User talk:Yann

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Busy desk.svg This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Bahasa Indonesia  dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  euskara  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  română  español  português  English  français  Nederlands  polski  galego  Simple English  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  українська  ქართული  հայերեն  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ไทย  မြန်မာဘာသာ  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  العربية  فارسی  +/−

/archives 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

God is busy, may I help you? / Dieu est occupé, puis-je vous aider?

You can leave me a message in English or French, at the bottom. Click here. Yann 22:13, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

copyright[edit]

[Here https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles/Edit_wiki_peadia] are copyright violations. --JusticeForce101 (talk) 11:25, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for a week. Yann (talk) 11:27, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Lost World[edit]

Hello Yann, j'espère que tu vas bien. Le film a déjà été présenté comme MOTD dans une version teinte d'origine et de meilleure résolution. Cordialement, — Racconish💬 08:46, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Racconish: Salut,
Ah oui ici : Template:Motd/2017-08#13. J'ai récupéré une version avec une définition vraiment meilleure, mais je n'arrive pas à l'importer (par dessus File:The Lost World (1925), full.ogv) sur Commons à cause de plusieurs bugs empêchant les importations de gros fichiers. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 12:42, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Pas compris : je l'ai déjà televersé. Cordialement, — Racconish💬 14:49, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Racconish: Une version 1080p qui fait 1,7 Go ? Où ça ? Yann (talk) 15:22, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yann, je te disais simplement (1) que le film a déjà été présenté comme MOTD et (2) que la version présentée est meilleure que celle que tu proposes, deux raisons, à mon avis, pour ne pas proposer cette dernière version à nouveau comme MOTD. Maintenant s'il s'agit de dire qu'on pourrait téléverser une meilleure version, c'est vrai, et je vais m'en occuper, pour la version originale teintée, mais je ne crois pas que ce soit une raison pour présenter le film à nouveau comme MOTD. Cordialement, — Racconish💬 22:29, 4 November 2021 (UTC) — ✓ Done 22:54, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Racconish: Vu la discussion en ce moment à propos de MOTD, proposer à nouveau ce film dans une version haute-définition me semble une bonne idée. Cette version est-elle celle que j'ai importée sur IA ? Cordialement, Yann (talk) 06:58, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yann, j'ai mis à jour File:The Lost World (1925).webm avec deux améliorations ; la résolution, 950 x 720 au lieu de 480 x 360, et la durée, 01:42:25 au lieu de 01:32:23, à partir d'une source YouTube que j'ai précisée. La source est le dvd Lobster/Flicker Alley qui comporte une dizaine de minutes de séquences retrouvées ne figurant pas dans la version antérieure. La source Internet Archive que tu as utilisée pour File:The Lost World (1925), full.ogv n'est pas précisée sur Internet Archive mais elle est manifestement de moins bonne qualité, plus courte et noir et blanc alors que le film est teinté dans toutes les versions d'exploitation. En tout état de cause, File:The Lost World (1925), full.ogv est une version moins bonne que File:The Lost World (1925).webm, que ce soit dans le téléversement d'origine de cette dernière ou a fortiori dans la mise à jour que je viens d'en faire et je ne vois aucune raison valable de préférer cette version. Par ailleurs, je suis au courant de la discussion en cours sur MOTD mais elle n'a pas permis de dégager de consensus. Nous avons des tonnes de très beaux films jamais montrés en MOTD et je ne suis pas partisan de pratiquer ici un passage en force. Au total, il me semble préférable de remplacer ta version de qualité inférieure de The Lost World (qui devrait à mon sens être supprimée) par autre chose, par exemple File:Sherlock Holmes (1916).webm. Cordialement, — Racconish💬 07:59, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Racconish: Je trouve les couleurs vraiment moches. C'est pourquoi j'ai cherché une version en N&B que j'ai téléchargée avec un fichier Torrent (7AA48F18C2B9FA37C4F0190B6801D8481118A057, 1.66 GB, 23.976 fps, 1920 x 1080). Mais on peut attendre que la discussion soit terminée avant de proposer à nouveau ce film. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 10:16, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yann, le jugement de goût mis à part, j'ai l'impression que tu considères que les films muets sont nécessairement en noir et blanc, ce qui est faux. Outre les colorations au pochoir, de nombreux films étaient teints dans des couleurs signifiantes. Par exemple le bleu pour la nuit, l'ocre pour le jour, le vert pour les scène fantastiques, etc. Il n'y a aucune raison de considérer qu'un noir et blanc est plus conforme à l'original que la version teintée quand celle-ci est d'origine [1]. Ce procédé n'a rien à voir avec la colorisation digitale de vieux films. Voir [2] ou [3]. La version que tu as téléversée n'a donc ni l'avantage de la durée (trop courte, scènes manquantes), ni celui de la résolution (trop basse), ni celui de la couleur (noir et blanc non conforme à la version d'origine). Cordialement, — Racconish💬 12:16, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Racconish: J'ai bien compris que certains vieux films étaient montrés au public dans une version colorée, mais cette couleur est un ajout postérieur à la prise de vue. Je veux bien que l'on garde une version colorée quand celle ci date de l’époque de la production, mais on devrait aussi avoir une version en N&B, comme on a plusieurs versions avec des montages différents. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 12:34, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Peu importe que la post-production soit postérieure au tournage, ce qui compte c'est qu'il s'agisse de l'intention de l'auteur et non d'une modification ultérieure, voire anachronique, qui ne corresponde pas à l'intention de celui-ci. Au cas particulier, il n'y a aucun doute que la version d'exploitation, celle qui a été présentée aux spectateurs lors de la sortie du film, était teinte, comme l'étaient beaucoup de films de l'époque. Cela n'a pas de sens d'affirmer qu'une version noir et blanc devrait être plus conforme à une prétendue vérité historique s'il est établi, comme c'est le cas ici, que le film est bien sorti en version teinte. Cordialement, — Racconish💬 13:35, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Racconish: The video2commons process again stopped with an error: An exception occurred: FileNotFoundError: b'[Errno 2] No such file or directory'. :( Yann (talk) 08:13, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Je ne sais pas ce que tu étais en train de faire, mais j'évite autant que faire se peut, de mon côté, d'utiliser video2commons. Cordialement, — Racconish💬 08:22, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Racconish: Et pourquoi ? Quel outil utilises-tu pour convertir les vidéos ? J'essaie maintenant de l'importer sur YT. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 08:26, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
J'utilise ffmpeg, le sous-jacent de video2commons. Cordialement, — Racconish💬 08:35, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
J'ai importé le film sur YT, mais il a été supprimé. :((( Yann (talk) 12:44, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Votre dernier message. Tilleul ?[edit]

Bonjour, Désolé, pour les ennuis que je vous cause. Je pense comprendre que la photo du Tilleul serait sous droits, habitant cet endroit : Mélin : j'ai toujours connu ce tilleul et j'en ai même fais une nouvelle parue dans mon Livre 'Novèles de Mélin paru en 2010. J'essaie de retrouver la photo que j'ai utilisée pour ce livre. et je vous l'envoie. Jacques Desmet —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2A02:A03F:AE4F:F300:F896:50A3:6F19:240F (talk) 15:13, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Earwax on swab.jpg[edit]

I've been going through FPCs to get some stats. As part of this, I've fixed some results where the maths was wrong. So far, this hasn't changed the result of any candidate. But it does in the above one. The FPC bot tallied 8 oppose votes and recorded that draft result. Then JovanCormac struck one vote according to "new rules", which I guess concerned number of contributions necessary. You then reviewed the FPC bot but didn't spot the oppose vote count had changed. According to the rules, a 14:7 vote should be featured. I'm not familiar with the steps needed to feature a candidate. Are you able to fix this one and promote it? -- Colin (talk) 14:29, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Colin: Promoted. Should it be added in the recent images list, and on this month, or on the month it was nominated? Yann (talk) 15:09, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would make more sense to add it to the archive as though it was featured then. Unless you feel it deserves a chance at POTY next year? I don't mind. Thanks for the fixes. -- Colin (talk) 15:29, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Who knows? Yann (talk) 15:52, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Indonesia bike27.JPG[edit]

I wonder if you can help with this one too. It got 4 support and 3 oppose, which should have failed even back then. Instead, it got promoted and featured on the main page. The user who promoted it hasn't edited here for years. Can you un-feature it? -- Colin (talk) 14:41, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, you are digging prehistoric stuff! I fixed this one. Yann (talk) 15:06, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:4-Stroke-Engine.gif[edit]

How do you feel about this one? According to the rules at the time -- "Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority, that means at least 67% supporting)" -- it should have been promoted. It had 8 support and 4 oppose (one of the support templates (Tak) was deleted so is hard to see). But it wasn't promoted. It is a tiny animated gif and I think we'd have delisted it if it had been featured. Should this one be left not promoted? -- Colin (talk) 16:24, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, exactly. If we want to be rigorists, we can promote it, and then nominate it for deletion, but I don't see the point. Yann (talk) 16:29, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

NileTravel continues adding nonsense templates[edit]

Hello, NileTravel continues adding templates about communism in simple photos of people. He also deletes your warnings from his talk page (without archiving the page). And I really think that this user with a such nickname may be a puppet of NileTravel. — Soul Train (talk) 11:19, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Both blocked. Thanks for reporting. Yann (talk) 12:03, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Another account. — Soul Train (talk) 02:43, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me[edit]

Hello, I noticed that an wikimedia editor tagged and deleted several sourced pictures which were copyrighted under:Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Please restore these images and check the sources I provided. See:https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-020-01162-2

As example: Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:Northwards_migration_of_Basal_East_Asian_lineage_(model_A_and_B).jpg

They were all tagged by an suspicious new user which you already warned: User_talk:SsSsSs0909

Please check this controversy and help me to restore sourced and useful pictures. Thank you. Mev Shreb (talk) 18:20, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: see Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:Northwards_migration_of_Basal_East_Asian_lineage_(model_A_and_B).jpg. Эlcobbola talk 18:57, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why was the logo removed?[edit]

Hello, how are you? I am talking about the topic of deleting File:نادي الوشم السعودي.png I work in this club and I have permission to put any information on wiki pages, including the club's logo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ammaralyousef (talk • contribs) 07:31, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ammaralyousef: Please confirm the license via email (see COM:VRT for the procedure). Do not reupload it, or you will be blocked. Thanks, Yann (talk) 09:12, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at QIC talk page[edit]

A discussion is being held here, over the reviewing process at QIC and the possibility of improving our Image Guidelines. As a regular contributor to the project, your opinion would be most welcome and valued. Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:43, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Watercolor_paintings_by_Gerda_Cederblom[edit]

Category discussion warning

Category:Watercolor_paintings_by_Gerda_Cederblom 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!


Thurs (talk) 19:44, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Thurs: OK, fine. Thanks for looking into that. BTW, there is no need to create a DR. Empty categories are automatically deleted. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:55, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS et le Musée de la Parole en Ardenne[edit]

Bonjour Yann,

L'utilisateur Lucyin (également auteur), avec qui je contribue sur Wikisource en wallon, a récemment contacté le Musée de la Parole en Ardenne pour leur demander de libérer quelques œuvres pour lesquelles il détient le droit d'auteur. Le président actuel, Joël Thiry (également auteur) a accepté d'en libérer quelques-unes et il est prêt a envoyer une autorisation en suivant la procédure appropriée. On m'a chargé de mettre en place le nécessaire pour que tout se déroule sans encombre. J'aurais cependant besoin d'un peu d'aide pour faire les choses correctement côté Commons. Pourrais-tu m'éclairer sur le point suivant : étant donné que l'autorisation contiendra les liens des fac-similés stockés sur Commons, y a-t-il un modèle particulier à apposer sur les pages des fac-similés en attendant que le tiket OTRS (ou plutôt VRT maintenant) soit validé ? Merci d'avance pour tes lumières. Reptilien.19831209BE1 (talk) 16:08, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Reptilien.19831209BE1: Tu peux ajouter dans le champ "Permission" de chaque fichier {{subst:OP}}. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 22:42, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merci, c'est précisément ce dont j'avais besoin. Reptilien.19831209BE1 (talk) 11:52, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Telugu-language films to Commons[edit]

Hope you are doing fine. I have learned during your Bangalore meet-up few years ago, subsequently done a few uploads of Telugu films using Video2commons. I have subsequently tried to upload a few old (1960 or before) Telugu movies, but met with some error messages. Can you help me, how to come out of the problems. I am seriously planning to upload these Telugu-language films to Commons. Thanking you.--Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 19:15, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rajasekhar1961: There are some bugs when uploading large files. For some obscure reasons, very large files usually failed. How big is your file? Did you try to create a WEBM format file on your PC, and to upload the result? Regards, Yann (talk) 22:17, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

License question[edit]

Hi Yann, I uploaded this derivative file today, a restoration. The original file here has a green flickr review template. Can I just copy the same template to the derivative file? Or do we have to wait for the derivative's license to be reviewed independently? Thanks. Bammesk (talk) 20:56, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bammesk: I reviewed the license. Yann (talk) 22:15, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Commons Photographers elections: self-nomination phase is open[edit]

Dear member of the Commons Photographers User Group,

The self-nomination phase for the first board election of our group is open as of today. If you'd like to take on a more active role and take our user group to the next level, please consider running for one of the open positions. Please check out the Board Election 2021 page for more details.

I hope you, your family, and your friends are doing well. All the best! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:40, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question for you[edit]

You blocked me for three days for one (1) revert. Yet other editors actually edit war and you do nothing. [4] [5]

I do not understand. Why are you against me? Krok6kola (talk) 00:43, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]