so they can be transferred to Commons. -Shaund (talk) 07:30, 11 December 2012 (CET)

Derivative works and corporate logos
I have found many files tagged with keepLocal with the reason of "derivative works" or "corporate logos", such as File:Doemporda.jpg, File:Awamori jelly, Ishigaki, Japan.JPG File:Breeze Card.JPG. Are such files really accepted on regular WV editions? Or do they need to be deleted? Another WTS gnome (talk) 02:31, 12 December 2012 (CET)
 * This depends on each language version. According to wmc:m:Non-free content, English, French and Russian Wikivoyage would reject those images as not being covered by the EDP, whereas Dutch Wikivoyage would reject it due to the project rejecting non-free content altogether. There is no information on whether the German, Italian or Swedish Wikivoyage projects have an EDP at all. Also, File:Awamori jelly, Ishigaki, Japan.JPG is currently in use by Japanese Wikitravel (and thus presumably also by Japanese Wikivoyage), and Japanese Wikivoyage hasn't even been imported to the WMF servers yet, let alone decided whether the project wants an EDP or not or what the EDP would say, so it's unclear if that image would be accepted or not. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:02, 12 December 2012 (CET)
 * The first two, at least, would likely be covered on en.wikivoyage under the "artwork" exception. It's a bit of a stretch, but if the image has value for the traveler then we want to keep it.  (It could be that neither image has much travel value, though.)  LtPowers (talk) 03:06, 18 December 2012 (CET)

Images on language versions
Some time ago, I created user categories on English Oldwikivoyage. Now I'm creating them on the other language versions too, but it seems that the other language versions have no tags at all: not even NowCommons if an identical copy exists on Commons. Thus, all files end up in the local Category:All files on WTS. At some point, we need to do the following: Also, some language versions are protected by password. These might contain files. Is there a way to access those language versions?
 * Ask User:MGA73 to run his bot for automatic tagging of files which already are on Commons.
 * Start tagging. I had to create all templates today, so they couldn't be created in the template namespace. Instead, you have to use,  ,  and.

Examples of user categories:
 * http://ru.wikivoyage-old.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%8F:Files_by_user
 * http://sv.wikivoyage-old.org/wiki/Kategori:Files_by_user

Examples of templates:
 * http://ru.wikivoyage-old.org/wiki/Wikivoyage:NowCommons
 * http://sv.wikivoyage-old.org/wiki/Wikivoyage:Ignore

Files on French and Dutch Oldwikivoyage will be tagged shortly. German and Italian Oldwikivoyage don't have any files. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:52, 13 December 2012 (CET)
 * Actually, I think on Russian Wikivioyage we do not have any files to be transferred.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:00, 13 December 2012 (CET)
 * There seems to be a very small number of images which are in use. For example, http://ru.wikivoyage-old.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB:Duomo_Florence1.JPG is used at ru:Wikivoyage:Направление месяца/2009/04. But if there are very few files which are in use, this may be low priority. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:12, 13 December 2012 (CET)

End game?
I, and others, are worried that the lengthy image migration and thus lengthy beta period is undercutting Wikivoyage's momentum as a new Wikimedia project. At some point, while not giving up on the image transfer, I think we need to allow Wikivoyage to move forward and start replacing red-linked images (which is a much, much more accessible task than file review). Here are my suggestions:


 * 1) Give up on locally hosted images. WV/en didn't have any summary templates, and generally the images don't have explicit licensing information or author information. It's a shame to lose all that media, but I don't see a practical way around this. Individual contributors who added lots of photos to local versions (e.g., Jani) can go through their uploads, add basic source & license information, and then request that their uploads be moved en masse.
 * 2) Declare that we're moving forward on Wikivoyage as though the image migration were over after:
 * a) we finish moving files by uploader with 15+ images in their category,
 * b) we finish moving all images that have move tags and a notice that the uploader is the image author, and
 * c) we finish moving all keep local images to relevant language versions.

Thoughts? I'll solicit more on :en too. --Peter Talk 23:57, 14 December 2012 (CET)


 * The images that I'd most like to ensure are transferred are the maps, in particular maps showing regional breakdowns, since no comparable image will exist on Commons. For everything else I've generally found that Commons has as good or better images than we do here, so replacing redlinks with Commons images seems like a not-unreasonable approach.  It looks to me like most maps have been moved, but if anyone knows of a lot of significant map content that's missing it would be good to call those out.
 * Assuming the maps have been moved I'd be in favor of declaring a time period during which migration will still continue, and during that time allow some images to be flagged as "high priority" for migration. That way anyone who has one or more images they want to see move can verify the license and attribution information, flag the image, and then the bot writers would have an easy way of telling that an image was both ready to go and a priority for migration.  End-of-year would seem like a reasonable cutoff date, with a goal of then ending the "beta" period by mid-January.  After that if an image creator wants a file moved they can upload it to Commons on their own, tagging it appropriately when they do so. -- Ryan &bull; (talk) &bull; 00:26, 15 December 2012 (CET)
 * Ryan, I am trying to do a systematic check of the maps, but I still have a backlog of 2000 files on Commons=(( I am not aware of any important maps here on wts, but we do have a number of maps on en.wikivoyage-old.org (for example, maps of the US national parks that you have uploaded). I think that they have not been transferred. --Atsirlin (talk) 00:34, 15 December 2012 (CET)
 * I've been debating flagging those park maps as "ignore" - they were always a bit kludgy, are only used on one page, and could probably be handled better. At best they are low priority for transfer. -- Ryan &bull; (talk) &bull; 00:53, 15 December 2012 (CET)
 * Anything tagged got transferred right away, so we should be pretty good on that front. There are probably still 10-20 such files that haven't been migrated, but finding them might be easier as part of a red-link hunt than going through the files methodically as we have been.  --Peter Talk 08:34, 15 December 2012 (CET)


 * OK, I did not know that. Anyway, en.wikivoyage-old.org still has a bunch of good WT-style maps, but I don't know how many of them are actually in use. Will try to check this. --Atsirlin (talk) 08:56, 15 December 2012 (CET)


 * Sounds reasonable. Just two thoughts from my side: i) we must ask same question on German Wikivoyage. I have no idea where they are in the image migration process; ii) we should keep wts and en.wikivoyage-old.org accessible (albeit password-protected) so that small file transfers are still possible after the beta period ends. --Atsirlin (talk) 00:34, 15 December 2012 (CET)
 * Yes, I agree with that. I was thinking the same thing the other day, we are losing momentum quickly. I am currently in the process of uploading KeepLocal images to en:, I will try to get through this as soon as possible. But don't wait for me. Many of the KeepLocal images are not highly valuable. Another WTS gnome (talk) 00:57, 15 December 2012 (CET)
 * Also, I think we just need to assume good faith and automatically change over all usages of "NowCommons different name" files on all WV versions. (Unless this is already done?) Another WTS gnome (talk) 01:04, 15 December 2012 (CET)
 * I propose that we move is much as possible by the end of the year. Launch in January (1st or 2nd week). We can continue moving images over one by one as needed but yes begin replacing the red links. James Heilman
 * Almost all file links have been updated by my bot. Currently, I'm doing a new bot run every second week or so to update links for files which have been moved since then and there are very few of those files. Is there any particular time (preferably in January or February) when it would be tactical to end the beta period and have an official release? --Stefan2 (talk) 01:45, 15 December 2012 (CET)
 * I'm inclined to think we need until 15 Jan. That gives us a week+ to get the files transferred that are tagged self-uploaded or reviewed by user, and then two weeks of hard work replacing red-linked images. Also, Jan 15 is generally when I start taking the new year seriously anyway (post-hangover/resolution-abandonment). --Peter Talk 08:38, 15 December 2012 (CET)
 * Sure would be happy with the 15th of Jan. Will begin working on a press release here . All free to join in. Jmh649 (talk) 20:37, 15 December 2012 (CET)
 * I am losing track of these things, but we *are* planning to use a bot to move everything tagged with the move tag, right? &mdash; Ravikiranr (talk) 08:03, 19 December 2012 (CET)
 * Nope, we're not. And yes, it's hard to keep track of this process ;) --Peter Talk 09:03, 19 December 2012 (CET)
 * So what will get moved? What do I need to do to ensure that all the files I uploaded, and the India images I tagged, will get moved? &mdash; User:Ravikiran_r (unsigned)
 * I've responded at your :en talk page. --Peter Talk 04:06, 21 December 2012 (CET)

It's 20 December, and we still haven't finished 2.b and haven't started(?) 2.c. But we're getting ready to launch on 15 January. What to do? Can we try and do 2.c ASAP? And then immediately refocus activity on local wikis to replacing red-linked files? --Peter Talk 04:06, 21 December 2012 (CET)
 * I am slowly but surely doing 2c (copying keepLocal files to where they are needed). I am deleting these files here when they are no longer required. The job is practically done on EN, there are only four to be uploaded to SV (will do this tonight), and NL doesn't want local files.So we can start removing redlinks on those three wikis right away (unless anyone is trying to confirm permissions with big uploaders on wv-old??). Another WTS gnome (talk) 07:26, 21 December 2012 (CET)
 * The bot-owners have done an exceptional job moving files, and appear to still be at it, but I'm wondering if we're now at the point where it is appropriate to begin replacing red-linked images on Wikivoyage. Perhaps one of the bot owners can answer the question of how many more files are expected to be migrated, and under what timeline that would occur, given that many remaining images have license or sourcing concerns.  If we've mostly migrated everything that should be migrated, let's move on to the next phase and begin cleaning up Wikivoyage redlinks. -- Ryan &bull; (talk) &bull; 20:58, 3 January 2013 (CET)


 * If a file is tagged with Ignore or does not have a source or license on wts it is not likely to be moved. In these cases I think it would be ok to look for a replacement.
 * If the file looks good then the file may simply be "forgotten". To be honest I have lost track on which files are ready to move and which are not. So in that case just leave a note here saying "Could you please move.
 * Many files on en.wikivoyage are not yet checked so you may find many "easy" files to move there.
 * I do not know what happend on fr and nl. --MGA73 (talk) 22:29, 3 January 2013 (CET)


 * Oh and if you/anyone can find a good reason to add a license to unlicensed files then do so and I can move the files. --MGA73 (talk) 22:33, 3 January 2013 (CET)


 * I suggest that you start by replacing the images in Category:Files to be ignored. Those files will almost certainly not be migrated, unless the one who tagged a file with "Ignore" did this erroneously. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:48, 3 January 2013 (CET)

KeepLocalUnused
I created KeepLocalUnused. Is there any chance the "regular bots" could add a category to KeepLocal files WITHOUT this tag? It would make the job a bit easier, especially helping to keep track of files newly tagged with KeepLocal. Thanks, Another WTS gnome (talk) 03:13, 15 December 2012 (CET)
 * I'm currently running a bot script on KeepLocal files. It does the following:
 * If a file with the same name is in use on selected projects, ImageUsage is added, including a list of pages using a file with the same name. Examples: File:2605341984 02d19f54d8 b.jpg and File:Aberdeen large station sign.JPG.
 * If ImageUsage is added, then, KeepLocalUnused is removed if the tag is used on the file information page.
 * If an image with the same file name isn't in use on any of the selected projects, KeepLocalUnused is added if it is not already there.
 * If a file is tagged with KeepLocalUnused after my bot has checked the file, it should be safe to delete the file. My plan is to adjust my regular category updating script to add KeepLocalUnused and/or ImageUsage to KeepLocal files whenever a KeepLocal file is modified. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:06, 15 December 2012 (CET)
 * So it is safe to delete all files which transclude KeepLocalUnused? It would make sorting-out of KeepLocal files a lot easier. Another WTS gnome (talk) 01:55, 16 December 2012 (CET)
 * Yes, it should be safe to delete those files, assuming that no one else has added that template after my bot checked the file during the afternoon. --Stefan2 (talk) 02:15, 16 December 2012 (CET)

keeplocal queries
I'm quite tired after a long day's work transferring KeepLocal images to EN using a "modified" version of FTCG. I would really appreciate it if people could individually check these leftover images and either Apologies if some of these are obvious; I'm tired. Thanks so much! Another WTS gnome (talk) 11:58, 15 December 2012 (CET)
 * 1) change the keepLocal tag to ignore
 * 2) say "yes, this is fine to transfer to EN" (and I'll transfer it tomorrow)
 * 3) take some other action (a few are edge cases)
 * If you just wait a little, then all files will have a tag telling where and if the file is in use by Wikivoyage in its English, French, Dutch, Russian and Swedish editions, which may make it easier to determine what to do. My bot also indicates if a file with the same name is in use by Wikitravel in its Arabic, Castilian, Catalonian, Chinese, Esperanto, Finnish, Hebrew, Hindi, Hungarian, Japanese, Korean, Polish, Portuguese and Romanian editions, in case anyone finds this information interesting for any reason. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:27, 15 December 2012 (CET)
 * Some of the images are tagged with . You are allowed to upload a small number of images for your user page, so these images might be OK for Commons. See Commons:Template:User page image. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:39, 15 December 2012 (CET)
 * All these files are in use on EN. Most involve the dreaded "derivative work" problem, which I find difficult to judge. Another WTS gnome (talk) 01:46, 16 December 2012 (CET)

I've hidden the list of files, I'll just move them anyway and we can deal with them on EN later... Another WTS gnome (talk) 06:46, 20 December 2012 (CET)


 * Don't upload any files to the Dutch Wikivoyage, it does not have an EDP and all local files will be removed there in the future. It will solely rely on Commons.--Globe-trotter (talk) 13:01, 16 December 2012 (CET)
 * If you don't want any local uploads, consider making a Bugzilla request to disable local uploads. If you do that, then you won't have any problems with users not understanding local image policies and uploading images anyway. See for example wikipedia:sv:Special:Upload or wikipedia:es:Special:Upload where you just see an error message saying that images can't be uploaded. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:29, 16 December 2012 (CET)

File:Hordaland regions.png
This is listed as being on Commons as File:Distrhorda.png. Could someone decide if this is correct? One area is yellow on the Wikivoyage map but red on the Commons one, and one area is green on the Wikivoyage map but purple on the Commons one. If the Commons map simply is wrong, then the image should be replaced anyway, but if both are correct, then we should maybe keep both maps. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:08, 16 December 2012 (CET)


 * Both are correct—the one here was adjusted for local purposes (travel regions breakdown), and should go in the Travel maps category. --Peter Talk 22:50, 16 December 2012 (CET)

Why are my files not moved yet?
If you have that question the answer is because it takes time to make sure it is done properly.

The two main problems is:
 * Who is the author and copyright holder?
 * Is it a derivative work with FOP issues?

The best way is to check your uploads and make sure to use the Information template and fill out all relevant fields.

If you add a different name as "Author" than your own username then we might wonder if it is own work or you found the file somewhere or got it from someone you know. Therefore it is a good idea to make it very clear like:
 * Own work

And change the license to or.

If this is NOT own work then you should NEVER add or.
 * NOT own work

It is also very important that it is very clear that it is not own work. So make sure to add a link to where you found the file and if you got it from a friend the best would be to send a permission to OTRS.

If the file is no longer online (the link does not work anymore) or it is not possible to verify the license online then concider if the file is really needed. It may be much easier to get a free replacement than to spend time to fix the problem.

If you take a photo of a tree or a bird then it is ok but if you take a photo of a statue, a building, a painting etc. then it may be an unfree derivative work.
 * Derivative work

You can read more on Commons:COM:DW and Commons:COM:FOP.

If it is an unfree derivative work you need to decide if the file should be deleted or used as unfree. If you think it is not needed then tag it with and if you think it is needed then tag with.

After that the file will be deleted or copied to en-wikivoyage.org or where the file is used.

If you have checked all your uploads just leave a note below or on WTS archive/Pub (temporary refuge)/Pub (temporary refuge)/Files by user reviewed. --MGA73 (talk) 15:04, 19 December 2012 (CET)
 * Okay all checked - now what?
 * Maybe this notice should be placed at some place where it is more visible. Also, there should maybe also be a link to this section from other pages with image migration information, such as en:Project:Cleanup. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:08, 19 December 2012 (CET)
 * Yes good idea. And perhaps it is also time to put some stuff to the archieve :-) --MGA73 (talk) 15:19, 19 December 2012 (CET)

Mass move of files in Category:MTC
We have now been moving files user by user for some time and there is not many "big uploaders" left. Therefore it will take more and more time to move files. And I bet you are all sick and tied of all the time it takes to move files.

I have therefore created Category:MTC (with files) for files in Category:Files to be moved to Commons (with  files) that does not have words like "www", "http", "wiki", "Commons", "wmc" or "[[:" so it is very likely that it is not copied from a website. My plan is to move all those files shortly without more checking.

However, I suggest that we have a short delay where everyone can scan the category for FOP issues and other problems.

After that I'll see if I can move all the files and any problems can be fixed when someone checks the file on Commons or check the local file.

I know there will be mistakes but we will never make it if 5 users have to check all files. There are hundreds of users on Commons that can help us. --MGA73 (talk) 17:29, 22 December 2012 (CET)
 * I suggest that you also exclude files which obviously are Mediawiki thumbnails of other images (such as File:450px-Linz-Hauptplatz.jpg). Those may have a missing source, may come from Commons or might not be own work. I will check the category for images needing rotation and add those to my watchlist. The solution is to move those files to Commons and then add for automatic rotation by $$n$$ degrees clockwise by Commons:User:Rotatebot. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:06, 22 December 2012 (CET)
 * As far as I can see there is only this single file. And it does not have a license so my bot will not move it. --MGA73 (talk) 18:30, 22 December 2012 (CET)
 * I have now done a quick check for images needing rotation and I have placed all of those on my watchlist so that I will notice when they have been moved to Commons so that I can tag them for rotation there. I have not done any other checks, though. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:00, 22 December 2012 (CET)
 * Great. Once this is done, I'll organize a mass red-link replace effort, so we can leave Beta on schedule. --Peter Talk 20:04, 22 December 2012 (CET)

Could we add to this category every file with source=self, source=own *, or credit=self in the imagecredit template? --Peter Talk 20:10, 22 December 2012 (CET)
 * I started to check and saw that you are already transferring. Is there still a part to check, or is it too late? I found three files without any licence, but from the first 200 files of the first category FoP seems to be fine.--Ymblanter (talk) 04:06, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * It's never to late to check. But if the file is on Commons you need to nominate it for deletion there (or just fix the problem if it can be fixed).
 * The bot will not move files without a license unless I make some mistake ;-) --MGA73 (talk) 10:18, 23 December 2012 (CET)

First batch moved (I think ~1.200 files) and 577 files is left in Category:MTC. These files have a "special license", no license or just have the same name as an excisting file on Commons. Especially files with PD-author needs to be checked to see if it is own work (and if yes changed to PD-self). --MGA73 (talk) 11:10, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * It seems that some files, such as File:P4070015.JPG, weren't moved. Is that because the file name is "bad"? You might wish to do a search for such files and upload them under different names on Commons. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:34, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * Yes files like that is skipped. I have to pick a name manually. --MGA73 (talk) 15:09, 23 December 2012 (CET)

I realised that there might be a problem. When you are adding files to Category:MTC, you skip files with "http", "www" and "". The issue is that most files currently have a [[Wikivoyage:ImageUsage tag which contains one or more of those strings, so maybe you are only adding unused files to that category for the moment? --Stefan2 (talk) 02:33, 30 December 2012 (CET)
 * For example, the files in Category:MTC2 seem to fit the criteria you listed above for Category:MTC with the exception that file usage is listed on the file information page. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:22, 31 December 2012 (CET)

High priority tag
Could we establish a high priority tag, so we can comb through star articles, featured articles, or just personal favorite articles, and get the remaining red-linked files moved (which might have been missed by the filesbyuser and mtc efforts)? This would be especially useful on en-old. --Peter Talk 20:06, 22 December 2012 (CET)
 * I have now written a quick script which searches through en:Category:Star articles. All articles in that category will be purged so that any images which have been moved to Commons recently will show up. If you move a file to Commons, then the image remains red until you purge the cache or edit the page, and it's a good idea to purge the star articles frequently so that readers can see the images. Purging is not needed for the bot's main task, but it's always better for the readers if they can see the images which have been moved to Commons. The bot will get a list of all images in the articles. If an image appears to be missing, then the bot will search for the image on this project and en.wikivoyage-old.org. If the image seems to exist on either project, then the image will be placed in a maintenance category. This category will include KeepLocal and Ignore files: we will want to replace or remove any Ignore files as soon as possible in these articles, and KeepLocal files need to be uploaded locally.
 * The server is currently very slow. User:MGA73bot seems to be moving a lot of files to Commons right now. Maybe the bot is running the massive task that User:MGA73 talked about above. If it means that there will soon be 2000 more images on Commons, then I will postpone my bot run so that I don't spam the category with files which will be uploaded to Commons within hours anyway.
 * Are there other article categories on any language edition of Wikivoyage that I should search for priority images? --Stefan2 (talk) 01:39, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * Anything with title icons transcluded was or is a featured article, and should be considered high priority. Also all articles currently at en:Wikivoyage:Destination of the month candidates, as all such articles are likely to be featured soon.  --Peter Talk 02:06, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * If you have some files you want to be moved asap just add them to a category (you pick a name and leave a note).
 * The result will be much better if you add/fix the information template and the license template (if own work by uploader).
 * If there is no license you need to ask the uploader or add one yourself (if you have some good reason to do so). --MGA73 (talk) 10:26, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * Info: I'm also "poking" the files in http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Category:Pages_with_broken_file_links with my bot to eliminate red links. Lets see how many are fixed (started with 4,806 and ended with 4,144 pages). --MGA73 (talk) 10:45, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * I poked the files in http://nl.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Categorie:Pagina%27s_met_onjuiste_bestandsverwijzingen and it dropped from 243 to 134 :-) --MGA73 (talk) 12:25, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * And http://fr.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Cat%C3%A9gorie:Pages_avec_des_liens_de_fichiers_bris%C3%A9s that went from 553 to 494 pages. --MGA73 (talk) 13:50, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * Also http://sv.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Kategori:Sidor_med_trasiga_fill%C3%A4nkar that went from 48 to 42 but there is a rate limit so the effect was probably not very good. --MGA73 (talk) 15:57, 23 December 2012 (CET)

I'm now categorising all missing images on pages transcluding en:Template:Title-icons. There doesn't seem to be any need to do a separate search for the star article category as all star articles seem to transclude that template anyway. Files will be added to the categories below: Stefan2 (talk) 12:28, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * http://en.wikivoyage-old.org/wiki/Category:Priority_images_to_process for files on English Wikivoyage-old
 * Category:Priority images to process for files on WTS
 * Yeah :-) I think it is beginning to look much better. How often does your bot fix filenames on xx-wikivoyage when a file is uploaded to Commons with a different name? I have uploaded 100-200 with a different name yesterday and today so there is probably some files to work on. --MGA73 (talk) 15:14, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * I just started that script. File names should be updated soon. I try to run it about once per week. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:51, 23 December 2012 (CET)

How can I make File:Plugs.png a priority file?--Globe-trotter (talk) 17:38, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * Stefan what do we do with files like that? "Originally uploaded to English Wikivoyage" and no link? --MGA73 (talk) 17:48, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * A file is a priority file if it is included in the priority category above. If you want to make a file a priority file, then all you need to do is to add it to the priority category. Alternatively, you can review all files in the uploader's category and ask for everything which looks OK to be imported. In this case, there might be a permission problem: how do we know that the named users have agreed to make this available under the mentioned licence? The uploader is not the same as the creator. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:51, 23 December 2012 (CET)

All missing files on pages transcluding en:Template:Title-icons have now been tagged. Are there other templates or categories on other language editions which should be searched for priority images? --Stefan2 (talk) 19:18, 23 December 2012 (CET)


 * Stefan can your bot fix file usage on cases like File:9201.jpg? --MGA73 (talk) 20:03, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * That is a redirect page. We need to make sure that all file redirects on this project are unused or replace them with an empty file information page with a NowCommons tag so that file usage is updated. Alternatively, if the redirect target (File:Plitvice National Park lakes and walkways.jpg) is unused, then the file can be moved to the redirect file name (File:9201.jpg). The numerical file name is used here:

Stefan2 (talk) 21:05, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * en:Plitvice National Park
 * http://wikitravel.org/ja/
 * Yeah I was afraid of that. So it is better to rename files during transfer and just add a description I can copy/paste as a new name.
 * What if we add a NowCommons and leave the redirect. Will your bot catch it? --MGA73 (talk) 21:18, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * My bot ignores all redirects and does not attempt to change any file usage related to redirects. If you replace the text " #REDIRECT [[File:Xyz.jpg]] " with " ", then my bot will find file usage. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:36, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * I changed two. Lets see if that works before we look for others like that. --MGA73 (talk) 22:47, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * After you changed it to "NowCommons", my bot updated the file usage for those redirects. After that, the redirects were unused, so I deleted them. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:25, 24 December 2012 (CET)

Usage of files
Perhaps Stefan could add a tag on all files not yet moved telling if the file is used and if yes where. It will make it easier to add a description if one is missing.

It will also make it easier to find out if it is worth asking uploader for a license or a clarification of source etc.

For example File:072.JPG seems to be unused and have no license but it is tagged with a move. I can't move without a license so it will stay in the move category forever unless someone adds a license or removes the move tag. --MGA73 (talk) 10:53, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * I second this. Perhaps only usage on Wikivoyage editions for now... WP:BEANS, I'm sure you can work out the reason.
 * BTW, I am almost done with KeepLocal images. There are 3 apparently to be uploaded to IT (I can't understand this, since DE and IT never used WTS) and 1 to be uploaded to DE (but I can't do this since my username, "This, that and the other", is blacklisted there). The rest are in use on WT editions not yet migrated. Another WTS gnome (talk) 11:30, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * And File:9167.jpg has a valid license but a crappy name and no description. It is really hard to move and name the file without knowing what or where :-) --MGA73 (talk) 14:05, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * A question: If I add ImageUsage, will your bot then copy the tag to Commons? We don't want it there.
 * My script is a lot faster if I don't make any searches on Wikitravel, and current projects should be higher priority anyway. I'm planning to tag files with ImageUsage if the file is in use on the current five language editions. I won't search German or Italian Wikivoyage for file usage since those use a different image repository. Once more language editions have been imported, I'll do a search for untagged images only on those projects, in case it means that we can figure out what more images show. For example, it seems that the Spanish and Poruguese editions will be imported soon. I won't tag any files with Template:Unused since I won't be checking projects which are waiting to be imported. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:29, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * I can tell my bot to ignore that template. --MGA73 (talk) 15:07, 23 December 2012 (CET)
 * Which KeepLocal files are claimed to be used by DE and IT? If your user name is blacklisted, try creating an account under a different name and ask for renaming. Someone was able to get around the blacklist on English Wikivoyage that way. --Stefan2 (talk) 00:24, 24 December 2012 (CET)
 * It's only 1 image so I can't really be bothered to do it just for that. Here are the imagesz:
 * File:Nyyazow monument.jpg to DE and IT
 * File:Astana.jpg to IT
 * File:Bahrain M Gulf Roundabout1.jpg to IT
 * File:Hallgrimskirkja.jpg to IT
 * I suspect they were either (a) copied to Commons and deleted there OR (b) the same image exists on both WTS and WV-shared. Another WTS gnome (talk) 01:28, 24 December 2012 (CET)
 * Ah, so the usage template doesn't list the projects. That's good: no bug in my script, then. Lots of old (pre-2008?) files exist on both WTS and Shared under the same name. File usage tags are being added for files in Category:Files with a different name on Wikimedia Commons (to facilitate NowCommons deletions) and Category:All files on WTS (so that you can find out if it is useful to try to look for source, permission et cetera). Files in other categories will follow later. --Stefan2 (talk) 01:41, 24 December 2012 (CET)
 * Stefan, I notice you are tagging "all files on WTS" and "...different name on Commons" categories. Could you also please do Files to be ignored? Many ignore-tagged files that are not in use can just be deleted, and I don't want to waste lots of time dealing with unused files. Another WTS gnome (talk) 06:19, 24 December 2012 (CET)
 * I've now told my bot to add file usage (or Template:Unused) to files which should be ignored. The bot is a bit slow and it's even slower when checking multiple categories at the same time, so it's going to take some time until all files have been tagged. Also, I might not be answering as quickly as usual during the next few days, and especially not today, due to Christmas celebrations. --Stefan2 (talk) 11:24, 24 December 2012 (CET)


 * Possible problem: I do not think that it is File:Cathedral.jpg that is in use in http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Exeter but what will your bot do if I move it to Commons with a new name? --MGA73 (talk) 11:49, 25 December 2012 (CET)
 * Then my bot will show me that there is a different cathedral at http://en.wikivoyage-old.org/wiki/File:Cathedral.jpg and then I will understand that it's a bad idea to update the file name. There have been several similar cases. By the way, there were two cathedrals under the name File:Cathedral.jpg, so I moved one of them to File:Cathedral 2.jpg. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:17, 25 December 2012 (CET)
 * Very cool and clever :-) --MGA73 (talk) 12:31, 25 December 2012 (CET)

List of ignore reasons
See here. It may be useful. Another WTS gnome (talk) 04:34, 24 December 2012 (CET)
 * Ah, sorry, I forgot to upload a list of these as I had promised above. --Stefan2 (talk) 11:25, 24 December 2012 (CET)

Merry Christmas
Merry Christmas! May our hard work here at WTS soon be complete. Another WTS gnome (talk) 10:14, 25 December 2012 (CET)
 * Could someone please delete File:IMG 1075.jpg? It isn't on Commons at all; the WTS server has gone bananas. Another WTS gnome (talk) 07:51, 27 December 2012 (CET)
 * Also File:JO 2004 - arches et bassin.jpg Another WTS gnome (talk) 09:32, 27 December 2012 (CET)
 * Both looks deleted to me. Could you check again? --MGA73 (talk) 10:29, 27 December 2012 (CET)
 * Nope: when I go there, I see the deleted file and the content of the former file page, but as if the image was at Commons. Even when I purge, I still see it. Another WTS gnome (talk) 11:21, 27 December 2012 (CET)
 * Oh I see; it's on WV-shared, but it looks for all the world as if it's on Commons. Can we fix this, just to preserve our own sanity? I suppose not... Another WTS gnome (talk) 11:22, 27 December 2012 (CET)

Server erroring out
Whenever I try to delete a file, it deletes the page revisions but not the actual file. It says, in big red letters, "Error deleting file: Could not create directory "mwstore://local-backend/local-deleted/b/b/t". ". The three characters at the end are different every time. This also happened at about the same time of day yesterday. It is very frustrating and leaves files half-deleted. Is it worth mentioning this "intermittent bug" to Hans or whoever is running WV-old at the moment? Another WTS gnome (talk) 09:40, 27 December 2012 (CET)
 * Whenever I see that a file on my watchlist has been deleted incorrectly like this, I try undeleting it and then delete it again, and that usually works. I assume that this is some temporary server problem. It's a bit annoying. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:50, 27 December 2012 (CET)
 * If server problems continue then I suggest that we copy ALL the remaning files to Commmons (when we get a chance) and put them in a special category and check the files there. --MGA73 (talk) 16:12, 27 December 2012 (CET)
 * It's not that bad... yet. Another WTS gnome (talk) 03:34, 28 December 2012 (CET)
 * No, this is a permissions problem, not a server problem. In other words, someone misset the file permissions. I know, because I've had this problem on Wikipedia before and they had to fix it by monkeying with the permissions. This problem will continue until the server administrator fixes it. *Hint, hint*. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:28, 30 December 2012 (CET)
 * Are you sure? User:Another WTS gnome has sometimes had problems deleting files, and when I tried restoring and deleting the same file a few hours later, then it worked for me. To me it looks as if this is a random bug which happens sometimes but not always and not always with the same file. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:43, 30 December 2012 (CET)
 * Try deleting this file: File:1257280101119 f.jpg. Good luck. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:54, 30 December 2012 (CET)
 * Didn't work this time. Has sometimes worked before, for example with Special:Undelete/File:Kassiopi.jpg. --Stefan2 (talk) 00:43, 31 December 2012 (CET)
 * And I just deleted a file (File:Artists-studio.jpg). Wonder why we can delete some files but not other files. --MGA73 (talk) 00:48, 31 December 2012 (CET)
 * Just for your information, I have also nominated that file for deletion on Commons. --Stefan2 (talk) 00:55, 31 December 2012 (CET)
 * Yes, this bug is in effect at the moment. I can delete some files but not others...Another WTS gnome (talk) 01:06, 31 December 2012 (CET)
 * For your information, I restored the file information pages for the images which couldn't be deleted. I think that this is better than having images without file information pages. --Stefan2 (talk) 01:36, 31 December 2012 (CET)

Info: As a test I tried to move File:1257280101119 f.jpg and got this error: You do not have permission to move this page, for the following reason: Could not copy file mwstore://local-backend/local-public/4/43/1257280101119_f.jpg to mwstore://local-backend/local-public/9/99/MGA-test.jpg. I do not know if that helps us but is shows it is not only deletions that is a problem. --MGA73 (talk) 12:44, 3 January 2013 (CET)
 * Indeed. We do not have permission to do anything with the file (only with the file information page). Maybe we should contact de:User:RolandUnger or de:User:DerFussi. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:28, 3 January 2013 (CET)
 * I asked Unger on shared because I noticed he is active at the moment. --MGA73 (talk) 14:47, 3 January 2013 (CET)
 * Also, there are a few files on Shared which should be imported from this project, but they need to be undeleted here first. Sigh. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:43, 5 January 2013 (CET)


 * Please check. I could delete File:1257280101119 f.jpg now. It seems working correct. --Unger (talk) 12:11, 7 January 2013 (CET)
 * I tested with File:Cafe-aborigen.jpg and it seems to work again. Thanks! --Stefan2 (talk) 12:20, 7 January 2013 (CET)


 * Sounds good. Please undelete the files mentioned above so we can move them to Commons. --MGA73 (talk) 14:59, 7 January 2013 (CET)

What's the status on the different projects?
I was wondering how things are going on the different projects. Anyone who know that? I mean these projects:


 * en: There is a total of 7,458 files and 6,228 files are not moved/checked yet
 * fr: There is a total of 1,931 files and I know that 172 files are tagged as NowCommons but I do not know about the rest of the files
 * de: There is a total of 0 files ---> Nothing to do
 * it: There is a total of 0 files ---> Nothing to do
 * ru: There is a total of 438 files and according to Atsirlin above, these files can be ignored. ---> Nothing to do
 * sv: There is a a total of 459 files and about 170 are not yet moved/checked. ---> all done
 * nl: There is a a total of 291 files and I know that 44 is on Commons but I do not know about the rest of the files
 * shared: There is a a total of 29,736 files and there is only about 300 files left to check/move ---> all done
 * wts: There is a a total of 22,534 files and 3,954 files in Category:All files on WTS and 1,067 files in Category:Files to be moved to Commons

As you can see I have found the numbers of files but I do not know if anyone is working on the rest of the files. --MGA73 (talk) 16:59, 27 December 2012 (CET)
 * I have been working on the "All files on WTS" category on this project and was planning to continue with the other projects when the "All files on WTS" category is empty. The category had a thousand more files on Christmas Eve, so it's going down fast. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:26, 27 December 2012 (CET)
 * Also, since I have been tagging lots of files, it should be possible to add more files to Category:MTC from Category:Files to be moved to Commons. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:55, 27 December 2012 (CET)
 * Also, I keep adding files to the move category all of the time, although right now I've added more files to the "ignore" category. I'm not sure how often you check for new files. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:26, 29 December 2012 (CET)
 * I'm moving files from whenever I have time :-) --MGA73 (talk) 21:10, 29 December 2012 (CET)

Now sv is done and there is only about 19 files left on shared :-D --MGA73 (talk) 01:07, 6 January 2013 (CET)
 * All on Shared are done. Some may show up later if/when KeepLocal and Ignore files are checked again. --MGA73 (talk) 21:29, 7 January 2013 (CET)

Korean Tourism Organization
File:Letter of permit.gif is a letter by the Korean Tourism Organization which grants User:(WT-shared) Paula the right to "use" certain images. This looks insufficient to me: while the letter itself is available under cc-by-sa, it is not clear if the images are available under that licence. Does anyone else have an opinion about this? --Stefan2 (talk) 14:51, 29 December 2012 (CET)
 * I asked about this on Commons, they suggested to send this permit to OTRS and see what they say.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:01, 1 January 2013 (CET)

User:(WT-shared) Olasiouek
Does anyone know what this user is called? All photos are listed as own work by the uploader, but sometimes the uploader claims to be called Aleksandra Lechki, and at other times the uploader claims to be called Joanna Zysiak. The uploader can't be both of them. It would be nice if we could at least keep some of the images, but then we need to identify who the uploader is. For now, I've tagged all files with "Ignore". --Stefan2 (talk) 20:37, 29 December 2012 (CET)


 * My Google-fu established that they are friends and that the uploader is probably Aleksandra. I have tried to send her a message for clarification. --Peter Talk 06:31, 30 December 2012 (CET)

Category:Files to be moved to Commons without a license
Hi. It seems that many files were tagged with a but without a license tag. I can't move files to Commons if they do not have a license tag. So to clean up Category:Files to be moved to Commons we should remove the move tag or replace it with something else. I added a few examples there. Comments? --MGA73 (talk) 16:54, 3 January 2013 (CET)
 * Well, File:100 3949.JPG violates Commons:COM:FOP, so there's no way that that image can be copied to Commons. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:05, 3 January 2013 (CET)
 * Yes that too. But I meant comments to the idea of removing the files from the category :-)
 * It would be much easier (for me) if there was only files in the move category that could actually be moved to Commons.
 * If we change the template then we also indicate that the files need an extra check. --MGA73 (talk) 17:11, 3 January 2013 (CET)

Moved the files to that category now and there is 268 files at the moment. Some might be ok but it will need manual review to find out. --MGA73 (talk) 20:26, 3 January 2013 (CET)

Archieve ?
Perhaps we could put some of the old stuff to an archieve? I just made a post on http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Wikivoyage:Travellers%27_pub asking users to check by if they have questions and it would perhaps be easier if only active/relevant threads were here? --MGA73 (talk) 08:29, 4 January 2013 (CET)
 * Done it :) Another WTS gnome (talk) 12:03, 5 January 2013 (CET)

Images that have not been copied to commons
What do we do about images that have not been copied over for no apparent reason? Pbsouthwood (talk) 19:07, 5 January 2013 (CET)
 * If they can be copied to Commons, tag them with . If a file hasn't been moved, it often means that it doesn't say who the photographer is, that it doesn't say under what terms the uploader agrees to license the image or that the image was moved from a language edition and later deleted there, without a way to verify that it was correctly sourced and licensed at that language edition. However, there are also a few thousand files which have not yet been checked by anyone because of lack of time. My plan is to continue checking those last files, and User:MGA73bot is still moving hundreds of files to Commons every day. If the file is in Category:Files to be ignored, try finding a suitable replacement at Commons and then replace the image at all places where it is in use. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:16, 5 January 2013 (CET)
 * Yes and on Shared there is only 19 files left to check + some that have been checked and need a permission etc. We have also checked and moved some on en and fr and that often means that files here can be tagged with NowCommons because the files were uploaded on more than one project. --MGA73 (talk) 21:42, 5 January 2013 (CET)
 * Or you could ask here if there is a reason :-) --MGA73 (talk) 21:31, 7 January 2013 (CET)

What do we do to end the project?
Most of the files have been copied or at least checked. But there are still some files left. So what do we do to end the project?

We could choose only to look at the most important files or we could try to check them all or most of the files.

I listed all our categories below and added a short comment on what to do. Feel free to change the text above.

Perhaps we should set a priority on which categories to work on? Everyone is ofcourse welcome to do whatever he/she likes the most.

Also, if there is a time limit we should make a note here so we all will be aware of it. --MGA73 (talk) 19:52, 19 January 2013 (CET)


 * I am currently categorising the remaining files by licence. Many files do not have a licence, and it should be faster to work on files which do have a licence and only after that look at the files which do not have a licence. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:29, 19 January 2013 (CET)
 * I am against the idea of shutting it down until each and every image has been properly transferred and checked. Just today, for example, I found an image that wasn't relinked on Wikivoyage, and another image that was sloppily uploaded to Commons from Wikitravel with the wrong licensing and source information. This can only be fixed if we review the images by hand. Fortunately, we have my script. Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:56, 20 January 2013 (CET)
 * Not to mention that the talk pages still should be moved to Commons, something I am doing by hand with a tool I wrote. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:01, 20 January 2013 (CET)
 * Most of the KeepLocal files are in use on an old WT edition that doesn't yet have a WV equivalent (mainly JA, I think). We can't do anything with those for now. I really think we should just leave them, and if JA.WV (and other required WV versions) are not set up by the time we are ready to close WTS, then too bad. Another WTS gnome (talk) 23:41, 20 January 2013 (CET)
 * What is the deal with the WT files, anyway? Is WT somehow still linking to files on this site? That doesn't make any sense to me. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:46, 21 January 2013 (CET)
 * The reason they are here is if, say, JA.WV were to be launched, as a fork of JA.WT. In that case we would need to transfer KeepLocal images across to JA.WV from here, and only then could they be deleted here. Another WTS gnome (talk) 01:03, 21 January 2013 (CET)
 * Oh, so if they're used on a Wikitravel page that has already been converted (e.g,. Italian, English), then we don't have to worry about it? Maybe the bot that marked them could have noted that and marked them unused - or could do so now. (*cough* Stefan) Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:29, 21 January 2013 (CET)
 * Oh, looks like he did. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:37, 21 January 2013 (CET)
 * Spanish and Portuguese Wikivoyage have recently been launched as a fork of the Spanish and Portuguese Wikitravel. If it says that a file is in use on Spanish or Portuguese Wikitravel, then it is most likely also in use on Spanish or Portuguese Wikivoyage. Other Wikivoyage editions might be started using Wikitravel content (see en:m:Requests for new languages). When or if they are created, files need to be delinked on the projects. I have recently started with the Portuguese files and delinked about half of them. Until the projects have been imported, I'm not sure if we can do anything with the files which are in use there.
 * Wikitravel continues as a website controlled by Internet Brands, but most contributors seem to have moved over to Wikivoyage. Internet Brands opposes the Wikimedia fork and the company has made a few things which make it difficult to get a new data dump of the site. For example, the MediaWiki API and Special:Export have been switched off. This means that the only way to fork Wikitravel is to use old dumps from August 2012, so there is in my opinion no point in making any edits to Wikitravel. --Stefan2 (talk) 16:13, 21 January 2013 (CET)
 * To Magog. I agree that we should not close the site before the files that were moved to Commons has been checked. The question is what to do with the files with Ignore or the files that are unused and not yet moved. Someone will have to spend time to check, transfer and check the transfer. If noone volounteer to do so how long shall we wait? --MGA73 (talk) 22:35, 21 January 2013 (CET)

Questions about single users or images
I think we could asume own work here Category:Files uploaded by Jaimexie. Same camera and uploaded shortly after image was taken. Thoughts anyone? --MGA73 (talk) 11:47, 27 January 2013 (CET)

Travelpleb
User:Travelpleb's contributions look solid (seem to be actual own work as far as my detective skills can tell) and would fill in a lot of obscure gaps. Is there a way to auto-tag all his images for transfer? Jpatokal (talk) 23:40, 19 February 2013 (CET)


 * As far as I can tell then most of these Special:Contributions/(WT-shared)_Travelpleb are allready copied to Commons. A few are deleted (for example as NowCommons or KeepLocal). I can only see 2 files in Category:Files uploaded by Travelpleb and both seems to be on Commons. --MGA73 (talk) 09:11, 20 February 2013 (CET)

Deleting images
Hey now, guys, I can't be the only one deleting images on here. I've had several thousand, and I've already hit burnout. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:20, 21 February 2013 (CET)
 * The fact is, it's boring as ****. I am really impressed you've been doing it for so long!!!
 * How many do you find that actually need anything done before deletion? Could we make an automated list of all those that need attention, or is that impractical? Another WTS gnome (talk) 09:37, 21 February 2013 (CET)
 * Well it would be just splendid if we could edit the user space and template space again, so we could              install nowcommonsreview.js, which should work spledidly with my script, updated twice weekly:  (*hint* *hint*). Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:25, 23 February 2013 (CET)
 * I installed it for you at MediaWiki:Common.js. Another WTS gnome (talk) 23:12, 27 February 2013 (CET)

What to do with files not yet om Commons
Helle everyone - I expect that hundreds of users still check this page every day :-D

Most of the good files are copied to Commons and some time in the future they will hopefully all be checked (see the post right above).

But what do we do with files in Category:Files to be ignored? Do we ignore them completely or de we check once more and if they are truely bad then we delete?

And files in Category:Files to be kept locally are most likely not free and no longer in use. Do we delete them?

Perhaps one of the old admins could have a look at the first 10-20 files in both categories and comment here? --MGA73 (talk) 14:46, 3 March 2013 (CET)


 * "Files to be ignored" is mostly okay, but there are images in there (like File:Sunken temple sangkhla.jpg) that are just fine and probably could be moved. That one, for instance, is high-res, has full EXIF information from a consumer-level camera, and was uploaded at a time that we were fairly lenient about explicit declarations of license.  As with text contributions, I thought we were comfortable assuming CC-by-SA 3.0 for such images.
 * "Files to be kept locally" should be migrated to any of the new Wikivoyages that have an EDP, shouldn't they?
 * -- LtPowers (talk) 17:04, 2 May 2013 (CEST)


 * I have just copied File:Sunken temple sangkhla.jpg and some other files with the "move" template to Commons.
 * "Files to be kept locally" are as far as I know migrated to any of the new Wikivoyages that have an EDP and want the files. Files are not allowed unless they are used so I think they should be migrated soon and deleted here. --MGA73 (talk) 20:49, 3 May 2013 (CEST)
 * Hmm... right, if they're not in use then they shouldn't be migrated. LtPowers (talk) 22:40, 3 May 2013 (CEST)


 * If noone objects I think we should delete them once/if we have checked that they are non-free and unused. That way we get rid of unfree files + avoid that the same file gets checked over and over. --MGA73 (talk) 23:12, 3 May 2013 (CEST)