User talk:Mdaniels5757

	SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 7 days and sections whose most recent comment is older than 60 days.

Archives Pre-2022 2022 2023

Hi Mdaniels, the bot seems to be stuck. It has stopped working since 6 days ago. 0x0a (talk) 17:53, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@0x0a Fixed. Thanks for letting me know. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:53, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mdaniels5757 stuck again? Tehonk (talk) 21:40, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mdaniels5757 Hi, will this bot work again? Tehonk (talk) 22:22, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tehonk Fixed again. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:04, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mdaniels5757 thank you for the fix, it was indeed fixed but it seems it's broken again? Tehonk (talk) 01:46, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tehonk Ugh. It should be fixed for good now? —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be running intermittently with some 24 hour gaps, since its return on the 16th. At the time I'm writing this comment, the most recent notification served by the bot was 27h30m ago. Belbury (talk) 15:00, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Belbury Thanks for letting me know. This appears to have been due to a different issue: some sort of error parsing the recentchanges feed. A restart fixed it, but I'll try to keep an eye on it. Please be sure to let me know again if you notice any issues. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:27, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, will do. And thanks for running a very useful bot! Belbury (talk) 17:48, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mdaniels5757 It's stuck again. 0x0a (talk) 04:53, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@0x0a Thanks for letting me know. I restarted it, and made it so it will show some more debugging info so I can figure out why I need to keep restarting it! —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 21:49, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mdaniels5757 Just letting you know that the bot seems to be taking 24 hour breaks again, at the moment. No notifications posted to talk pages on the 21st, only one on the 23rd, and it's been silent for the past 29 hours. Belbury (talk) 19:22, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Belbury Thanks, restarted. Hopefully I can look into the cause this weekend. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:30, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is it by design or oversight that the bot now only seems to be running from 5pm to 5am UTC each day? Belbury (talk) 09:56, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a coincidence with when it happened to break; certainly there are no settings for that. I'm probably going to need to rewrite it eventually, but I just set up an w:en:anacron job to restart it daily. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 21:32, 10 July 2024 (UTC) (forgot ping: @Belbury: —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 10 July 2024 (UTC))[reply]

Curious! Twelve hours is a long time to be skipping notifications about things which happen speedily - from my own timezone it means pretty much no uploaders are going to hear about the files I've marked manually. Would it be a silly question to suggest restarting the script twice daily? Belbury (talk) 16:44, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Belbury It definitely is not silly, but setting that up as a cronjob is a bit harder if it's running off of my laptop. So I implemented it into the program itself; we'll see how that works. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mdaniels5757, the bot is going bananas, like here. What to do? Cheers. Jeff G. suggested I talk to you. Thanks. Lotje (talk) 12:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lotje It looks like people were been making more deletion nominations without notifying people than usual; none of the notifications I saw seem to have been wrong. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Mdaniels5757. Though I do not understand why this on my user talk page. I did not upload this file. Hence my worries. Cheers. Lotje (talk) 03:40, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lotje Ah, that was because you created the redirect that was nominated for deletion, not the file. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 21:29, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

X (social network) has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

—Matrix(!) {user - talk? - _uselesscontributions} 16:37, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

yeah I am good with it having been deleted. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 15:27, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In reference to this https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Kagoshima_trip_photo_of_unknown_location,2398.jpg#File:Kagoshima_trip_photo_of_unknown_location,2398.jpg I requested it for renaming in case someone disagreed with the rationale Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 15:28, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Immanuelle OK, thanks for letting me know. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:27, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain how “File:Thorny Entrance by Ján Hronský,.jpg” is a meaningful description of the content of the image. If your explanation is “it depicts the photograph Thorny Embrace by Ján Hronský” I’m requesting a do-over. Dronebogus (talk) 00:32, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dronebogus Which of the following is met here?:

1. Absolutely no information at all (e.g. random letters, numbers, and words like “Flickr”, “original”, and “crop”)
2. The only piece of meaningful information is the name of the photographer or the holder of the copyright.
3. The only piece of meaningful information is the date that the photograph was taken on.
4. The only piece of meaningful information is a broad location, such as a city, province, or country. In this case, the location is so large that an average person would not be able to figure out where the image was taken or what the image depicted, without assistance from someone that knows the area.
5. The only piece of meaningful information is a word, such as “smartphone” or “screenshot”, which broadly describes the subject of the file, but does not impart any information that would help someone identify the specific object depicted. This is not just restricted to inanimate objects, it also applies to broad titles or groupings, such as “queen” or “bird”.
6. The only piece of meaningful information is an acronym or a person’s initials. This differs from “Absolutely no information at all” in that the acronym or initials are related to the subject of the file, even if it takes a second to figure out how.
7. Contains a coherent description or message that do not describe the subject of the file. Does not apply in cases where the name of the file is the title given to a work of art by the artist that created it, even if the name has nothing to do with what is depicted (for example, many works of Dadaism).
8. Images where the information in the filename, while normally acceptable, is inappropriate for (i.e. does not match) the specific content.

—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:39, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And yes, it does in fact depict photograph Thorny Embrace by Ján Hronský :) —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:40, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The image File:Cartoon of people falling into a giant's mouth (color).jpg shows an artwork entitled Dealing with Bullies. This is obviously the title the artist gave to it (see the source link, which is now dead but links to the artist’s page) but it was nevertheless renamed as “meaningless or ambiguous”. I think criterion 7 is for individually notable artworks (for example this obviously isn’t a flamingo but depicts a famous sculpture titled Flamingo) not any random file that has a non-descriptive title by the creator. Otherwise what’s preventing me from uploading an image of a cat entitled “Napoleon’s big shoe” and saying it’s exempt from renaming because it’s the official title? Dronebogus (talk) 00:53, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dronebogus I think the current filename does, in fact, "describe the subject of" the file: thorny is a reference to the spikes, and entrance refers to what the subject is obscuring. I think it is fairly clear, given both the filename and the image, that the filename refers to/describes the file. In the case of Dealing with Bullies you mentioned, I think the association between the name and file is significantly more subtle.

Recall that file moving is not favored, as "Commons aims to provide stable filenames as there might be external file clients and file moving involves significant human and computing resources." As such, where renaming under criterion 2 is desired, but its requirements are not clearly met, I generally think adding the desired information to the description or categories is a better solution. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:21, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you undid my edit to File:박기표 프로필사진.jpg because not G4: was never deleted per consensus/a DR. I hence welcome you to COM:VP#COM:CSD#G4 if you'd care to weigh in. You and Yann seem to have different opinions. Jonteemil (talk) 18:19, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonteemil Responded, thanks for letting me know. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:04, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Admin Mdaniels5757,

I found the correct source for the cropped image above and passed it. Unfortunately the uploader gave both a wrong source and a wrong cc by 2.0 license...and someone has to clean up the mess. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:41, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Leoboudv Fantastic, thank you! —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:30, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mdaniels5757,

Can you help move File:Peter Gregory Obi's signature.pdf to File:Peter Gregory Obi's signature.svg or File:Peter Gregory Obi's signature.png. SafariScribe (talk) 15:37, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SafariScribe Because the file is a PDF, it shouldn't be moved to a type that it isn't (like SVG or PNG). I just created File:Peter Gregory Obi's signature.jpg for you (jpg because that's what the source file is). —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:44, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. SafariScribe (talk) 15:46, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The bot archived some requests into a wrong section. --Geohakkeri (talk) 10:29, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Geohakkeri Odd. It looks like it also archived them into the correct section. I'm guessing this was because of a misplaced request that was since fixed; let me know if it happens again. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 13:10, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]