close
Jump to content

Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard

Add topic
From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from Commons:VRT/Noticeboard)
Latest comment: 5 days ago by Kinnimeyu in topic ticket:2026030910013442
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 7 days and sections whose most recent comment is older than 90 days.
VRT Noticeboard
Welcome to the VRT noticeboard

This page is where users can communicate with Commons Volunteers Response Team members. (For VRT agents to communicate with one another please use VRT wiki.) You can request permissions verification here, or anything else that needs an agent's assistance. This page is multilingual — when discussing tickets in languages other than English, please make a note of this and consider asking your question in the same language.

Please read the Frequently Asked Questions before posting your question here.

The current backlog of the (English) permissions-commons queue is: 15 days (graph)  update

Start a new discussion

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
VRT Noticeboard
VRT Noticeboard
Main VRT-related pages

Shortcuts: Commons:VRT/N • Commons:VRTN

Uploads without licence

[edit]

About 3/4 of the permissions we receive from France and Spain refer to images without licence tag. This means considerable extra work for VRT, because we need to remove the complaint from the User:AntiCompositeBot/NoLicense and add the appropriate licence each time after having checked and approved the permission.

This has been going on for months now. Is there really nothing that can be done about it? It should be prevented that files get uploaded without licence tag. Mussklprozz (talk) 10:26, 12 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

The problem is that we have so many accepted licenses that having a filter to prevent this is not really possible. If we decide that new users are only allowed to use the regular cc licenses we could easily create a filter. GPSLeo (talk) 10:40, 12 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
How about a filter that forbids to leave the licence empty? This would eliminite 80% of the problem cases, since most users decide for cc-by-sa anyway. Mussklprozz (talk) 12:26, 12 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
I'd suggest not to solve this by edit filter but by changing the upload interface. But it has to be found out at first which of the dozen ways for uploading creates this problem. Krd 12:46, 12 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
It seems to be the upload wizard. See e.g. File:Laura Urbina.jpg and File:Jorge León Gustà.jpg. --Mussklprozz (talk) 18:48, 12 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
Yes, the issue comes from the Upload Wizard. I mentioned that a few months back, and I am surprised that it has not been fixed yet. Yann (talk) 19:27, 12 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
Yes, the bug that selecting the permission option removes the license is still present. Just tested here File:Testfile2.png. @Sannita (WMF) could you have a look why this is still not resolved? GPSLeo (talk) 20:32, 12 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
FWIW, on April 13 of this year, I edited Commons:Uploading works by a third party to describe the necessary workaround for this on uploads, because Sannita let me know he did not expect the fix to occur promptly. I still have no idea why a fix to this would be difficult. - Jmabel ! talk 21:50, 12 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
@GPSLeo Unfortunately, the Structured Content team is no longer active, and it is still unclear who owns UploadWizard in the latest re-organization. I'll keep pushing for a solution, if you would be so kind to send me the Phab ticket, I can try to find someone to work on it. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 12:39, 13 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
The ticket should be phab:T391600. And the WMF did drop the maintenance of a core tool again? Is there an official statement why this happened? This is exactly what was the main criticism by the community in the open letters and also in the community call series. GPSLeo (talk) 14:29, 13 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
@GPSLeo AFAIK an announcement on Commons is in the making, but I have no news on when it will be published. About the ticket, I reached out to the devs, and they have it on their rader, but it's going to take at least another couple of weeks before it gets addressed, due to other priorities at the moment. I'll keep you posted, but please feel free to ping me here or in private about it, just to be sure it doesn't slip off my mind. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 14:58, 17 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
is there any update on the announcement, can be more public than here Gnangarra 10:13, 3 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Gnangarra no update, I pinged already in private the people behind it Sannita (WMF) (talk) 15:21, 3 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Sannita (WMF): Plewase follow up on this. --Krd 06:11, 7 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Krd Still no update, I'm trying to find who can take care of this, but it's hard at the moment. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 12:32, 7 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
Almost 2 months and no answers from WMF? All we are getting is the sound of silence. Once again Commons is kept in the dark. Bidgee (talk) 20:00, 7 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Krd and Bidgee: I believe there is literally no one from WMF currently assigned to the Upload Wizard. I gather that includes Sannita no longer being assigned this, either. - Jmabel ! talk 23:01, 7 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Quiddity: Can you help out? Krd 09:13, 10 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
I heard about Commons:Unsupported Tools Working Group, maybe they can help out? cc @Sohom Datta. Nemoralis (talk) 19:15, 11 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Sannita (WMF): is there any way volunteers can work on the Upload Wizard? - Jmabel ! talk 19:51, 11 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Jmabel I'm afraid I don't have the answer to that. I'm pushing one team to adopt this bug and solving it, but so far no luck. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 11:50, 12 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
FWIW, the problem and the workaround are documented at COM:THIRD#How they can grant a license (and how you upload) step 12. If you need to give people an explanation, it is probably better to aim them there than to custom-write an explanation in each case. It would also be great if we could start doing translations of COM:THIRD: it seems to be stable and heavily used. - Jmabel ! talk 20:20, 10 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
MediaWiki talk:Gadget-PermissionOTRS.js#Remove AntiCompositeBot tagging
You'd still have to insert the license, but it's an easy fix to automate one step. I'd have to look into the gadget to see if a dropdown with common licenses could be added somewhere. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 13:23, 27 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
The existing code has virtually no code comments and the structure is too different from what I'm used to. I tried but don't think I can work this out. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 23:05, 27 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
why do I torture myself - Alexis Jazz ping plz 13:07, 28 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

Questions about ticket access

[edit]

1. Is ticket access logged? (e.g. "$user viewed $ticket_number at $timestamp")
2. If it is, who can review that log, and does it get reviewed regularly?
3. Is ticket access at all ratelimited? In other words, would a single account have the technical ability to scrape all tickets in existence in a short period of time?
I know you swear an oath etc, that's not what I'm concerned about. This question is about the abilities of the system. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 14:37, 27 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

I presume the log can be viewed by anyone if CU is any indication Trade (talk) 19:05, 27 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Josve05a: --Trade (talk) 20:22, 27 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
As a regular VRT agent, I do not have access to any log showing that another user has merely viewed a ticket. I can only see logs for explicit actions taken on a ticket, such as following it, adding notes, merging, forwarding it, etc. I cannot speak for what logs are available to VRTS administrators beyond what is visible to regular agents, so I will leave that part of the question to them to answer if needed. Regarding rate limiting, the system is generally quite slow in practice, but this appears to be due to overall performance and not to any per-account access throttling that I am personally aware of, but for operational security reasons, details about technical safeguards against large-scale access or scraping beyond what we "mere volunteer agents" have access to or knowledge about are unlikely to be discussed publicly. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 20:25, 27 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Alexis Jazz: --Trade (talk) 03:06, 28 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
I think @Krd can answer this. Nemoralis (talk) 12:19, 29 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

ticket #2017040410018177

[edit]

Can you please check this ticket (this file)? Is the image subject really also the photographer? That is, is this really a selfie? Would have to be, by German Urheberrecht, if he claims to be the copyright holder. Non-transferable. Thanks, --~2026-19181-86 (talk) 13:05, 28 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

The ticket appears to include several images. Add this one to the question. --~2026-19181-86 (talk) 13:11, 28 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

According to the ticket, yes. Full list of files: https://w.wiki/KUM5. Nemoralis (talk) 14:03, 28 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

 Info In the meantime, I contacted the uploader on the German WP. He got the pictures from the image subject. In other words, he has no idea who the copyright holders are. --~2026-19181-86 (talk) 18:53, 28 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

I have reopened the ticket regarding File:Ulrike und Rolf Heinemann 1969 Bulgarien.jpg which sohuld be deleted if there is no additional feedback. Regarding the ticket the ticket IMO has to be considered valid. Krd 08:44, 30 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thanks. Just help me understand please: So the first one is o.k., it actually is a selfie? --~2026-19750-08 (talk) 14:33, 31 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
No. But there is permission for it in the ticket. Krd 10:39, 1 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Krd 15:15, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Bleeps.gr

[edit]

I have noticed several images depicting graffiti by street artist Bleepsgr, real name Vlassios Kakouris, while almost all uploaded by Villiamcurtis (talk · contribs).

Things to consider.

Can you check this ticket? Is the uploader the original artist? And if so, why its not his name or alias in the descriptions and attribution? Geraki TLG 18:50, 30 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Yes, the permission letter is from original artist (Bleeps.gr/v.kakouris). Nemoralis (talk) 23:19, 3 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Is there proof of identity? Geraki TLG 09:59, 6 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

ticket:2019042510004531

[edit]

This may have a ticket, but it's a professional promo photo and certainly not a selfie. Sven Teuber cannot be the author / copyright holder on this. --~2026-19750-08 (talk) 14:26, 31 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Same thing goes for this image, ticket:2021011210008231. --~2026-19750-08 (talk) 14:37, 31 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Although it is not mentioned in the permission letter (nor was it asked in the ticket), they are usually able to take such pictures themselves with a remote controlled tripod. Both ticket is in German, so I will leave this to our German VRT members. Nemoralis (talk) 23:17, 3 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

ticket:2026030910013442

[edit]

i'm having trouble with something: basically i uploaded the image File:Ruben Sim (2026).jpg on march 8th, and had the rights holder (ruben sim/ben simon, since it's a photo of him) email the commons permissions email. they seem to have misunderstood my intent when i clarified this (i told someone to get him to contact them, and he did) saying they did not accept "proxy statements", but it wasn't a proxy statement.

VRT replied to my initial concerns on march 10th (28 days ago) but haven't replied to my follow-up emails since, and the file is set to be deleted in 2 days because it hasn't been taken care of. i sent brief follow-up emails on the 19th, 31st and today. the image is currently being used in a GA about the subject, what should i do? Kinnimeyu (talk) 20:14, 7 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

can the image be put on some sort of hold so it can stay up? since nobody's replied to me since march 10th, i wasn't aware if there would be any problems with it. i just don't want it to disappear from a GA since i can easily ask for more details or an additional response if needed. Kinnimeyu (talk) 14:46, 8 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
image has been deleted from article... could somebody PLEASE reply? Kinnimeyu (talk) 05:25, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
it's been literal radio silence since march 10th and i have no clue what i'm supposed to be doing! Kinnimeyu (talk) 05:33, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
hello @Krd: i have explicitly been trying to get ticket permission for the whole month! i'm really not sure what i'm doing wrong here since i've just been waiting on a reply the whole time Kinnimeyu (talk) 05:44, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Kinnimeyu: as of this writing, File:Ruben Sim (2026).jpg is still here on Commons. If it was deleted from an article, that is not the doing of anyone on Commons. - Jmabel ! talk`
my bad, i should've explained that better: the cropped version of the image was automatically removed because of the 30-day deadline. Kinnimeyu (talk) 20:42, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
now the image is actually deleted, with still no reply... will someone please tell me what i'm supposed to do? @Krd: i've been waiting since march 10th to hear anything. Kinnimeyu (talk) 05:12, 10 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
permission has been sent out by the original photographer, michael (schlep), now that i know this was required. Kinnimeyu (talk) 22:09, 10 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Status for the ticket from pinkprogramming.se?

[edit]

I assisted my colleague in sending a permission email to VRT a while ago, from a sender address ending in "@pinkprogramming.se", concerning a few files, one of them being File:Pink Programming logo (color).png. All the files in question were already deleted when the email was sent, but the instructions at COM:VRT assured me that undeletion would be handled by the VRT member with no further action required on our part. Since the files are still not undeleted, I would like to ask about the status for this ticket?

Since my colleague (who is the representative) sent the email, I cannot personally check for any reply from VRT, and she haven't told me that there's been any reply. I am also aware that there's no proof for my relation to the email's sender, but perhaps you're still allowed tell me. I can be reached by email for nonpublic communication. Rose Abrams (talk) 10:39, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

If possible please provide the ticket number. Krd 15:14, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Is there some way for me to find it? I'm not a VRT member so I don't have access to the system, and I also don't have access to the sender's email account. Rose Abrams (talk) 16:44, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Your colleague probably received an automatic response with a ticket number in it. Nemoralis (talk) 20:34, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Rose Abrams: You don't say how long "a while" is, but it has been weeks and she's had no reply (I presume she has checked her junk folders, etc.), and she has checked the address she sent to, she should probably just re-send the email, and this time she should CC you. - Jmabel ! talk 20:39, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

VRT agent seeked who speaks hungarian

[edit]

It is about Ticket:2026040710008254. The permission given there seems valid to me, following automatic translation, but I do not speak Hungarian. The image in question has been deleted. There is a request for undeletion going on: Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:Péter_Kiszl_in_2026.jpg. Mussklprozz (talk) 18:17, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Bencemac is a VRT agent who speaks Hungarian. Yann (talk) 19:34, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Yann: Thanks :-) Mussklprozz (talk) 19:48, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Mussklprozz (talk) 19:49, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Request for status check on ticket:2026032010002487 (CC BY-SA 4.0)

[edit]

Hello,

I am writing to politely request a status check on a pending VRTS ticket. The original copyright holder sent the permission email weeks ago, but the file is still marked as pending and is at risk of being deleted.

Could a VRT agent please check if the received email has a valid permission and process the ticket? If the form is incorrect or missing anything, please let me know so I can inform the copyright holder to resend it correctly.

Thank you for your time and assistance!

-- Makergreen (talk) 05:29, 10 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Ticket is pending reply from the permission sender. Krd 06:29, 10 April 2026 (UTC)Reply