User talk:Dschwen

Not getting any messages makes Ambilobe panther chameleon sad.

Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 (Feel free to reactivate conversations by pulling them from the archives)

How to avoid unwanted geolocation

@Chiswick Chap, MGA73, Romaine, Eissink, Havang(nl):

Hi. I really appreciate the great work and effort to extract coordinates from Exif metadata. However, I noticed also several complaints and problems about unwanted or inappropriate extracting. What to do with that problem? My proposals:

• to create any template ({{Irrelevant Exif coordinates}} or/and {{Incorrect Exif coordinates}}) which would block your bot from extracting coordinates. Uploaders should be made aware of the possibility of use it.
• to create any template ({{Delete Exif coordinates}}) which would propose files to erase Exif coordinates from the file metadata by a bot. (The subsequent process cannot be fully automatic, but must be under human control, ie the proposal must be verified and approved.)
• subject the coordinate completion process to a cursory preview of the previews so that those types of images where the coordinates are likely to be irrelevant or undesirable can be excluded or checked. (Similar tracking and verification works in the processing of bot rotate requests.)
• Block re-extraction of coordinates where they have already been manually deleted from the file page
• Significantly mark the origin (method of insertion) of coordinates in the {{Location}} template with a separate parameter, so that it is possible to distinguish data extracted from EXIF from data entered manually, or from coordinates entered / obtained in another way. The coordinates should be accompanied with the text "Extracted from Exif data".

Some other ideas? --ŠJů (talk) 00:39, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for trying to find a solution. Reading the cases of Romaine and Havang(nl), one may wonder how many unuseful exif data have already been used to produce inaccurate geo coordinates while the uploaders didn't notice, but I have no idea how to solve cases like that. Eissink (talk) 01:43, 31 October 2020 (UTC).

Very glad to see that the issue is recognised. Any means that permits ordinary users to ensure without delay or complication that a file does not have coordinates extracted when it is not appropriate would be acceptable.

There are some classes of image where coordinates will basically never be useful, such as scans of pages from out-of-copyright books. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:56, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for having looked at that problem. Text of warning template could be Extracted from Exif data, possibly incorrect geolocation coordinates. Notice that actual messages generated by translations of the templates are sometimes causing additional confusion. --Havang(nl) (talk) 09:21, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

You can add such files to Category:Location not applicable. But I don't know whether DschwenBot reacts on this. --тнояsтеn ⇔ 19:22, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

I also see this as a problem, missing geocoordinates are just missing information, while wrong geocoordinates are wrong information. Acc. to the wikiprinciple missing information is preferred over wrong information. Deletion of wrong coordinates is a way to deal with wrong coordinates, but if the bot is stronger, we will end up with more and more unusable geo information. I now try {{Bots|deny=DschwenBot}} acc. to the bot's user page (currently there are less than 400 files marked that way: [1]). I do not consider this as a practical solution, I would prefer the solution that the bot respects removal and does not reinsert wrong exif data again. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 11:21, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

While many of the bot's edits may be valuable, it seems clear that many are also unwanted. It is troubling that Dschwen in no way reacts to any of the complaints and questions, like my question over 7 months ago. Perhaps the issue should be brought up at f.i. ANI, to have administrators look at it, because this discussion is going nowhere. Eissink (talk) 11:40, 17 December 2020 (UTC).

Eissink, I assure you this was not a deliberate stone walling on my part. I had a prolonged absence from Wikimedia projects due to some other obligations. The most straight forward answer to "How to avoid unwanted geolocation" is to remove it before uploading, because the data is on commons, whether my bot makes it more accessible or not. Alternative approaches are discussed below. I like the Category:Location not applicable suggestion. Would you consider this an acceptable approach? --Dschwen (talk) 22:36, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

If this has the consent of others also, I'm fine with this. Thanks, Eissink (talk) 12:10, 12 January 2021 (UTC).

I got the same issue with this file. It added an incorrect location to the file that was readded after I manually removed it. I personally dislike the idea of {{Bots|deny=DschwenBot}} because to me this template (in this case) would say "please do not add the wrong information to the file" like as if it shouldn't be the default anyway.
--D-Kuru (talk) 07:42, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

@Dschwen: Can we get a word from you on this here?

1) DschwenBot readded the incorrect location tag yet again.

2) The bot seems to add the location tag to many other images that may shouldn't even have a location tag after all like eg File:Dog is dog is dog.jpg.

I would consult other admins on this, but if the bot runs wild and does more damage than good and is not fixed in time I think it's best to block it before the wrong tags get out of control.

--D-Kuru (talk) 11:15, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Hey everyone (@Thgoiter, D-Kuru, Eissink, Herzi Pinki, Chiswick Chap, Havang(nl):)! I could add a check for Category:Location not applicable. That seems to be the cleanest and simplest solution, which would not create a duplicate tagging situation. Pywikibot also has a built in functionality that allows users to block bots or certain bots from editing a page, see Template:Bots, but that seems to be a rather heavy handed approach (just saw D-Kuru already pointed that out). Readding of manually removed locations should not happen. The bot keeps a list of pages that were processed once and should never touch a page a second time, if that happened, I'd be interested in seeing the history to check the times. This would be a bug! --Dschwen (talk) 22:32, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Seems good to me. Chiswick Chap (talk) 22:35, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Ok, I've hacked this in real quick. If the text Category:Location not applicable is on the file description page the bot will not process the page. --Dschwen (talk) 23:51, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

acc. to the structure of Category:Location not applicable (with many subcategories, e.g. Category:Screenshots), this might have been too quick. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 00:13, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

here is my example of readded coordinates (from 2019, maybe fixed now, see #Wrong geolocation)): [2]

If you really can avoid readding geo information, this would be the best solution. Category:Location not applicable would also be an enhancement, As a remark to all, not to you: this category is a collection of issues for somebody else Nobody seems to care removing the location infos.

You argued that best would be not to upload wrong location with exif. How true. But Exif tends to be faulty, depending on the equipment, the situation and the user - yes the user. There are sets of images by user with exact location and set by other users with wrong and sloppy locations. It may be also difficult to check location info before uploading, so the easiest way (for me) is to upload a set of files and check location info with wikimap for example. Location may be in the exif, but might be removed manually, and your bot will add again. (to be clear, your bot will not add twice, but will not respect my removal at least the first time) If you can find an improvement for this use case, it would be appreciated. And we have no control over sets of files imported from external sources (flickr), running the upload script is easy, checking and correcting the location is hard work and often not done by the uploader. Maybe we all could maintain a list of external users (flickr users) by their external user link, whose location info we do not trust. And the bot should leave those files untouched. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 00:13, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't think that this would be the correct approach. Sometimes the EXIF coordinates are right and sometimes they are wrong and not all uploaders know how to fix them (I don't). Category:Location not applicable is probably too broad to be used as "don't use the EXIF coordinates" determinator. {{Irrelevant Exif coordinates}} or/and {{Incorrect Exif coordinates}} are probably the best approach. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:26, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Commons Photographers User Group meeting on Saturday

Dear Commons Photographers User Group member,

I'd like to invite you to our next virtual meeting on Saturday, December 12. We'll have two presentations: Habib Mhenni aka Dyolf77 will answer the question Do "we" need DSLRs anymore? and Martin Falbisoner will walk us through the making of his featured picture File:Caribbean_Sea_-_Long_Exposure.jpg.

If you can make it, please add your name to the list of attendees to this page:

• Virtual Meeting on December 12, 2020

I hope to see you in three days. Also, I wish you, your family, and your friends all the best for 2021. Your contributions to Commons make a big difference.

Warmly, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:02, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy holidays 2020/2021!

		* Happy Holidays 2020/2021, Dschwen! *
		Merry Christmas! Happy New Year! Joyeux Noël! Bonne année! Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr! Счастливого Рождества! С Новым годом! ¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo! Щасливого Різдва! З Новим роком!    -- George Chernilevsky talk 13:48, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

FastCGI

Hello, FastCGI does not work since about the half of December. Could you please have a look at it? Thanks, --Nefronus (talk) 22:06, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

User:Nefronus, I fixed it today, sorry for the delay! --Dschwen (talk) 22:20, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Coordinates from EXIF

Hi, can you please add coordinates to template from EXIF to all photos in Category:Files by User:MIGORMCZ/Wikiexpedice Orlické hory by your bot. Thank you and sorry for my bad english. --MIGORMCZ (talk) 07:42, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

@MIGORMCZ: all files get processed as soon as they are uploaded (within a day). If coordinates were not added to your images the bot must have been unable to extract them. I'll check this out tomorrow. --Dschwen (talk) 05:34, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

@Dschwen: Hi, all files in that category have been uploaded last year. Your robot added coordinates to only three photos when I uploaded new versions of them this monday. All photos have the same coordinate format in EXIF. --MIGORMCZ (talk) 10:41, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

@Dschwen: I can ask what it looks like with those photos? --MIGORMCZ (talk) 12:46, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@MIGORMCZ: Hey, I haven't forgotten about this. There must have been a downtime for the bot right about when you uploaded these images. I'm working on updating the bot from python2 to python3 (about time!) and will rerun it for the time interval when you uploaded the pics. --Dschwen (talk) 15:14, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Panoviewer

Happy new year Dschwen, could you check that panoviewer's database is still updating? For example, https://panoviewer.toolforge.org/#Sackville_Road_Methodist_Church,_Bexhill_(indoor)_(360_panorama)_(2).jpg, has yet to be indexed. Kind regard, --Dr-Mx (talk) 18:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

@Dr-Mx: the only database is the cache directory of images. Looks like something went wrong processing that pano. I'll check it out. --Dschwen (talk) 20:46, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Yep, stuff's broken and has been for quite a while. (things are not quite as bad as I thought initially) I'll try to kick it back in shape. But I might need a gird engine admin to make sure the necessary software is installed on toolforge. Thanks for alerting me to this! I have some catching up to do.... --Dschwen (talk) 20:51, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Ok, fixed. That particular image looked unlike most other JPG images I've dealt with. The panoviewer inspects the file header to make sure that the requested image is actually in the JPG format. This image did not pass the test. I have fixed the test. --Dschwen (talk) 21:24, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

@Dschwen:That's interesting to know, being as it's a relatively new 360 camera. Thank you for your help. --Dr-Mx (talk) 23:07, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Interface admin

Hello, I just saw that I missed to notify you yesterday, but of course you already noticed that your request for Interface Adminship was successful. Welcome back! --Krd 08:30, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Krd! Already used the bit :-) --Dschwen (talk) 17:49, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

I worked all day on setting up a new database schema and developing new more robust queries for coordinate extraction that will make the WikiMiniAtlas work with the current database setup on WMF cloud (no user DBs on replica servers and no cross DB joins). Of course that is not seen as "activity" on wiki... :-) --Dschwen (talk) 17:51, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

FastCCI CloudVPS project

Hello Dschwen, please see https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/cloud/2021-January/001385.html. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 22:20, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

@AntiCompositeNumber: thanks, great catch!! Email sent. I really have to set up some email filters. I'm on such a host of lists that things like this can easily slip by. --Dschwen (talk) 05:41, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Your most memorable shot 2020

Dear member of the Commons Photographers User Group,

Over the course of the past two years, we've been sharing pictures that have a special meaning with each other at the start of the new year. Today, I'm inviting you add your most memorable shot of 2020 to this page:

• Your most memorable shot 2020

I hope you, your familiy, and your friends are well during these difficult times. I wish you all the best for 2021 and I can't wait to see what your most memorable shot of 2020 looks like.

Warmly, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:31, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Next Commons Photographers meeting featuring large format photographer Ben Horne

Dear member of the Commons Photographers User Group,

I'm happy to invite you to our next virtual meeting on Saturday, March 20, at the usual time. As I mentioned during our last get-together, I'd like to invite external guests every now and then, given that it seems good to expand our view and learn something from someone outside our community.

Our first external guest, Ben Horne, will talk about large format wilderness photography, followed by a question-and-answer session. Ben is maybe one of best known contemporary large format photographers in the United States. On his excursions to national parks, he shoots 8×10 film and talks about his adventures on his YouTube channel which has attracted more than 48,000 followers so far. He is YouTube's first, and longest active landscape photography vlogger and I'm thrilled that he has agreed to join our next meeting and talk about his experiences.

If you're interested in joining this meeting, please sign up on the page below:

• Virtual Meeting on March 20, 2020

Also, don't forget to post your question(s) prior to the meeting on the following page in order to ensure a good and fruitful question-and-answer session:

• Questions for Ben

I'm very much looking forward to this event and I hope you'll be able to join.

All the best, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:31, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Panoviewer

Hi! Just wanted to thank you for setting up this tool! Just FYI, on Wikidata I made a user script to display the tool in an iframe whenever photosphere image (P4640) is used in an item. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 10:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

This is cool! --Dschwen (talk) 18:15, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

File:22 August 2020 Valle della Breggia da Monte Generoso.jpg

Greetings,

was wondering why File:22 August 2020 Valle della Breggia da Monte Generoso.jpg was visited by your bot while other uploads I did on the same day weren't. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:22, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

That's curious. I'll check it out tomorrow! --Dschwen (talk) 03:07, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: are there still unprocessed images? It could have been pure chance that the first image was uploaded before the bot run commenced (at which point it retrieves a list of new images from the database) and the other images did barely not make the cut. Either way, it looks like the bot just picked them up the next day. Cheers --Dschwen (talk) 15:09, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Not as far as I can tell. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:34, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Reminder: Commons Photographers meeting tomorrow

Just a quick reminder: the meeting with large format-photographer Ben Horne will happen tomorrow, Saturday, March 20. If you haven't done yet, please consider signing up for the event and add your questions to this page. This will be our first virtual meeting in 2021 and I'd be super happy if you could join. All the best, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:34, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Zoomviewer

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T263141

Hi Dschwen, are you still operating the zoomviewer? The service appears to be unresponsive, see the corresponding Phabricator ticket or this discussion. This affects all images that use the {{LargeImage}} template. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 12:00, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

The webservice probaly just needs a restart. --Dschwen (talk) 22:19, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@AFBorchert: there was a change necessary in the webserver configuration, since WMF moved all tools from toolforge.org/toolname to toolname.toolforge.org . Ah, well, they keep us on our toes... --Dschwen (talk) 22:46, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Dschwen, thanks for fixing this! I am glad that the Zoomviewer is working again. Recently, I have started to upload large scale stitched pictures like this one where the Zoomviewer is really helpful. Thanks for maintaining this. Best, AFBorchert (talk) 15:48, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

the panoviewer works with most files, but not with others

example: it does work with —> image, but not with this one. any ideas/explanations? Maximilian (talk) 19:47, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Hmm, I thought I had fixed an issue with oddly formatted JPEG files (that didn't have an expected magic signature). Let me investigate. --Dschwen (talk) 19:17, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Maximilian Schönherr: ah, I think I was missing an urlencode for the filename somewhere in the code. The Umlauts and unicode dashes in that filename just tripped up the fetching of the file from commons. Fixed. --Dschwen (talk) 23:23, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Dschwen: first of all: danke, danke! secondly: the photo which i took 1 minute earlier, from a lower altitude, still does not work. if you find the root of the problem, we (that is all panorama photographers) might circumvent the obstacle. Maximilian (talk) 11:43, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@Maximilian Schönherr: yeah, I forgot one tiny detail. All images that previously didn't work resulted in a cached image file with a size of zero bytes. The code thinks the file is there, so it doesn't attempt to re-download it. Let me purge those from the cache... --Dschwen (talk) 15:33, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

again: danke! can we pano uploaders purge the disfunct files from the cache? if so, how? because, i guess, we’re not talking about the browser cache. Maximilian (talk) 20:17, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

No, I have not implemented that functionality. I have purged all zero byte files though and this should not happen again. --Dschwen (talk) 05:01, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

There is also a problem with files in this category. The system doesn't generate the bigger and better version. And with this image it seems something got messed up while processing the image (for instance, zoom in at the flag to see it). Kruusamägi (talk) 09:54, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Problem in VI

I am confused to ask you but the BOT is blocked in VI; Can you help us? Thank you for what you can do. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:25, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

ohlala

Psyhyde (talk) 15:02, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion Notification sent to wrong user

I would like to notify you about a possible bug for QICbot:

After I nominated File:勝沼ぶどう郷の甚六桜 04.jpg for quality image and the image was promoted, QICbot sent the promotion notification to くろふね, an user only registered on Japanese Wikipedia (no local account created on Comons-see here), instead to the photographer and uploader, Jranar.

I would be grateful if you can look into the problem and see if there is any bug, thank you!廣九直通車 (talk) 07:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Stop you bot

Hi! Stop you bot for this file. This not oryginal photo, this photocopy old photo! --Микола Василечко (talk) 06:14, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Extracting Exif date information

Hello, we batch uploaded some pictures of small monuments, all are now available at Category:Pictures uploaded from Drobnepamatky.cz. We were then notified that a small portion of the pictures includes "date of creation" information in their Exif (example: File:Zvonička v Hodkovicích (Q104973551) 02.jpg). I know that your bot is able to extract various Exif data. Would it be possible for you to extract this line in Exif and replace {{Other date|?}} in {{Information}} with the proper date? Thank you very much for your help on this. --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 07:17, 22 June 2021 (UTC)