Commons:Requests and votes
This is the requests and votes page, a centralized place where you can keep track of ongoing user requests, and where you can comment and leave your vote. Any user is welcome to comment on these requests, and any logged in user is welcome to vote.
When requesting rights that do not need the support of the community (e.g. filemover) please go to Commons:Requests for rights!
How and where to apply for additional user rights on Commons[edit]
- Oversighter: Commons:Oversighters/Requests
- Checkuser: Commons:Checkusers/Requests
- Bureaucrat: Commons:Bureaucrats/Requests
- Administrator: Commons:Administrators/Requests
- License reviewer: Commons:License review/Requests
- Bot: Commons:Bots/Requests
All applications made on the above pages are automatically transcluded onto this page.
How to comment and vote[edit]
Any logged-in user is welcome to vote and to comment on the requests below. Votes from unregistered users are not counted, but comments may still be made. If the nomination is successful, a bureaucrat will grant the relevant rights. However, the closing bureaucrat has discretion in judging community consensus, and the decision will not necessarily be based on the raw numbers. Among other things, the closing bureaucrat may take into account the strength of any arguments presented and the experience and knowledge of the commenting users. For example, the comments and votes of users who have zero or few contributions on Commons may at the bureaucrat's discretion be discounted.
It is preferable if you give reasons both for 
Support votes or 
Oppose ones as this will help the closing bureaucrat in their decision. Greater weight is given to argument, with supporting evidence if needed, than to a simple vote.
Purge the cache. Use the edit link below to edit the transcluded page.
Requests for Oversight rights[edit]
When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Oversighters/Archive.
- Please read Commons:Oversighters before voting here. Any logged in user may vote, although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.
No current requests.
Requests for CheckUser rights[edit]
When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Checkusers/Archive.
- Please read Commons:Checkusers before posting or voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.
No current requests.
Requests for bureaucratship[edit]
When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Bureaucrats/Archive.
- Please read Commons:Bureaucrats before posting or voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.
No current requests.
Requests for adminship[edit]
When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Administrators/Archive.
- Please read Commons:Administrators before voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.
Requests for license reviewer rights[edit]
Infrogmation[edit]
This is a closed request for license reviewer status. Do not make edits to it.
- Infrogmation (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (search username in archives) (assign permissions)
- Reason: I'm a long term admin and active user. Mostly I'd like rights to review licenses
so I can take care of images I upload from Flickr without someone else having to bother when bot review irregularly doesn't take care of it. I think my history shows I will work to use my rights/powers in an informed and responsible way. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:50, 21 October 2023 (UTC) - Scheduled to end: 17:50, 23 October 2023 (UTC) (the earliest)
- Since you are already an admin, you can already review licenses. Yann (talk) 18:10, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Infrogmation: reviewers are not allowed to review their own uploads.--RZuo (talk) 18:15, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for info. I *thought* I used to have permission to review being an admin years ago, but it seems to no longer work. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- : OK, I manually reviewed File:Monks preparing for ritual at the Great Buddha Temple in Guangzhou.jpg - Could someone check that I did so correctly? I'd been trying to confirm licenses by pressing the "License +" button, but it always gives me an error message, I assumed the problem being that I didn't have rights - do I need to have some ap to use that? Or is it ok I just put in the license review by hand edits like I did on this one? Wondering, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:48, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- You can't review images because you are not a license reviewer. Bedivere (talk) 21:33, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- OK, sorry - I was believing what I was told above that since I was an admin I *did* have license review rights. Apparently that was incorrect. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:39, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose The right is not for people to review their own uploads. --Bedivere (talk) 21:33, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
OK, withdrawn.-- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:35, 21 October 2023 (UTC)- I'll be happy to withdraw if not supported, but first I'd like the issues being discussed to be cleared up - I fear so far what I've been told seems more confusing than clarifying. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:53, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- in principle you should be able to review uploads as per COM:LR, but not your own ones Bedivere (talk) 21:39, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- Right, I've already been told one can't review own uploads, noted. As to the rest, now I'm confused - "You can't review images because you are not a license reviewer" and "in principle you should be able to review uploads as per COM:LR" - that is not a contradiction? I *should* be able "in principle", but in practice I actually can't? With File:Monks preparing for ritual at the Great Buddha Temple in Guangzhou.jpg which I tried to review, did I act improperly? -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:38, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- "it always gives me an error message"
- cant help you if you dont say what the error message is. RZuo (talk) 12:08, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
- OK, @RZuo: I just tried pressing the "license +" button on File:Durezza 2022.jpg, I got this error message File:Screen Shot 2023-10-22 at 10.48.16 AM - Wikimedia Commons error message when trying to review image.png. Using Firefox on a MacBook. (Similar results Firefox on Linux laptop). -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:54, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Infrogmation it appears other users dont run into the same problem? User:Abzeronow reviewed that file successfully?
- i assume you're using MediaWiki:Gadget-LicenseReview.js?
- if other users can use the same gadget without a problem, and you have the same problem in different browsers, i think the logical deduction must be probably something related to your account, like other gadgets you use or any javascript functionality you enabled or disabled? RZuo (talk) 07:50, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- OK, @RZuo: I just tried pressing the "license +" button on File:Durezza 2022.jpg, I got this error message File:Screen Shot 2023-10-22 at 10.48.16 AM - Wikimedia Commons error message when trying to review image.png. Using Firefox on a MacBook. (Similar results Firefox on Linux laptop). -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:54, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
- Right, I've already been told one can't review own uploads, noted. As to the rest, now I'm confused - "You can't review images because you are not a license reviewer" and "in principle you should be able to review uploads as per COM:LR" - that is not a contradiction? I *should* be able "in principle", but in practice I actually can't? With File:Monks preparing for ritual at the Great Buddha Temple in Guangzhou.jpg which I tried to review, did I act improperly? -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:38, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- No, I've not downloaded the gadget! I've just tried clicking on the "license +" review link - I was assuming I wouldn't be seeing that button if wasn't clickable for me. Is the "license +" button visible to all accounts? Perhaps a standard error message could be added, something like "This works only if 1)You are a reviewer 2)You have downloaded Gadget-LicenseReview (link)"? Hm. So I guess that's been the problem. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:46, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- gadgets are not and dont need to be downloaded. they are switched on/off at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets.
- Gadget-LicenseReview and those "license +" buttons are only visible to sysops and reviewers who enabled the gadget. RZuo (talk) 17:31, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- No, I've not downloaded the gadget! I've just tried clicking on the "license +" review link - I was assuming I wouldn't be seeing that button if wasn't clickable for me. Is the "license +" button visible to all accounts? Perhaps a standard error message could be added, something like "This works only if 1)You are a reviewer 2)You have downloaded Gadget-LicenseReview (link)"? Hm. So I guess that's been the problem. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:46, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Infrogmation I did not see or read that you asserted you were an administrator. As an administrator you can review files without having the actual license reviewer right, it comes with the admin bits. Bedivere (talk) 14:46, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
- OK... I guess that clears up that point. Should be useful tool, though I can find plenty of admin work on Commons even without it. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:09, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Infrogmation I did not see or read that you asserted you were an administrator. As an administrator you can review files without having the actual license reviewer right, it comes with the admin bits. Bedivere (talk) 14:46, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Not granted per above, admins are already license reviewers. -- CptViraj (talk) 02:47, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
Johshh[edit]
Requests for permission to run a bot[edit]
Before making a bot request, please read the new version of the Commons:Bots page. Read Commons:Bots#Information on bots and make sure you have added the required details to the bot's page. A good example can be found here.
When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Bots/Archive.
Any user may comment on the merits of the request to run a bot. Please give reasons, as that makes it easier for the closing bureaucrat. Read Commons:Bots before commenting.
MappeComuniBot (talk · contribs)[edit]
Operator: Sette-quattro (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
Tasks: Upload up-to-date maps of Italian municipalities. There are about 8000 municipalities, boundaries are updated yearly by the national statistical agency. Here is an example of image that will be uploaded, the description will be automatically updated for each municipality: [1]
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_Aicurzio_(province_of_Monza_e_della_Brianza,_region_Lombardia,_Italy_2023).svg){kind=link}
Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: upload several images automatically
Automatic or manually assisted: automatic supervised (through OpenRefine)
Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): One time run each year
Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): I don't know the edit rate allowed using the new OpenRefine function for uploading images. As fast as it can, i suppose.
Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y
Programming language(s): used through OpenRefine Batch Uploading https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc6aNNmsNCI
Sette-quattro (talk) 16:03, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
- Discussion
- Please make test run. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:34, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
GlaMainBot (talk · contribs)[edit]
Operator: Beao (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: I've automated lossless crops for Category:Images from the German Federal Archive with borders and need permission to start uploading the results.
Automatic or manually assisted: Manually assisted to start.
Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): One time run for uploads, otherwise daily for my listing of User:GlaMainBot/Most_used_images_for_cleanup
Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): At most ten uploads per minute.
Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y
Programming language(s): TypeScript (using mwn)
Beao 07:49, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
- Discussion
- Just to clarify: Is this to upload as a new version, or to overwrite? If the latter, is there a consensus to do so? I see that those borders include photo credits to the individual photographers, and these are from a respected archive, so I'd just want to make sure that there is agreement that this is desired; I've seen similar situations go either way. Clearly more useful in Wikipedia articles without the borders, but it's not clear to me that we don't want also to host a version with the credit line on the image. - Jmabel ! talk 23:58, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
- My thought is to overwrite. I've not seen any written consensus on the matter, but in practice that's what has been done for years in this category. I think that implies a silent consensus, considering these captions have been digitally added by the archive and provide no additional information not already in the description. Beao (talk) 08:36, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
- Please make some example edits. Krd 17:06, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- All right, here are three examples:
- File:Bundesarchiv Bild 137-068842, Sonderzug der Einwandererzentralstelle.jpg
- File:Bundesarchiv Bild 137-068843, Sonderzug der Einwandererzentralstelle.jpg
- File:Bundesarchiv Bild 137-068852, Sonderzug der Einwandererzentralstelle.jpg Beao (talk) 10:55, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
- Looks good to me. Krd 13:49, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- Please make some example edits. Krd 17:06, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- Any more information or discussion needed? Beao (talk) 12:22, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- [2] Why is this updated so often? Krd 03:04, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
- The "Images with watermarks" category is very big, so the retrieval of file usage statistics is batched to a fixed number of images every hour to avoid performance spikes, and I update the gallery after every batch. Is updating gallery pages too often problematic? I could do it less often (I'm thinking if images are not removed from the category), and also avoid doing it when nothing changes. Beao (talk) 15:53, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
- [2] Why is this updated so often? Krd 03:04, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
Requests for comment[edit]
 Centralized discussion
| ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Template: View ■ Discuss ■ Edit ■ Watch |
