Commons:Village pump/Archive/2026/01

Surnames

We have a longstanding and slightly stale Commons:Categories for discussion/2024/07/Category:Surnames, mostly about the fact that we currently supposedly have two flat-list categories for surnames. It impacts probably 10,000+ categories in terms of their parent categories, and hasn't gotten a lot of attention, so I'd like to see more voices there before considering the matter resolved.

Please, unless you find my wording here non-neutral (which you should certainly address here), let's keep the discussion on the CfD, not here. - Jmabel ! talk 19:10, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Can anyone work out the name of the photographer, and if they have a Wikidata entry

See: File:Pamela Colman Smith, "In Private life" (1904).jpg RAN (talk) 11:48, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

R.D. Macpherson? (Robert Macpherson) Nakonana (talk) 11:59, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

The "D." is written like the Greek letter Delta or Cyrillic cursive "d". Nakonana (talk) 12:00, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Or maybe not "Robert" but some other name because this Robert died before 1904. Nakonana (talk) 12:03, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Maybe it's not a "D" after all but a "J" instead? R.J. Macpherson [1]? According to Google search there may also be something about R.J. Macpherson at [2] but the page doesn't load for me to confirm. Going by Flickr, R.J. was active around 1895, so the time would fit. Nakonana (talk) 17:26, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

And it looks like he was based in Jamaica. The woman in the photo is half Jamaican and lived in Jamaica for some time, right? Nakonana (talk) 17:28, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

• Excellent detective work, "Macpherson", now I see it. I will see if I can find more images from him. --RAN (talk) 14:13, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

en:Duncan Macpherson (photographer)? Nevermind, he was likely too young in 1904. -Nard (Hablemonos) (Let's talk) 14:43, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:2026 protests against the capture of Nicolás Maduro in New York City

I noticed this is a subcategory of Category:Demonstrations and protests in support of the Venezuelan government of Nicolás Maduro. Is it fair for Commons to call the demonstration a pro-Maduro demonstration? Trade (talk) 02:42, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

I understand what you are getting at, but from a navigation point it may be for the best. We might want a separate parent category at the same level as Category:Demonstrations and protests in support of the Venezuelan government of Nicolás Maduro, but if we do that the two should be linked with a {{Cat see also}}. - Jmabel ! talk 08:29, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Adding a specific category for the art style in File:Fem_myror_är_fler_än_fyra_elefanter_papperskalender_02.jpg

I came across File:Fem_myror_är_fler_än_fyra_elefanter_papperskalender_02.jpg and I noticed that its art style looks intriguing. I'd put that file in the same category with others (that contain the same art style) but I don't know what category would be appropriate.

Edit: by "art style", I specifically meant different colored patterns, each containing colors almost always of high saturation, put together in the same art piece. Toarin (talk) 20:06, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Undeleted in 2026

Hi, Nearly all files have been undeleted from Category:Undelete in 2026. So at least 800 files from 454 deletion requests. If you find more files to be undeleted, please ask on COM:UDR. Thanks, Yann (talk) 18:02, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

What to do with audio file with wrong pronunciation?

Hi,

File:zh-zhī.ogg contains audio that's actually a pronunciation of "zhǐ", not "zhī" as the file name suggests (this is already confusing people: see wikt:Talk:之#Mandarin_audio). The file was nominated for deletion before, but was kept (Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Zh-zhī.ogg). There's already a perfectly valid file File:zh-zhǐ.ogg containing a correct pronunciation of "zhǐ". What do we do now?

• If we can't delete File:zh-zhī.ogg, can we upload a new version of it? I recorded a pronunciation of "zhī" and tried to upload it as a new version, but got hit with Commons:Overwriting existing files.
• If we can't upload a new version, can we at least rename File:zh-zhī.ogg (so that we can upload a correct file)? The problem is that File:zh-zhǐ.ogg is already taken (and it's a good file). Do we rename it to File:zh-zhǐ2.ogg?
• I *could* upload my recording as File:zh-zhī2.ogg and edit all the pages that use File:zh-zhī.ogg to use my version... But that seems like a waste of everyone's time (as it's so much more work than just fixing the wrong file), *and* File:zh-zhī.ogg would still remain erroneous and confusing.

Can an admin step in here? Wyverald (talk) 03:44, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Stepping in, partly as admin. Unless someone else objects in the next 24 hours, here's what I propose.

• I will temporarily mark File:zh-zhī.ogg with {{Allow overwriting}} so you can overwrite it.
• When you overwrite it, please edit the file page to accurately reflect your replacement file.
• @Wyverald: may I presume that once I allow overwriting, you will get to it promptly and report back here so an admin can quickly lock it back down? Is there a time of day that works well for you (in UTC, please) to start this?

- Jmabel ! talk 06:14, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. I can do it any time this weekend (from now until 8am Sunday UTC, or 8pm Sunday to 8am Monday). Wyverald (talk) 18:51, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

@Wyverald: have at it! Let us know here when you are done, so I can remove that tag. - Jmabel ! talk 23:01, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Done. I took the liberty to remove the tag myself when editing metadata -- hopefully that's not illegal :) Thanks for the help! Wyverald (talk) 02:15, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

i think @Jmabel's solution is wrong. in case of error, the description should almost always be edited to describe the file, not the other way around.

changing the file and the description to fit the title causes way more confusion, as i just got confused by the discrepancies between the different versions. RoyZuo (talk) 14:28, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

I strong disagree that we should just edit the description here. That means File:zh-zhī.ogg will continue to have the wrong content forever; the correct file can at best be named File:zh-zhī2.ogg; it's a lot more immediate work to fix all the articles; and any future article wanting to link to a pronunciation of "zhī" will probably start out linking to the wrong one.

You said "changing the file and the description to fit the title causes way more confusion". Why is that? I can only see people getting confused if they look at the revision history of File:zh-zhī.ogg, which I can only assume to be very rare. Then again, I might be missing something here as I'm not a frequent user of Commons. Wyverald (talk) 20:57, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

@RoyZuo for many files I would agree with you, but this is one where its name is part of a pattern of harmonized names. One would expect it to contain a recording of a particular phoneme; apparently, it did not. - Jmabel ! talk 22:13, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

now yall are leaving the histories of two completely different files by different creators at the same page. that is very confusing.

the version contributed by Shtooka Project could be deleted as a duplicate of File:Zh-zhǐ.ogg as they record the same thing by the same speaker. that's better than leaving a mess behind like this. RoyZuo (talk) 22:45, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

My account reset

My account has reset. My edit history has disappeared, and it now says I registered in November 2025, though I registered over a decade ago. What the fuck? TransOceanic (talk) 19:48, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

This is not Wikipedia, look: en:Special:Contributions/TransOceanic. --Achim55 (talk) 19:59, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. Don't even know how I wound up here. TransOceanic (talk) 20:02, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 00:24, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Image wrongly deleted

I have just noticed that File:Robert Gillmor 2010-03-23.jpg (which is very widely used, both on and off Wikimedia projects) was deleted; and wrongly.

As I noted in The deletion discussion, the non-free painting that was depicted in part of the image was deliberately blurred, and thus de minimis. Others disagreed, as is their right, that the blurring was sufficiently hazy. Rather than deleting the image, the blurring of that part should have been increased (and by the minium necessary to satisfy the doubters). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:02, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: Should be done now. If you want to do a less blurred version, that's up to you. (I'm in an airport right now, working with less at hand than usual.) If you no longer have the original to work from, I or another admin can get that to you. - Jmabel ! talk 20:15, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you; as I said, it should use "the minium necessary to satisfy the doubters". I have previously declined to do so, since my view of what is acceptable (i.e. the image as uploaded) is clearly at odds with what those involved in the discussion believe. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:26, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 00:24, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Need for specific categories for 3D model files

Hi everyone and happy new year. I noticed only now that a direct link to the 3D model category was added directly on the home page of Commons and, looking it up quickly because I was a little bit curious and excited, I noticed that there are indeed some real 3D model files (.stl files mainly)... together with a mass of ordinary and static png/jpg images of 3D models.

Shoundn't we create some category for those specific files, like we did for the image files theirselves (example: )? It's a little bit odd to see for example a real 3D model file like this (File:Aston Martin F1 AMR23 2023.stl) with only a generic "3D models" cat and nothing more.

I think that real 3D model files should be distinguished from others and should be easily discoverable.

Seeing how the Category:Media by file format is organized, I think we should add a super-category there named like "3D models by file format" (or should we add them to the Category:Images by file format? I don't know exactly) and then a "STL files" as a sub-cat one (and other cats. for other type of 3D model files of course, I'm not an expert still of which types are most used or permitted here on Commons) at first, and maybe even some other appropriate relative cat for those objects.

What's your opinion on this? :) --LucaLindholm (talk) 15:33, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Ah ok, I noticed that under the Video file formats there already is the Category:STL files... but is it a video file? It is confusing and quite no one expects it to be there, tbh.

I was only unlucky to have encountered only some file that wasn't tagged with that cat. XD LucaLindholm (talk) 20:37, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

There is nothing to stop you from adding other appropriate parent categories to Category:STL files. - Jmabel ! talk 02:08, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

An IP user had placed the STL files into Category:Videos by file format; I moved it into Category:Media by file format. MKFI (talk) 08:02, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 00:32, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Removing metadata?

Hi, I discovered that my personal name appears in the metadata of some files I've uploaded. Is there any way of removing it? Why would it appear in the first place? Many thanks. Yakikaki (talk) 10:16, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

@Yakikaki Because something (your camera or your software editing program) added it before uploading. Commons just shows what is already there before the upload. You can upload a new version without the name and then ask an admin to delete the old revisions. This is called EXIF data and there is lots of software that can edit and change it. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 11:08, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

If you have a Windows PC, then once you download to your machine you can edit EXIF data via the file properties, then reupload. - Jmabel ! talk 01:45, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

The normal way to delete an old revision is described at COM:REVDEL; in this case you may want to mail or ping an admin. There are various free software to remove exif data; after you did that you need to upload the new file as a new version to each of the files ("Upload a new version of this file" underneath "File history" on the file description page). Prototyperspective (talk) 00:40, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 00:40, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Mass rename request

Hi. Some time ago I uploaded these files via Lingua Libre, which included my then-current username in the names:

• File:LL-Q7979-AlexGallon-preventive.wav
• File:LL-Q7979-AlexGallon-bivalve.wav
• File:LL-Q7979-AlexGallon-bipartite.wav
• File:LL-Q7979-AlexGallon-biogenesis.wav
• File:LL-Q7979-AlexGallon-octant.wav
• File:LL-Q7979-AlexGallon-metallurgist.wav
• File:LL-Q7979-AlexGallon-fishbone.wav
• File:LL-Q7979-AlexGallon-spank.wav
• File:LL-Q1860 (eng)-AlexGallon-billy goat.wav
• File:LL-Q1860 (eng)-AlexGallon-concentration camp.wav
• File:LL-Q1860 (eng)-AlexGallon-sleepwalker.wav
• File:LL-Q1860 (eng)-AlexGallon-bouncy.wav
• File:LL-Q1860 (eng)-AlexGallon-numerically.wav

Please could someone replace "AlexGallon" with "Pink Bee" in these? I would prefer it if my old username was not immediately visible on my list of uploads. (I am aware and don't mind that it can be found easily elsewhere.)

Apologies if this is the wrong place to ask. I couldn't find any information on the correct way to request mass renaming. Thanks. Pink Bee (talk) 00:06, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Trying to do this (and related changes) but the files that are in Category:Lingua Libre pronunciation by AlexGallon seem to be there via some sort of implicit trick in a template, and while I hav been able to rename them, I cannot move them from that category to Category:Lingua Libre pronunciation by Pink Bee. - Jmabel ! talk 02:34, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I will sort the cat issue separately. Pink Bee (talk) 02:57, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 00:42, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Global misidentification of File:Ouida_from_Cabinet_Card.jpg

Hi, File:Ouida_from_Cabinet_Card.jpg is globally misattributed. The person depicted is not Ouida, but Pauline Lucca (1841–1918), the Austrian opera singer.[1] Because the file is used on multiple Wikipedia language editions as Ouida’s portrait, the misidentification is being widely propagated. Could an administrator please assist with correcting the file’s subject attribution and updating its global usage accordingly? TheFairyTaleLover (talk) 13:59, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

This looks very plausible if you compare her face to the other portraits of Pauline Lucca on Commons. I am not an admin anywhere, but I just corrected the German Wikipedia page and the German Wikisource page of Ouida as well as the Ouida Wikidata item. I also made a rename request for the photo. Generally, there is no reason why you need an admin for the global corrections. So I do not fully understand your request. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 15:02, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. Sorry, I'm relatively new to Wikimedia Commons, and in any case, I was mainly referring to the photo's renaming. I'll do my best to replace the photo on all other Wikipedia pages as well. Have a good evening. TheFairyTaleLover (talk) 18:31, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 00:43, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Periodicals about anarchism

This includes both newspapers and magazines, and many were categorised as both. Should we amalgamate them, and perhaps call them all periodicals? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rathfelder (talk • contribs)

I don't understand the problem: both magazines and newspapers are a subset of periodicals (alongside academic journals, etc.). If there are sufficient number of one subtype to break that out into a subcategory and categorize that along some kind of existing scheme, then I think it's a good idea to do that. If not, then not. For files that are categorized as being both a "magazine" and a "newspaper", I don't think that really makes any sense. Typically, a magazine that is about current affairs, politics, and general news is called a "newsmagazine" or "news weekly" and is generally considered a magazine and a newspaper is generally something else. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:49, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

The problem is that most of these political publications claim to be newspapers, but they are really much more like magazines. They dont have actual news Rathfelder (talk) 19:12, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

If something here is still unsolved, please start a CfD (Commons:Categories for discussion). Prototyperspective (talk) 13:20, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 13:20, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Help with photographer

See: Category:Photographs by Haruo Katoh. I am not sure if I have the right name. RAN (talk) 20:21, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Why Kato with h at the end? It looks more like Kato. H., or H. Kato. Nakonana (talk) 21:34, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

And is it even a photographer in the classical sense? Because in one of the clippings it looks like they are also the author of the text. Nakonana (talk) 21:58, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

I'm curious about where "Haruo" has come from. I couldn't spot anything in the files to suggest "Haruo" or any other name beyond "H." Did you find some other clues or is it a wild guess? From Hill To Shore (talk) 22:21, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

• From here: George Eastman Museum https://collections.eastman.org/objects/list;jsessionid=659BC629061614F963B87D46C18C6E3E?filter=department%3APhotography%3Bpeople%3AHaruo%20Katoh, but maybe wrong, that is why I asked for help. --RAN (talk) 15:29, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Запитання до користувача: "Didym"

Вітаю пане користувач Didym, скажіть будь-ласка для чого ви видаляєте мої файли з Вікіпедії!? Чи можна це розглядати як вандалізм, ваші дії? Адже ніяких порушень в моїх фотографіях не було? Для чого ви видалили мої фотографії з вікіпедії? Адже я можу розглядати ваші дії як вандалізм. Дайте мені відповідь для чого ви видаляєте мої фотографії з вікіпедії? Ви є адміністратор? Severus777 (talk) 20:35, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

@Severus777 Пожалуйста ознакомьтесь с

• Вікісховище:Ліцензування
• Вікісховище:Сфера проекту
• Вікісховище:Правила копірайту за темами
• Commons:Норми авторського права за територією/Україна

Nakonana (talk) 23:46, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Отвечу на русском. Скорее всего ваши файлы нарушают авторское право, ведь вы не предоставили свободных лицензий на эти фотография как минимум. Лучше ознакомьтесь с правилами которые предоставил коллега Nakonana. Всего наилучшего Incall ^talk 07:36, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

If something here is still unclear, please make a new thread on the user's talk page or COM:Village pump/Copyright. Prototyperspective (talk) 13:00, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 13:00, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Third Geneva Convention, Article 13 and Wikimedia Commons

Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest.

Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.

Measures of reprisal against prisoners of war are prohibited.

Should files that show prisoners of war in an insulting manner or for public curiosity be hosted on Commons? Some people on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nicolas Maduro on board the USS Iwo Jima (cropped).jpg think they shouldn't Trade (talk) 22:05, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps the pictures should or should not have been released under the Third Geneva Convention, but they were; Commons is not a signatory to the Geneva Convention, and is not censored. - The Bushranger (talk) 03:04, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Commons is hosted in the united states and generally has to comply with United States law. The United States is a signatory to the third Geneva convention. So i think the question is, is commons violating United States law by hosting these images. Bawolff (talk) 03:27, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Article 13 of the Third Geneva Convention requires that prisoners of war be treated humanely and protected "against insults and public curiosity". This obligation applies to the Detaining Power, meaning the state holding POWs, with the aim of preventing humiliation, propaganda use, or exposure for public spectacle. It does not create a blanket prohibition on all images; context matters, and images used for encyclopedic, historical, or educational purposes without intent to degrade are generally not considered a violation.

Regarding Wikimedia Commons and the Wikimedia Foundation, GCIII binds states but not private organizations. As a US-based non-profit, WMF is not the Detaining Power, so hosting images does not create direct legal liability. (Section 230 further shields WMF from liability for user-uploaded content.) While the United States is a signatory to GCIII and has criminalized "grave breaches" under Article 130. such as killing or torture, exposing POWs to public curiosity is not itself a grave breach under US law. Any potential violation would lie with the original publisher or state actor, not a third-party host like us. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 03:35, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Requesting deletion of previous revisions of file

Is there a way to request deletion of previous versions of a file for copyvio reasons? I uploaded File:Judge James E. Horton and Dr R. R. Bridges during Scottsboro Boys trial.jpg, but I realized that the portions not in the cited newspaper may not be PD and cropped accordingly. Based5290 (talk) 06:35, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

@Based5290: You can do that by filing a regular deletion request, and then explaining in the request that it's not for the whole file, but for a previous version. ReneeWrites (talk) 09:29, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Commons:Revision deletion may also be interesting --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 11:02, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

It's not just possibly interesting, this is the solution here – please do not start a regular deletion request but follow the guidance on COM:REVDEL to get the prior revision(s) deleted. Prototyperspective (talk) 11:55, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

• @Based5290: If you still have the text image, let me know the paper. I can check if they renewed their copyright. Having the image of the news article means we can post the text at Wikisource, if public domain. --RAN (talk) 17:45, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

  See File:The Birmingham News 1933 04 06 First Three Pages.pdf Didn't find any relevant renewals. Based5290 (talk) 18:58, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

  The 1st issue of this newspaper I see with a copyright notice is September 24, 1967 (September 23, 1967 issue with no notice)  $999$REAL 💬 ⬆   20:03, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 11:55, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

First published in the United States before 1930

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T271968

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T413619

The upload wizard is still offering "First published in the United States before 1930" as a reason why a work might not be covered by copyright; that should now be "First published in the United States before 1931".

Is there a reason why the annual update cannot be automated? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:49, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Possibly better asked at Commons:Upload Wizard feedback. - Jmabel ! talk 21:12, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Someone needs to keep doing this every december. RoyZuo (talk) 14:15, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

T271968 has been open for five years /sigh/ Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:46, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

This sounds like an "aw, poor baby" thing. Someone can't be bothered to make such a simple change once per year? RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 15:44, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

As I understand it, only a WMF employee or contractor can touch the Upload Wizard code, and there is sometimes no such a person assigned to maintain the Upload Wizard. - Jmabel ! talk 02:06, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Casts of shows

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. ReneeWrites (talk) 23:10, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Hazbin Hotel/Helluva Boss cast: not an area I work in a lot, but I was under the impression it is not normal to put a bunch of categories for individuals in a parent category for a TV show (in this case a web series) on which they happen to have performed. I thought the only media under a category like that should be ones relating to the show, and that if there is a person who appeared on the show and we have content related to that person on that show we create a category for the intersection of the person and show. Do I have this wrong? Pinging @Oornery. - Jmabel ! talk 06:25, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

You're quite correct, and multiple CfDs have reached that conclusion. Performing in a specific show is not a defining characteristic, and categorizing in this way would result in many actors being put in dozens of tangentially-related parent categories. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:33, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Agree; it will also cause lots of offtopic files underneath some category (which can be browsed using the deepcategory search operator). Probably a note about this casts thing and possibly similar cases should be added to some guideline/help/policy page. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:37, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

I'd strongly support some added text to this effect in Commons:Categories - ideally in a more general form along the lines of "don't use categories as a database". Omphalographer (talk) 23:34, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

I had started the original CfD and was a proponent for having these categories deleted, but this is the first time a "cast members" category actually contains valid media. Category:Hazbin Hotel/Helluva Boss cast is still in need of cleaning up (the general actor categories should be removed, as should File:Norman Reedus by Gage Skidmore 4.jpg this image of Norman Reedus at a Walking Dead panel) but the other photos show cast members at panels and photo-ops that are specifically about Hazbin Hotel/Helluva Boss. See also my comment on Categories for Discussion. ReneeWrites (talk) 19:46, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Happy New Year 2026 to everyone!

This is the year of Wikipedia/Wikimedia's 25th anniversary, and, so, a good moment to think about what can be done to help keeping, in addition to carry on building, this wonderful work that we are creating together.

In the year that has just ended, I wrote 3 essays related to this topic (1 in Commons and 2 in English Wikipedia), that you can read if you are interested:

• Digital preservation
• Past and future of Wikipedia
• The hidden encyclopedia that resides in the article histories

In the year we have just left behind, there was also very good news in this regard: for the first time (as far as I know), Internet Archive publicly confirmed that, unlike 10 years ago, it has copies around the world, so the many contents preserved there (including many Wikipedia articles and many Commons files, among many other WMF pages) are not exposed to the natural risks that a single location like San Francisco may face, so now there are far better preservation guarantees for legitimate files or wiki pages that, for one reason or another, may be removed from public view in WMF sites in the future (I think it's a good practice to also save in Wayback Machine those Commons files that are worth of special value). MGeog2022 (talk) 20:01, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be a much better policy to establish data centers for Wikimedia projects in additional and safe countries? That would also mitigate the risk. --Enyavar (talk) 08:06, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

I think that WMF backups in countries other than the USA would be fine, but probably they could only host offline backups, since US copyright law is always considered for Commons media, and US-only fair use law is considered for many media files hosted in Wikipedia itself. I'd like to see fair use and fixed-term (since publication) copyright expiration in the European Union and other countries, but, sadly, it isn't the case for now (the current interest in promoting AI in the EU could be a good reason to change the laws, but I fear they won't change, since it seems that, sadly, AI companies are given permission to ignore copyright laws where others wouldn't be allowed to do the same).

Here, I wasn't thinking about possible censorship or political issues. Fortunately, it doesn't happen often, and administrators make a great work, but, for one reason or another, a Wikipedia article or a Commons file (there are more than 130 million files in Commons, we need to be understanding) may be mistakenly deleted (false copyvio claim, controversial out of scope discussion, etc). I'm not saying it's something that usually happens, only that it is something that could happen with some files, and, if they are of special value, it's good to include them also in Wayback Machine, where, to ask for deletion of content, very strong evidence of the copyvio is needed. MGeog2022 (talk) 14:15, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

I think there is some confusion above:

• Besides three sets of servers in the U.S., Wikimedia already has servers in Amsterdam, Singapore, Marseille, and São Paulo.
• Not all WMF projects follow U.S. copyright law. For example, de-wiki as far as I know completely ignores U.S. copyright law, but follows the copyright laws of Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, which are almost completely harmonized with one another.

Jmabel ! talk 18:37, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the info in the second point, I wasn't aware of it.

WMF does have datacenters out of the USA, but they are caching ones only (source). As far as I know, only 2 of the 3 US datacenters store the full contents permanently. But good point also to talk about the non-US WMF datacenters: if there can be caching datacenters out of the USA, perhaps there would be no problem in having application datacenters also (I don't know enough about it, but I always thought that the reason for both application datacenters being US-based was WMF following USA copyright law). MGeog2022 (talk) 19:51, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Having whole datasets outside the US (preferably in stable, democratic countries), would be good. We have to be prepared --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 20:33, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes. While having more than 2 production copies isn't probably needed, and would add technical complexity, if only the backups hosted in the 2 application datacenters were copied to, for example, each caching datacenter, it would add cross-country redundancy, at a cost that seems very affordable to WMF budget (several backups of less than 2 PB should not be a big problem for such a budget). MGeog2022 (talk) 11:21, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Internet Archive doesn't have much of Commons. Re that & Commons:Digital preservation, see m:Community Wishlist/W213 (physical Wikimedia Commons media dumps). Prototyperspective (talk) 00:17, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

School class pictures

I find very few group pictures of school classes. Most schools had end of the schoolyear pictures of the whole class. Nowadays this is very limited because of of privacy concerns, but in the past this was not a problem. Are there any specific categories for this? In this case the children where born around 1932. I find it very dificult to recognize any childern at this age even if you have a picture of the child at the same age to compare. I cannot recognize my mother with any certainty (two good posibilities) Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:38, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Class photographs. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:51, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

I have been categorising/sorting school classes by country. However, this File:ACS School Uniform.jpg has no country info.Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:41, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Added to Category:Unidentified locations. Now we wait... Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:30, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Google Image Search leads to [3]

ACS may be Anglo_Chinese school in Singapore, or en:Adi Cakobau School, in Fiji. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:47, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Uniform matches the latter: [4]. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:53, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

The pictures without a country is sorted with an X. These are: File:Elipsis Cole 28.jpg, File:Hala school pic.jpg, File:La promo del cole 28.jpg, File:PCB Batch 2015-16.jpg, File:Sofiemyr NM 2012.jpg, File:Thankyou55.JPG, File:Title005.JPG and File:WUL-i04 02090 0090 集合写真 1.pdf. (the last is probably Japanese, because of the Japanese language). Smiley.toerist (talk) 15:34, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

It is abuse of category sorting to use an opaque system like that. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:40, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

There is no country with the first letter X. All other files are sorted by category. Many files where placed in country subcategories. (Romania en Belgium categories where created) The number of files has been reduced from around 122 to 62. I want the unsorted files to be together. I want to limit the number of temporary work categories. Maybe using ' X' is better, this then goes to the front.Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:01, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

I don't refer merely to the use of "X", but to using countries as a sort key in that way.

Sort keys are meant to ensure that files or subcategories with names like like "Barack Obama" sort under "O", "042" under "42" and "The Silmarillion" under "S", not for strings that are not part of file names. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:15, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

If you want to classify by country, you can make subcategories ("School class pictures in Transylvania"). No need to use sorting keys as if they were categories. Pere prlpz (talk) 16:17, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Sort keys have many uses, but the example you mention is the exception rather than the main use. Most times sort keys are used to get the files in chronological order and the file names are very diverse. Example: Category:Trains at Amsterdam Central station. Train material types sometimes get sorted by number such as Category:Intercity Nieuwe Generatie in the Netherlands. There only the trains with visible number get sorted. Example: Category:Intercity Nieuwe Generatie in the Netherlands. This ia practical system as there are many contributors who usualy dont bother to research or mention the fleet number. When sufficient number of files are grouped together by sorting a subcategories can be created as in Category:ASEA Rc by fleet number. For ASEA Rc by livery the Category:ASEA Rc by livery is used. Personaly I find this overcategorisation, but if the contributors specializing in this area are happy so be it.

Back to school classes. I only want to create subcategories if there sufficient number of files. And you get to know how many files there are for each country? By sorting them. When there a sufficient number of pictures for a country a new subcategoryis created. In the meantime one can easily search for a specific country if the sorting is up to date. I wil now mention how the category is sorted.Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:39, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Using keys to sort chronologically is also an abuse. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:00, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

There are many ways to sort, but sorting by year is less relevant in this case. Furthermore the dating of many pictures is imprecise.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:02, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Additionally, in Commons there is no problem with creating categories with a single file or a few files. Specially, creating categories by country helps finding and organizing school photographs, while just ordering them is obscure and hard to understand to the point of uselessness.

There might be some places where ordering can be useful, but not as a replacement for categories. Pere prlpz (talk) 12:12, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

There is no technical problem with creating categories with a single file or a few files, but is it desirable? It is very frustrating when you scan a main category for some element/aspect in the pictures and you have scan every subcategory individualy. Using SDC and Cat-a-lot scripts on many unnecessary subcategories, cost a lot of extra time. For example: adding SD (Q602767) to the files in Category:ASEA Rc with the SDC script, would be much easier if there where no subcategories. Now there are 200 subcategories of individual locomotives in (see Category:ASEA Rc by fleet number). I suspect most of the locomotives pictures have Q602767 in the SD. But the only way to check is to rescan all the relevant subcategories. And for what? Who is really interested in an individual locomotives? I urge restraint in trying to categorize everything (and types of combinations). There is certainly such a thing as overcategorisation. Luckily there is an alternative way of ordening/searching the files with Structured Data. (see https://commonswalkabout.org/) This is much more flexible with combinations and specific queries. Categories systems should only try to facilitate standard searches, not overspecific, niche ones.Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:13, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Malformed dates

This SPARQL query shows >8K items with SDC "Inception" dates of between 1 and 1000 AD.

Many are modern photographs with clear errors. For example an image where the date was entered in the format "1-4-09"; but was "2009-01-04", in EXIF.

My request for a bot to address this was archived without being actioned.

How can we address the issue? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:23, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

For starters, it has to be pretty easy to slap a maintenance category (or a template that adds a maintenance category) on the images found by the SPARQL query. - Jmabel ! talk 17:39, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

See also Commons:Bots/Work requests#Changing values in the date field based on categorization. Date in categories <-> date field / SDC mismatches (contradictions) could also be listed and would include many of these and some other cases. Maybe the query can also be used to find more of these contradictions. Prototyperspective (talk) 00:31, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

"Photographs of Israel" before 15 May 1948

Why does Wikimedia Commons have categories for "Photographs of Israel" for any date before the declaration of that state in 15 May 1948? I imagine that this question has been debated and decided in the past, and perhaps not amicably. However, I would be grateful for an explanation of why there are categories for "Photographs of Israel" from the 1840s up to 15 May 1948.

By contrast, there are almost no categories for photographs of Palestine before 15 May 1948. There is one photo in "Black and white photographs of Palestine in the 1890s", one in "Black and white photographs of Palestine in the 1940s", and that is all. Given that the entire territory was called Palestine under British rule from 1918 to 1948, Commons' practice seems ahistorical. And even before British rule, English Wikipedia says that "Palestine" was the name of the entire area "In common usage from 1840 onward".

Please make it make sense? Motacilla (talk) 16:01, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Photos are usually grouped by country and administrative subunits thereof. However there was no such country as Palestine before 1948. There was Mandatory Palestine from 1918 to 1948 and several Ottoman provinces before. Ruslik (talk) 20:04, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

We have Category:Ottoman Palestine by year and Category:British Mandate of Palestine by year. The "Photographs of" category is usually added by templates like {{Taken in}} and {{Taken on}} by setting the "location" parameter. However, the addition of the templates and the setting of the location parameter have to be done manually. People are probably just not adding them to the files they upload, or they set the location parameter to "Israel" for whatever reason. Nakonana (talk) 21:33, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Somewhat analogous to having Category:1860 in Washington (state) (and see the note on that page), though of course a lot more politically fraught.

There are a ton of places in the world where our system of basing geographic categories largely on present-day nation states becomes problematic, but I'm not sure there is a tremendously better solution. Would we want to say there is no such thing as "in Poland" between 1795 and 1918? On another front, there was recently a big fight over whether people born in the Baltic States between 1945 and 1991 were or were not born in the Soviet Union. There is no solution to questions like this that will make everyone happy. - Jmabel ! talk 01:53, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

This issue seems easier than the Eastern Europe issues. They should be in Mandatory Palestine, or, before that, in the Ottoman Empire. Rathfelder (talk) 15:09, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Are there any RfCs and/or CfDs about this also about other geographic regions and polities (such as countries)? Prototyperspective (talk) 13:13, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

License review YouTube

I would like to draw attention to the Category:YouTube review needed, which is overloaded with 8,000 files. I often check this category, but I cannot review all these files by myself. These files need to be fully reviewed to prevent a large number of non-licensed files from accumulating. Incall ^talk 18:32, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

I thought there is a bit which proves the license automatically :( --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 20:10, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

We have something like that for Flickr, where the bot can look at the Flickr file and make sure it's the same, but the bot can't confirm that a video or screenshot actually came from a specific YouTube video. Omphalographer (talk) 05:49, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

I guess a tool that makes license reviewing easy would be of great help in terms of speeding things up. It could load the license section (maybe also the file description) in one panel (e.g. left side) and the YouTube video's description in another panel (e.g. the right side) with a button "Confirm" (e..g below) one just needs to click if the license is fine. Additionally, there would be a "Skip" button and if the YouTube video is down or set to private it would automatically load the archived version (if available) in the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine. To check if the video is the same either also the two videos could be embedded at the top or the tool automatically check if both the duration and the YouTube video ID in the structured data are matching.

I estimate this could speed up the review by 300–600% and thereby motivate more users to spend any or more time on the license reviews which could be enough to get this fully done. Thus, imo this is yet another issue largely inhibited from being solved due too little software development by WMF or facilitation thereof (eg via campaigns). A wish for such a tool could be submitted to the m:Community Wishlist.

An open question or issue with this is whether license review is just about confirming whether the license set at the source is actually the one stated on the file page or whether it's more comprehensive where the reviewer is expected to check whether the source video actually is CCBY (many CCBY-tagged videos on YT aren't really CCBY because they're largely composed of nonCCBY clips made by other people for example). It seems like currently only the former is done. Prototyperspective (talk) 13:11, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:FoP-United States

A couple of image files of US buildings in this category are wrongly tagged {{FoP-US}}. Some images show buildings that were completed before 1990, hence {{PD-US-architecture}}. Calling for assistance as there are more than 1K files under this category. Regards, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 07:49, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Either way, the file is fine to keep. Why is this a task worth recruiting people into? Most photos of buildings in the U.S. will have neither tag, and that's fine, too. - Jmabel ! talk 00:44, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@Jmabel using wrong tags risks disinformation to image reusers and readers, considering that no copyright exists for all pre-1990 US buildings. Tagged templates concerning subject status should give accurate information to non-Wikimedians, not to mislead them into thinking that copyright protection exists to pre-1990 US buildings. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 06:37, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

See this for example. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 06:43, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@JWilz12345: What advantage is their even to having two separate templates here, rather than a single template with bullet points for each of two cases? It is OK to publish photographs of architectural works in the U.S. regardless of when the building was built; the only thing that changes is the rationale. - Jmabel ! talk 06:56, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@Jmabel see Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2012/11#US buildings completed before 12/1/90. I agree to what cmadler said: "No, FoP is an exception to the normal rights of copyright owners. If there's no copyright, there's no FoP (and no need for it). For example, both the Trump Tower Chicago and the Willis Tower (nee Sears Tower) can be freely photographed, but for different reasons (the Trump is under FoP while the Willis is PD) which have different implications for potential reusers." PD buildings like Willis Tower can be freely exploited and even reproduced in 3D, but reusers' exploitation of Trump Tower Chicago is only limited to photography of it or making a drawing/painting of it, consistent with COM:FOP US. FoP is just an exception to copyright; it does not make the underlying work 100% freely exploitable by reusers. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 07:09, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Understood, but we don't store buildings on Commons. My solution could be implemented by one person in under an hour (reword one of the templates, redirect the other to it), and covers all related media that we store. Yours needs a team of people and constant ongoing vigilance. - Jmabel ! talk 07:48, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@Jmabel I'll wait for cmadler's response (they last became active on enWiki in 2023), if they finally agree to merge the template for uncopyrighted US buildings with the template for copyrighted US buildings. Per their 2013 insight, though, they were firm in having two separate templates. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 09:45, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

International payment

An international payment in my family archives. This is certainly PD but wich license? There must be other categories (stamps etc). Is this august 10th?

• 
• 

Smiley.toerist (talk) 15:28, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Since it is from 1889 I think you could use {{Pd-1923}}. Ruslik (talk) 19:23, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

As this is unpublished (except for the banklogo with the building), I think {{PD-US-unpublished}} is the better option.Smiley.toerist (talk) 23:42, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

The license issue is resolved, but not the stamps classifications. Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:50, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying – removed the section solved template. I suppose you're referring to There must be other categories (stamps etc). Is this august 10th? – it's entirely unclear to me what you're asking about there. Maybe other users understand what you meant but it may be good to make the remaining question(s) clearer. --Prototyperspective (talk) 12:57, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

On the front there are two eliptical stamps. It is unclear what they are. (mention New York and Leipzig). On the back there are other stamps. It would be interesting to know how these transfers where administratively processed in 1889. There was a telegraph, but how did the banks verify and prevent fraud? Smiley.toerist (talk) 14:22, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

No infobox visible in Category

Category:Chagnon contains {{Wikidata Infobox}}, but the infobox isn't visible. I see a hidden Category:Uses of Wikidata Infobox for deleted Wikidata items. I don't understand what this means, but how can I make the infobox visible? Wouter (talk) 10:39, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

I see the same issue. The related Wikidata item is d:Q673388. This Wikidata edit may be relevant.

Purging the cache did not resolve the issue. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:41, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

This appears to be solved on my end? The infobox shows up both on desktop and mobile for me. ReneeWrites (talk) 14:00, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Like Pigsonthewing, I also purged the cache without success, but now I see the infobox. Could it be a cache problem after all? Wouter (talk) 15:12, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

I have now the same problem with Category:Ménétréol-sous-Sancerre. Purging the cache does not help. In Wikidata a similar change by @Samoasambia: . Probably again waiting a day may solve a cache problem. Wouter (talk) 15:35, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

The same problem with Category:Vouzon. Wouter (talk) 15:40, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

I did a small edit on the category and it solved the issue. I guess time will fix all the infoboxes. Samoasambia ✎ 16:20, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Indeed a zero edit does the job. Wouter (talk) 16:25, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the ping. I deleted a batch of ~21k Wikidata category items created around a year ago about French communes that contained only a Commons category sitelink while the main items didn't have Commons galleries (which makes the category items unnotable under #1.4 of d:WD:N) and placed the sitelinks back to the main items. I'm not sure why the infobox isn't functioning correctly. Probably some kind of cache issue? Samoasambia ✎ 15:47, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

if this is not resolved (infoboxes getting fixed over time), then please move this or create a new thread at Commons:Village pump/Technical. Prototyperspective (talk) 23:15, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 23:15, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

'Deepcategory' seems not to function

Hello. Today, for the third day in row, I find out that the 'deepcategory' parameter does not work anymore. A query like this one (or the alternative) doesn't return one single hit, while before it would. Has something changed in the search functions? I didn't notice. Regards, Apdency (talk) 12:40, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

 Comment, please see related discussion at Commons:Village pump/Technical#Special search partially down?. Apparently a patch for this problem has been submitted. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 17:03, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

No. I have taken a look there now, but how could it be helpful in respect to the problem I mentioned? It's just that a search parameter that for years used to work, suddenly ceased to work. There's not much more that I know. Apdency (talk) 18:01, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

@Apdency The search parameter "deepcategory" is supposed to work, but due to some problem it stopped working. A fix has been proposed and submitted, but it is still currently waiting to be implemented, which should happen within a couple days. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 19:59, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Thank you. We'll await ... Apdency (talk) 20:36, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

technical issues are for Commons:Village pump/Technical and there's a thread already Prototyperspective (talk) 23:12, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 23:12, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Suburban stations in Helsinki in 2003

I suspect all stations are within the AB tarif zone on the Helsinki Central - Puistola line.

• 
• 
• 
• 

Smiley.toerist (talk) 00:23, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

I think the first three are indeed Puistola. The last one might be Jokela railway station, though it is not in that interval. The red building left of the locomotive might be visible in the left edge of this photo. Antti T. Leppänen (talk) 12:47, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

I agree, it would match the three elektrified tracks.Smiley.toerist (talk) 15:01, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

 DoneSmiley.toerist (talk) 19:23, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Station in Finland

Where is this? It was made travelling from Joensuu to Vaasa. There is an museum? Museo.Smiley.toerist (talk) 19:23, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Pieksämäki railway station. MKFI (talk) 08:11, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 23:03, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Public Domain Mark 1.0

https://archive.org/details/a-history-of-the-university-in-europe-volume-1-universities-in-the-middle-ages

Check the usage section. Does this mean this file is released under the CC-Zero license? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingsacrificer (talk • contribs) 20:40, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

No. The Internet Archive metadata is incorrect; page 4 of the book states clearly that the authors reserve their rights:

© Cambridge University Press 1992

This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception
and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements,
no reproduction of any part may take place without the
written permission of Cambridge University Press.

Omphalographer (talk) 20:46, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Please see Commons:Village pump/Copyright. Prototyperspective (talk) 23:02, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 23:02, 19 January 2026 (UTC)