It can't habdle unicode... can't be used for non-latin wikis. can something be done about that? thanks Felagund ----- Original Message ----- From: "Magnus Manske" <magnus.manske(a)web.de> To: "Wikimedia Commons Discussion List" <commons-l(a)wikimedia.org> Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 4:27 PM Subject: [Commons-l] Direct copy to commons

Kernigh schrieb: Should work now (as well as UTF8 names). Didn't try it, though. That's what I do :-) I plan on another script that looks for, say, 20 commons-compatible images on a wikipedia (or wikibooks) which are /not/ on commons yet. These should be displayed with thumbnail images, links, etc. There would be a checkbox in front of each, and the checked ones can be uploaded en block to the commons. Would that be desirable? Magnus

2006/5/4, Magnus Manske <magnus.manske(a)web.de>de>: I suppose 'compatible' here means 'under a commons-approved license'? I would add an option to add categories - a picture on Commons that neither has categories nor is on a subject page is of little use, at least much less than one that is. -- Andre Engels, andreengels(a)gmail.com ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels

Brianna Laugher schrieb: I put a version of what I imagined earlier live at http://tools.wikimedia.de/~magnus/pushforcommons.php I have disabeled the upload part, so it is currently only usable as a "bad license hunter". The image name leads to the description page, the image links to its "big" version. An image on commons with the same name (so it exists) is displayed in the "commons" column; also, a note is "commons" is mentioned in the description, indicating that the image is on commons under another name. Magnus

Jimmy Wales wrote: As someone also working on de.wikipedia, which is quite strict on license issues itself, I totally agree. The decision about an image being suitable for the commons has to be made on a case-by-case basis. However, in the light of hundreds of thousands (didn't count them all) of suitable images "trapped" on local wikipedias, I merely strive to provide a means to easily assess the states of images, then take appropriate action. The tool in question can be used to identify images without suitable information for the given wikipedia, something which does not involve commons at all. On the other hand, an image tagged with "{{GFDL-self}}", a text like "made this myself", and a good-but-non-professionally looking image - who would go back to the user and say "Well, I want to upload this on commons, but you have convince me you took this yourself first!"? At most, one would check for consumer-type camera EXIF data, and then copy it to commons in good faith, right? Try [1] (will take a minute or so to load fully), and you will see that there are some cases clearly *not* destined for the commons, some doubtful cases, and some that are (maybe with a little additional checking) clearly suited to be copied to the commons. With the demands for making commons the default upload site, the tendency is clear: put all multimedia content that is suitable for commons there, so all wikimedia projects (and others) can benefit from them. I merely try to ease that effort. Magnus [1] http://tools.wikimedia.de/~magnus/pushforcommons.php?language=en&max=20