User talk:STBotI

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

PLEASE DIRECT ALL QUESTIONS ABOUT IMAGES TO THE IMAGE COPYRIGHT HELP DESK.
If you are here to register a complaint regarding this bot's edits, before doing so please note:
  1. There is a very clear policy regarding the use of non-free images, which must be followed by all users. Even you. This policy is located at Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. You must read this.
  2. If the bot left a message, read it, along with any links in the message, before complaining here. It explains the problem. Also, check the tag left on the image, if there is one. These, along with policy, explain the issues.
  3. Do not revert the bot's edits to your userpages or templates, because the bot will just do it again. Do not remove the deletion templates, because they will be restored. Do not assume that you can revert and then evade my notice, because BetacommandBot checks all images periodically, and ImageBacklogBot will catch you again next time it is run.
  4. Check and make sure the image has a valid source.
  5. Make sure that the image has a valid non-free use rationale (A guide can be found here)
  6. I will not add rationales for you. As the uploader it is your responsibility to do so.
  7. All images must comply with policy.
  8. A generic template tag is NOT a valid fair use rationale. You must follow the instructions here.
  9. If you're here to whine and complain that But <image name> is just like my image and it isn't tagged for deletion, I will tag that image too, I just haven't gotten around to it yet.
  10. If you're here to whine and complain that the bot screwed up, please at least include a link. Diffs are even better, but a link to the image is sufficient. I do not really want to go through your contributions just to find that the error was yours, not mine. Do not do this.
  11. There is a very clear policy regarding having fair use rationales on fair use images. This policy is located at Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria point #10(c). Rationales must be provided for each use of an image. Also please see Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline.
  12. We do not permit fair use, copyrighted images to exist on Wikipedia if rationales for that image's use are not provided. Please see Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#Images.2Fmedia #6. Also please see the Wikimedia Foundation's resolution on this matter at m:Resolution:Licensing policy point #4.
  13. We do not permit fair use, copyrighted images be used outside of the article namespace. Please see WP:NFCC#9
  14. For quite some time, we have attempted to encourage people to provide rationales. The results of this effort have been dismal at best. Clearly, greater measures are necessary.
  15. The use of fair use, copyrighted images on the Wikimedia servers is covered by United States law. Our policies with respect to this bot's actions are based on that law. Please see Fair_use#Purpose_and_character.
  16. Bug reports are very welcome; tagging images as this bot is doing per policy is not a bug.
    To file a bug report:
    • Visit https://jira.ts.wikimedia.org/secure/CreateIssue!default.jspa (you will need to register)
    • Select:
      • Project: ST47's tools
      • Issue Type: Bug, new feature, whatever. If you don't know what this means, choose bug.
    • Click next.
    • Fill in a short summary, select a priority level, and look to see if the name of the bot is listed in the components section. If it is, select it, otherwise, select unknown.
    • Ignore affects version, fix version, environment, assignee.
    • Add a detailed description, and
    • Hit 'create'.
    • Due to an excessive amount of trolling and idiocy on this talk page, in order for me to remain sane while reviewing your bug report, it must be placed on this bug tracker. Any bug placed elsewhere that requires more than a 5 minute fix will be neglected.
  17. If you'd like to opt out from receipt of warnings ONLY, not from your images being reviewed or tagged, then leave a message here. By requesting to be opted out, you agree to the statements on the subpoints of this line. If you discontinue to agree with them, you must request removal from the opt-out list. This is to ensure that I'm not left receiving messages from a user wondering why their images are being deleted and they aren't being told.
    1. You do not want to hear from this bot or its owner regarding issues with images you upload.
    2. You understand the non-free content policy on Wikipedia and agree to abide by it.
    3. You accept that this bot's operation in tagging your images and the images of others is necessary in order to comply with that policy.
    4. You do not intend to contact this bot's owner with any issues regarding an image being deleted or other operation of this bot, unless the bot tagged an image that you uploaded that complied with non-free content policy completely, containing a source and either a free license tag, or a non-free image license tag and a non-free image use rationale is used on at least one article and has a link to that article in the rationale.
  18. Oh, and if you say rational instead of rationale, I am going to hit you over the head with a large fish.
Questions and complaints regarding your images, rather than this bot, can be directed to the Image Copyright Help Desk where a team of volunteers will endeavor to offer useful advise in a convivial atmosphere.


I intend to start working on getting STBotI back up and running within the week on new images only, and eventually on all images. To that end, I have created two subpages, User:STBotI/CodeCollaboration and User:STBotI/MessageCollaboration. They are fairly self-explanatory. I'll be uploading the image detection code to the former and heavily commenting it shortly, and I'll put something up on the latter eventually. Suggestions or improvements are welcome to either the page, the talk page, or my user talk. Note that the messages are mostly transcluded, so edits made to those templates will affect all users. Anyone is welcome to participate constructively, I reserve the right to ban anyone from those pages if they are acting inappropriately.

/Archive1 /Archive2 /Archive3 /Archive4

Contents

[edit] Understanding Copyright

User: Political Dweeb here thanks you for showing me this. I now wanted to ask you about how to put a copyright tag on a image description page and then when do I take it away from the image description page.Political Dweeb (talk) 08:18, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Opt-out

I would like to opt out. And by the way, I have the following code on my talkpage: {{bots|allow=MiszaBot,MiszaBot III,HBC Archive Indexerbot}} and your bot should recognise this and bypass my page. But it didn't. Please exclude me from your ticketting ASAP. —TreasuryTag—t—c 10:48, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not following nobots because it's too annoying to meet all the possibilities. My bot is not required to follow nobots. Once there is an optout, I'll review your contribs and decide whether to add you. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 11:50, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Per the seventh bullet-point here, you are required to provide an opt-out method. Since you currently don't comply with the standard one, don't provide one of your own, and insist in exercising God-like power over who is permitted on the hypothetical future one, your bot is not permitted! I suggest you action this ASAP. —TreasuryTag—t—c 11:57, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
One could argue that these messages are not optional, as it's generally considered to be a good thing to notify a page's creators on a CSD, prod, or AFD request. Once I've assessed your need for opting out of warnings, I'll add you to the list. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 12:09, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
And I'm not seeing a large volume of warnings. Can you explain why you need to be opted out? --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 12:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
I request at the top of my talkpage that I do not want image-deletion-label-bureaucratic-notice-warning-message-box-notification-thingies. Bots can't read the request, obviously, but that is what {{bots}} is for - I'd like to receive NONE, and I received one from you today. As I pointed out above, with the bot policy, you are required to operate an opt-out system for talkpages. —TreasuryTag—t—c 16:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
I've added you to the list. Next time the bot reboots, it will reload the opt-out info. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 18:20, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Thank-you. —TreasuryTag—t—c 19:48, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I DID WAT U SAID

I ADDED COPYRIGHT TAGS TO MY IMAGES! DemiLovato15 (talk) 23:45, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I am lost

I got this message:

==Image copyright problem with Image:Vase3r 480.jpg== Thanks for uploading Image:Vase3r 480.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well. For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 17:51, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

There are two of the same now. I only wanted one, and I wanted that on my used page, not a separate page, and smaller image size. Sorry, but computer savvy I lack. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 18:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Mamta

I am sorry but I beleive that I had already added the non free rationnel for the image , then what is the problem ? --Mazfired (talk) 20:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] adding links for radiolinkshollywood.com

Hello,
Adding links to wikipedia is very frustrating!
I add them and find out the next day that they have been removed!
What can I do to have them NOT removed?
Please help.
Thanks
courtens

[edit] Change message for 10c failures

The message left for images that fail NFCC 10c is incomprehensible to most people. Can you please edit it to say something simple, like "the rationale must include the title of the page to which it relates"? Stifle (talk) 13:20, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 4HCrest.gif

I have received a notifaction that this image may be deleted. That may be because my inexperience has left the wrong information regarding it. It is however a crest of a British army unit which ceased to exist in 1958. The crest is in use in the public domain.GDD1000 (talk) 00:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:A nous les petites Anglaises.jpg

replied on my talk page. Pgr94 (talk) 13:31, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Errors (tagging images on commons which are GFDL or public domain as non-free)

I noticed this bot left a series of templated messages at User talk:Severa. The images in question are: Image:AbortionAccessinCanadaMap.png (GFDL), Image:AbortionCzechRepublic.png (GFDL/CC-SA-2.5), Image:AbortionLawsAustraliaMap.png (GFDL/CC-SA-2.5), Image:AbortionLawsMap.png (public domain), Image:Abortion time series Norway.PNG (GFDL/CC-SA-3.0), and Image:Abortionmethods.png (public domain). All of these images are on the commons (but have a non-redlinked wikipedia page due to the inclusion of Category:Abortion images. Seems the bot doesn't realize these images are properly licensed on the commons, and that there actually isn't an uploaded image associated with these pages here on en.wiki. I guess it wouldn't matter that much if these image pages were deleted here, because the images would still show through via the commons. However, the categorization would not work (though I'm not even sure if it is appropriate to categorize images from the commons here on wikipedia...) One last thing, the user whose page received the warnings was not the "uploader" of some of these images, but instead was simply the one to add the category to the page. Anyway, hope this helps.-Andrew c [talk] 15:38, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to repeat these concerns with regard to 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 images. I don't care to have my talk page barraged by a misguided bot. Thanks,--cj | talk 15:55, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Likewise with Image:Ac preussen.jpg. If you're going to run a bot tagging images all copyright paranoid, you can at least make sure it only tags images that are actually problematic. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 16:44, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I've submitted a bug report (ST-44) through the JIRA system for this.-Andrew c [talk] 17:07, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Errors in targeting

This bot left a message on my talk page about two dinosaur images, the second being Image:Afrovenator abakensis dinosaur.png. I didn't upload these images, despite what the bot thinks. de Bivort 19:57, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

It looks like I have the same problem noted in the messages above. Maybe it's time to take the bot off line for a while. de Bivort 19:58, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bots Gone Wild

It looks like your bot wants to be free again, and has again escaped from your tyrannical clutches? ;)

It has again tagged my talk page concerning a couple fair-use images I did not upload. Is this a cry for help from your bot? Are you mistreating your bot?

See this version of my talk page: [1]. --Timeshifter (talk) 01:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Large fish

Despite your admonitions to the contrary, I find it ridiculous that you can't come up with a reasonable rationale for why an image of a book cover might appear on an article about the book. Wikipedia works best when people who see problems fix them on their own instead of admonishing their fellow contributors. If you were paying me to be a contributor, I'd be happy to listen to your nagging. As it stands, I'm happy to watch you remove good faith content for no good reason because I no longer give a damn. --Dystopos (talk) 04:17, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree wholeheartedly with Dystopos. It is in my opinion counter-productive to bother image submitters who have to learn about using fair-use templates. Since when has competence with templates been a prerequisite for contributing to Wikipedia?
It would be more constructive if those with competence in fair-use rationale policy and the relevant templates handled the clear-cut cases.
Or as a compromise make it one-click easy to add a fair-use statement. Pgr94 (talk) 08:08, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Image submitters who can not understand one of the most major concerns about images, copyright, should not be uploading images. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 10:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Would you extend that principle to say that "people who are not experts should not edit Wikipedia", or is it still "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit."? I'm not saying it isn't wrong to use images under Fair Use without a rationale. I'm saying that if you see a problem, you should fix it yourself. Wikipedia is about contributing, not about nagging. --Dystopos (talk) 23:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm saying that people who are not willing to put in a little effort should not edit Wikipedia. We have thousands of images uploaded every day, if everyone just included the right documentation, we'd be fine. Very many people don't, and I do not have the time to identify and fix every one of them. I do have time to identify them and let the uploader know, so they can fix it. If the uploader is going to continue ignoring policy, then that uploader should be blocked. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 00:23, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Could you explain why the people who uploaded content in the "bad old days" -- when the policy recommended using boilerplate fair use templates and didn't discuss individual rationales for each article --should be lumped in with the current crop of flagrant lawbreakers? And why it takes less time time and is more effective to notify the original uploader of content added years ago than to glance and see if maybe the rationale for the individual article is glaringly obvious, perhaps even something that could be worded precisely the same way the boilerplate was worded? It's just tiresome to have contributed ones efforts voluntarily and in good faith only to be bombarded years later with newly-discovered policy requirements. --Dystopos (talk) 04:40, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Leading flack

Why is the bot putting <digit><CRLF><CRLF> out before its message - as here? -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Because the page didn't exist and for whatever reason the bot didn't see it as blank, but saw it as an error. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 10:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Erroneous image tagging

This bot has tagged Image:AstroLow.gif when it already contained all the necessary copyright information. Smith609 Talk 10:55, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Wrong, you failed to provide a non-free image use rationale, as required by policy. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 18:03, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

It has also tagged Image:AppleInsider_Homepage.png when it already contained all the necessary copyright information Eraserhead1 (talk) 12:36, 21 May 2008 (UTC).

  • Image:AztecaLasVegas.jpg already provided a fair use rationale, which named the article in which it was used. Nevertheless, I have added the approved rationale using the template. You are creating unnecessary work by tagging images that already have a fair use rationale. dhett (talk • contribs) 04:47, 22 May 2008 (UTC) (comment withdrawn)

[edit] Bot message

Hi! The message that I received on my talk page has this text:

"You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale."

When I had uploaded the image, I had put in a {{Non-free book cover}} tag. This is (at least was then back in 2005) logically understood to be the fair use rationale. However on investigating, your bot seems to make it mandatory to use the template: {{Non-free use rationale}}. So I would suggest that you modify the message text to allow users understand that this is what is needed. This would better ensure compliance. =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:41, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

As I explained to the other small-minded fool who assumed that the bot is a foolish script, the bot looks for many things, one of which is a non-free image use rationale. Anyone who talks about how to appease the bot rather than follow policy is misunderstanding the term "policy". The bot enforces policy, and if you have clearly failed to follow policy, then the bot will issue a warning and add a deletion template. {{Non-free book cover}} is not a fair use rationale. The template even says that it is not a sufficient claim of fair use. If you can't keep track of your old uploads, which I can understand, well that is why the bot sends you warnings... --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 10:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Bbcscrumv_logo.jpg

Confused as to why this was tagged. NFCC 10c) is cited which states:

  • "The name of each article (a link to the articles is recommended as well) in which fair use is claimed for the item" - yep got that, although the recommended (but not mandatory) link is omitted.
  • "A separate fair-use rationale for each use of the item, as explained at Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline. The rationale is presented in clear, plain language, and is relevant to each use." - yep got that too, although again in plain text rather than a template (which the guideline doesn't mandate).

The source and generic template tag are also present. I really can't see where I've gone wrong here... AlexJ (talk) 10:34, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

You need a link to the article. I've corrected that. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 10:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Reading the guideline again: The name of each article (a link to the articles is recommended as well) in which fair use is claimed for the item. Where does that say I need a link to the article? AlexJ (talk) 11:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:BlasterBates LWABjpg.jpg

In compliance with policy 4Q2, you are hereby welcome to delete the image, and be damned. No attempt will be made to make this a more interesting encyclopedia in the future. ɟʎ. Djdaedalus (talk) 14:58, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

Please see [2]. --Duk 17:45, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked again

Please see [3] and Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Blocked_again --Duk 03:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:BethClaytonPSQ.png}

This seems to have been inappropriately tagged. The image description page does bear the required information, and it survived a deletion discussion already. Image:BethClaytonPSQ.png. Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 03:16, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Logos

The issue of logos has been discussed several times. Once it is pointed that it is company logo claiming fair use, there must be no problem. Skartsis (talk) 16:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)