This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
I am concerned that certain combination of non-free uploads e.g. tv screenshots end up displaying n.a. as the response to WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#2 in the resulting fair use rationale e.g. File:Jeremy in English as a Second Language.jpg The use of not applicable does not appear to be in keeping with the requirements of the WP:NFCC to give a full explanation as to why an image meets the criteria. While some boilerplate to meet these two criteria probably is ok, it shouldn't be n.a. Any suggestions for improvement in wording or should it not be boilerplate and the uploader needs to establish reasons for themselves. Nthep ( talk) 11:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
I hate FURs filled with trivial/predictable/redundant verbiage, so we'll just cut it short. And don't anybody dare complain that that's not a valid FUR.You had no right to unilaterally make that decision and for you to do so and then claim that that is now "standard practice" is ridiculous. That is dictatorial.
WP:NFCCE states, Note that it is the duty of users seeking to include or retain content to provide a valid rationale; those seeking to remove or delete it are not required to show that one cannot be created—see
burden of proof.
A valid rationale states why the image meets all 10 required criteria. Your unilateral action has made it so tens of thousands of fair use images do not have a complete, valid, FUR. We all know that most people have zero actual grasp on the necessities of images here (or anywhere). To default to an incomplete FUR because you don't like boilerplate language with the knowledge that most people will just ignore it because they don't know any better is facilitating a policy violation. --
Majora (
talk) 21:48, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Fut. Perf, given that several people are now disagreeing with you on the matter, the status of its having consensus is clearly in question. Even if it once did, consensus can change, and when multiple people are in good faith questioning the practice, I think it's reasonable to ask whether it does (still, if applicable) have consensus. I didn't even know the Upload Wizard did that. I know some other people don't either, because I've seen them get after people for using the "n.a.". In fact, that just came up at a Teahouse question, and led to a new editor being chastised for that, and getting thoroughly confused having no idea what they did wrong. Generally speaking, I want a rationale to show that an editor actually carefully considered the NFCC before uploading a nonfree image, and came to the conclusion that the use does indeed meet each and every one of them. I might support boilerplate in some of the "identification" cases where use is widely considered acceptable, but it should still at least be there to show how the image passes it. Seraphimblade Talk to me 15:18, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Pretty much what Masem said. Having something there leads by example, and shows that all criteria apply to all images. If you leave "n.a." in some fields in some cases, you are telling people that is an acceptable practice for them to do too, since obviously plenty of other people have done it and gotten away with it. I also, FPaS, disagree with your assertion that no one would learn anything. I think there are some people who do not learn, but those are the ones we run into and have to deal with and clean up after. Those who do learn become good, discerning users of nonfree media, carefully considering if it is appropriate or not, so we never notice them. Even if we notice something they uploaded, we just look, say "Yep, looks fine", and move on. Regardless, though, the question is whether the practice really does have consensus. I read the past discussion, and I don't see it ever really coming to a consensus, just kind of dying off. The fact that the community was OK with the upload wizard as a whole does not indicate they were fine with this part of it; I suspect most of them did not even notice and just looked at the shiny widgets. Which, by the way, are very cool and helpful, and I certainly don't want to make it seem like your work writing the tool isn't appreciated. But sometimes, tools need to be refined, not just stay static. I suppose if you really want, we could raise an RfC on this specific issue, but I don't see why it's necessary to go that far. It's long since been accepted that all nonfree criteria apply to all nonfree images. So saying "n.a.", which means "not applicable", is clearly not in line with the consensus that they do apply. Even when a particular use case means that a particular NFCC is almost always satisfied, it still does apply. Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:04, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
This discussion is now over. I'm tired of dealing with the IDHT disruption from you two. As the current maintainer of this script, I am most certainly NOT going to implement any changes to it at this point. If you insist on changes, you'll have to do it yourself. (But if you try to make the script sneak in boilerplate text that the user hasn't written or endorsed in the questionnaire, forget it, I'll fight you tooth and nails to prevent that.) If you want, start by presenting a mock-up here of what you think a questionnaire section for any one of the routine cases ought to look like, and then good luck narrowing it down to something people will actually read and understand. They won't. You're only going to make the quality of uploads get worse. Have fun. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:53, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
I really believe this is more serious an issue towards proper NFC policy than Fut.Perf. thinks it is, and to that end, I've dropped a notice on the WT:NFC page to here. -- MASEM ( t) 16:06, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
If you omit the check box "Will be used at the top of the article.... " the image won;t upload. But there is no diagnostic, indicating what you have missed out.
All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough, 19:23, 29 June 2017 (UTC).
When a new user presses Upload File- they land here. Most of the time they need to land at the Commons Upload Wizard. On a normal page, there would be a prominent hat-note to take them there- obviously I can't add one myself. When the new user arrives here, the first thing they see is the large link to the WP(en) Upload wizard, what I would like to see is a 80% link underneath- linking them to the commons wizard. The problem that a trainer faces, is that there is no easy way to describe where to find the little link in the big blue box at the left hand side- no eas way to put it into documentation. Please ping me when a solution has been agreed. -- ClemRutter ( talk) 01:35, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
( talk) 21:56, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes Lefika Skodda ( talk) 00:13, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
I click on it but it keeps on restarting to the same page LD.leira 18:57, 2 November 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quinn Leira ( talk • contribs)
I am on an iPad, I try to press start the file upload wizard but nothing happens DatBoy101 ( talk) 00:45, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
Still nothing DatBoy101 ( talk) 23:08, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
I've tried several times today to upload some photos using the wikimedia upload wizard.
I get as far as the "Release Rights" page, tick the "These files are my own work" radio button, but when I click the "Next" button, nothing happens (literally nothing, no processing, no error message)
I've tried half a dozen times over a 6 hour period (approx 5pm to 11pm GMT)
The "Next" button is definitely enabled as a button, because the cursor changes to a hand when I hover over it
I've tried it on my PC (Windows 7) with Chrome and with Internet Explorer 11
I've also tried it on my Pixel / Android phone with Chrome — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enchufla Con Clave ( talk • contribs) 22:45, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Ok - Sorry - I didn't relise. I'm fairly new to this — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enchufla Con Clave ( talk • contribs) 12:33, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
How can I grant permission to the copyright owner before I upload a copyrighted image? FourBowl5905100 ( talk) 12:52, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
It appears that there is no way of marking an article as a screenshot of Microsoft Windows. If there is, then it's unclear. – Batreeq ( Talk) ( Contribs) 01:34, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
I clicked on the link in Safari, Chrome and in the Wikipedia app. Nothing happened Mplungjan ( talk) 19:27, 24 October 2017 (UTC) Mplungjan ( talk) 19:27, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
I am also "supposedly" using iOS also though I am confused on the process of how to use it l, perhaps I have no need for it...
Soxb2017 ( talk) 10:30, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Image upload does not work in mobile browser or the iOS app. Ititanthompson ( talk) 04:36, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
I want to add an image BP1771 ( talk) 03:54, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Need to an upload a sound file but I don't know how to do it. -- Dabblequeen ( talk) 21:17, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
This tool seems to be very buggy. I spent time entering all of the information and submitted it, then the file upload didn't complete and all the information I entered was lost. This occurred multiple times. Finally I got the file upload to work, but without entering the complete information needed for the file submission. Please fix this! -- Wykypydya ( talk) 06:37, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I have submitted an article and given an image from instagram, but they deleted the image as due to copyright issues? So can i use an image from google instead? if so how? Thewrecklessmind ( talk) 15:10, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
I WAS B
Can someone please fix this. It doesn’t work anymore with the IOS11 update. I need to upload some images to Wikipedia, not Wikimedia. DatBoy101 ( talk) 20:55, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Is someone even trying to fix this ‘because nothing’s happening DatBoy101 ( talk) 03:20, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, it doesn't work!! PoularChess1243 ( talk) 02:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Its opening the same page again and again Arshan Ali Khan ( talk) 05:49, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Yes it not worked Stronger starakas ( talk) 07:48, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
The problem seems to be related to the mobile version of the Wikipedia website. I had that problem but feedback I received was that it’s a bug with the mobile version of the website and to fix the problem I had to use the desktop version of the page from the “desktop” link at the bottom of the page. File upload works fine with the desktop version of the page. Adrian816 ( talk) 10:22, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
I’m trying to upload a picture to Wikipedia website but the upload wizard doesn’t run when I click on the link Adrian816 ( talk) 19:12, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Solution worked, thanks Adrian816 ( talk) 10:24, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
(see previous post for context) - Please can an administrator of the project page add a note “If you are using an iPad or safari browser select the desktop version of the file upload page to avoid compatibility issues due to the mobile version not working.” I can post comments here on the talk page but the file upload page seems to be protected. Adrian816 ( talk) 10:33, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
That, and be able to copy a previous form if the details are all the same apart from the file and its name. Chrisdevelop ( talk) 21:53, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
Yes Sii.mohamed.56 ( talk) 15:32, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Okay sir Niazi Ali zaman ( talk) 07:19, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Sprung bab scripted
The wizard currently asks that the image be such that "Its use does not negatively affect the commercial interests of its owner".
If you follow the link, you get: "Respect for commercial opportunities. Non-free content is not used in a manner that is likely to replace the original market role of the original copyrighted material."
This is sometimes significantly different. I just uploaded a copyright ad by the tobacco industry in order to discuss recent marketing practices; this is clearly fair use, and there is no way the Wikipedia article, or its use of the ad, will somehow replace the ad's function (selling a product). But critical discussion of the ad might reasonably be considered to negatively affect the commercial interests of the company that owns the copyright. This has broader implications for any "criticism and review" application; obviously it is not forbidden to write, say, that critics panned a film, and why, even if you illustrate the statement with a movie poster, and even if some people read the article and then decide not to go see the film.
I suggest rephrasing: "Its use is not likely to replace the original market role of the copyrighted material", perhaps? HLHJ ( talk) 20:52, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I cannot get the upload wizard to start. When I click on the link, it blinks, nothing else. NMmedFarm ( talk) 17:01, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
I can't do it
Sameerbrkb ( talk) 10:14, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
It looks like an IP user copied content from Wikipedia talk:File Upload Wizard/Archive 6 and created Wikipedia talk:File Upload Wizard/Archive 7 with it. The bot has not archived anything there yet as it's still filling up archive 6. - kyykaarme ( talk) 14:44, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Shouldn't the file upload wizard widgets (buttons, radio buttons, file upload box, etc.) be uploaded to follow the new Wikimedia Design Style Guide? The code can be found on https://doc.wikimedia.org/oojs-ui/master/demos/?page=widgets&theme=wikimediaui&direction=ltr&platform=desktop#icons-mediawiki-ltr. Thanks for looking into this! Cheers, Daylen ( talk) 04:50, 9 August 2018 (UTC) (Please ping me in your reply)
Please help me in uploading picture Manns8447 ( talk) 07:52, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
gongz on.. Alxjohnhenry ( talk) 17:18, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
Please Help Me Uploading The Picture Faisalsahi919 ( talk) 18:35, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
Yea i want that if possible Ibrahima Kanteh ( talk) 19:48, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
I want to upload the pictures Lwazilwenkosi ( talk) 21:10, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Well that's lame. With all of the cellphones in the world you would THINK that Wikipedia would be able to come up with some kind of coding that would allow a person to add photos to a page. Afterall a photo is only digital coding pulled together into a classified unit with a designated file type. A photo can be opened by the antiquated DOS program, so why can't they utilize that to translate photos? Amazing... ToddlyLovesJesus2 ( talk) 07:13, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
@ Future Perfect at Sunrise, Hawkeye7, Maile66, and TheDJ: Please replace the Wikitext of Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard with Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard/sandbox to fix lint errors. — Anomalocaris ( talk) 16:35, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
I think I spotted a bug in the form. In Step 3, when I do the following:
... the textarea id="NFPurpose" has been removed from the uploadDetails panel id="detailsNFMisc". The result is that all required fields cannot be completed and the Submit button remains disabled. The only fix is to reload the page and start all over again.
I think there's a javascript bug which removes the textarea. Cnbrb ( talk) 11:26, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
OK. DroopyFate12345 ( talk) 16:50, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
TL;DR: could you please change the text "titlepage of a book" to "cover or dustjacket of a book" in the text that is presented to the reader for non-free fair use rationales. That is, change
|style=""|<span id="placeholderOptionNFCover"></span> |This is the '''official cover art''' of a work.<br/>This is the titlepage of a book, the cover of a CD or video, the official release poster of a movie, or a comparable item. It will be included as that work's primary means of visual identification, at the top of the article about the book, movie, etc. in question.
to
|style=""|<span id="placeholderOptionNFCover"></span> |This is the '''official cover art''' of a work.<br/>This is the cover or dustjacket of a book, the cover of a CD or video, the official release poster of a movie, or a comparable item. It will be included as that work's primary means of visual identification, at the top of the article about the book, movie, etc. in question.
Reason given below.
One of the choices given when the uploader selects that the file to be upload is non-free but is believed to be fair use is (emphasis added) is:
This is the official cover art of a work: This is the titlepage of a book, the cover of a CD or video, the official release poster of a movie, or a comparable item. It will be included as that work's primary means of visual identification, at the top of the article about the book, movie, etc. in question.
The highlighting is to show the conflicting advice given regarding books.
For books, "official cover art" (generally meaning the dustjacket if there is one, the actual cover if there isn't) and " title page" (a page inside the book, giving the title and publishers name etc.) are very different things indeed.
Both are works of craft, both are copyrighted, and both serve mostly decorative functions in the article. But a book cover/dustjacked it much more a work of craft, with the artist often credited and sometimes being a notable graphic designer, while a titlepage is simple and uncredited. A title page has no commercial value, a cover/dustjacket can have some. And a title page conveys no useful information to the reader, being purely decorative, while a cover/dusjacket can provide at least a bit of contextual background of how the work was presented to the public.
The advice is contradictory, but when it drills down specifically to books it does specifically say "titlepage", so that would supersede the more general instructions. And titlepage would be the more conservative choice.
But the "titlepage" advice given is wrong, for these three reasons:
Which is why I asked for "titlepage" to be changed to "cover/dustjacket" rather than another change. Herostratus ( talk) 14:01, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
A new user found this wizard helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edwardj 123 ( talk • contribs) 17:19, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Its very helpfu. Mohammad Mohiuddin Hasnat ( talk) 19:32, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Quite useful Jp creation ( talk) 09:05, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
I've never uploaded a photo before, but I've done three today--very easy, no trouble. Also, I really appreciated the template for adding the photos to articles, which I promptly did. N'Awlins Contrarian 02:48, 3 February 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by N'Awlins Contrarian ( talk • contribs)
my self shivshyam mishra s/o shreeram mishra from allahabad uttar pradesh, india — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shivshyam pandit ( talk • contribs) 11:41, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
I just want to say thanks for letting the file upload process be more seamless; I had to upload a book cover the other day, ( File:Warriors, The Sight, Second edition cover.jpg), and it helped me through the copyright and fair use process better than I would've done myself. (I probably would have screwed up somewhere.) Anyway, thanks! – Ben79487 ( talk contribs) 02:28, 12 February 2019 (UTC) www.interwork.com/
This
edit request to
Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please prepend <noinclude>{{pp-template|small=yes}}</noinclude>
to the start of the page. It is currently template-protected (see
the protection log) but the page is not currently tagged as such. Thanks, --
DannyS712 (
talk) 06:10, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
I am trying to upload images, but I currently am not able to because the link only reloads this page Erfson ( talk) 20:54, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
👌🏼 Nooneknowsme12 ( talk) 02:43, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
me too Urania 13:21, 21 December 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angiel ( talk • contribs)
I am clicking the upload wizard link but nothing is happening Redeem7 ( talk) 00:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
I am trying to upload images, but I currently am not able Bharatkumarmahto ( talk) 15:55, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
I am clicking the upload wizard link but nothing is happening Bharatkumarmahto ( talk) 15:56, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
I am clicking on the upload link but nothing is happening Agnas Anil ( talk) 17:37, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
You have to click the Desktop site button at the bottom of the page to work Islameditor47 ( talk) 15:41, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
Nothing is working for me WikiWiki5678 ( talk) 17:39, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
I found out a way to do so. Mobile users, click on the "Desktop" button at the bottom of the page. Then the page will reload. Once reloaded click the "Click here to start the Upload Wizard" button again. You should be able to see a new page and not a reload. Islameditor47 ( talk) 11:10, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
How to upload মোঃ চঞ্চল মাহামুদ ভারুয়া ( talk) 23:48, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
How to upload মোঃ চঞ্চল মাহামুদ ভারুয়া ( talk) 23:49, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
ဖိုင္မ်ား
Nice Fagmmmu ( talk) 01:05, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
how অভিজিৎ চক্রবর্ত্তী ( talk) 21:39, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Is it possible to add more FURs like Template:Non-free use rationale poster and Template:Non-free use rationale video cover to this page? -- Kailash29792 (talk) 11:58, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Is it possible to add more FURs like Template:Non-free use rationale poster and Template:Non-free use rationale video cover to this page? -- Kailash29792 (talk) 11:58, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Is it possible to add more FURs like Template:Non-free use rationale poster and Template:Non-free use rationale video cover to this page? -- Kailash29792 (talk) 11:58, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
I believe that the file File:Traci Lords signature.png should belong to the Common.-- NeoBatfreak ( talk) 06:16, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
I have been having the odd issue with editors that see the empty "n.a." fields that are no wholly required to meet NFC complain that these have to be filled in to meet NFC. I have tried pointing them to past discussions here where its been agreed those are not mandatory fields and the "n.a."s are fine.
I think it might be helpful that on the upload, if this wizard could spit out an additional line after the rational tables along the lines "This rationale was generated through the Upload Wizard, which by design may leave some fields as unfilled but otherwise meets the minimum requirements for NFC. If you make any edits to this rationale, please remove this text." This would make it clear that we broadly do not have problems with missing "n.a." fields that are generated by the Upload Wizard, but as soon as you make any rationale changes, you should try to complete those better. -- Masem ( t) 23:05, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
The wizard uploaded the file, but lost my rationale. See Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 69#Can't find rationale I typed up. HLHJ ( talk) 03:24, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
I am concerned that certain combination of non-free uploads e.g. tv screenshots end up displaying n.a. as the response to WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#2 in the resulting fair use rationale e.g. File:Jeremy in English as a Second Language.jpg The use of not applicable does not appear to be in keeping with the requirements of the WP:NFCC to give a full explanation as to why an image meets the criteria. While some boilerplate to meet these two criteria probably is ok, it shouldn't be n.a. Any suggestions for improvement in wording or should it not be boilerplate and the uploader needs to establish reasons for themselves. Nthep ( talk) 11:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
I hate FURs filled with trivial/predictable/redundant verbiage, so we'll just cut it short. And don't anybody dare complain that that's not a valid FUR.You had no right to unilaterally make that decision and for you to do so and then claim that that is now "standard practice" is ridiculous. That is dictatorial.
WP:NFCCE states, Note that it is the duty of users seeking to include or retain content to provide a valid rationale; those seeking to remove or delete it are not required to show that one cannot be created—see
burden of proof.
A valid rationale states why the image meets all 10 required criteria. Your unilateral action has made it so tens of thousands of fair use images do not have a complete, valid, FUR. We all know that most people have zero actual grasp on the necessities of images here (or anywhere). To default to an incomplete FUR because you don't like boilerplate language with the knowledge that most people will just ignore it because they don't know any better is facilitating a policy violation. --
Majora (
talk) 21:48, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Fut. Perf, given that several people are now disagreeing with you on the matter, the status of its having consensus is clearly in question. Even if it once did, consensus can change, and when multiple people are in good faith questioning the practice, I think it's reasonable to ask whether it does (still, if applicable) have consensus. I didn't even know the Upload Wizard did that. I know some other people don't either, because I've seen them get after people for using the "n.a.". In fact, that just came up at a Teahouse question, and led to a new editor being chastised for that, and getting thoroughly confused having no idea what they did wrong. Generally speaking, I want a rationale to show that an editor actually carefully considered the NFCC before uploading a nonfree image, and came to the conclusion that the use does indeed meet each and every one of them. I might support boilerplate in some of the "identification" cases where use is widely considered acceptable, but it should still at least be there to show how the image passes it. Seraphimblade Talk to me 15:18, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Pretty much what Masem said. Having something there leads by example, and shows that all criteria apply to all images. If you leave "n.a." in some fields in some cases, you are telling people that is an acceptable practice for them to do too, since obviously plenty of other people have done it and gotten away with it. I also, FPaS, disagree with your assertion that no one would learn anything. I think there are some people who do not learn, but those are the ones we run into and have to deal with and clean up after. Those who do learn become good, discerning users of nonfree media, carefully considering if it is appropriate or not, so we never notice them. Even if we notice something they uploaded, we just look, say "Yep, looks fine", and move on. Regardless, though, the question is whether the practice really does have consensus. I read the past discussion, and I don't see it ever really coming to a consensus, just kind of dying off. The fact that the community was OK with the upload wizard as a whole does not indicate they were fine with this part of it; I suspect most of them did not even notice and just looked at the shiny widgets. Which, by the way, are very cool and helpful, and I certainly don't want to make it seem like your work writing the tool isn't appreciated. But sometimes, tools need to be refined, not just stay static. I suppose if you really want, we could raise an RfC on this specific issue, but I don't see why it's necessary to go that far. It's long since been accepted that all nonfree criteria apply to all nonfree images. So saying "n.a.", which means "not applicable", is clearly not in line with the consensus that they do apply. Even when a particular use case means that a particular NFCC is almost always satisfied, it still does apply. Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:04, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
This discussion is now over. I'm tired of dealing with the IDHT disruption from you two. As the current maintainer of this script, I am most certainly NOT going to implement any changes to it at this point. If you insist on changes, you'll have to do it yourself. (But if you try to make the script sneak in boilerplate text that the user hasn't written or endorsed in the questionnaire, forget it, I'll fight you tooth and nails to prevent that.) If you want, start by presenting a mock-up here of what you think a questionnaire section for any one of the routine cases ought to look like, and then good luck narrowing it down to something people will actually read and understand. They won't. You're only going to make the quality of uploads get worse. Have fun. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:53, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
I really believe this is more serious an issue towards proper NFC policy than Fut.Perf. thinks it is, and to that end, I've dropped a notice on the WT:NFC page to here. -- MASEM ( t) 16:06, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
If you omit the check box "Will be used at the top of the article.... " the image won;t upload. But there is no diagnostic, indicating what you have missed out.
All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough, 19:23, 29 June 2017 (UTC).
When a new user presses Upload File- they land here. Most of the time they need to land at the Commons Upload Wizard. On a normal page, there would be a prominent hat-note to take them there- obviously I can't add one myself. When the new user arrives here, the first thing they see is the large link to the WP(en) Upload wizard, what I would like to see is a 80% link underneath- linking them to the commons wizard. The problem that a trainer faces, is that there is no easy way to describe where to find the little link in the big blue box at the left hand side- no eas way to put it into documentation. Please ping me when a solution has been agreed. -- ClemRutter ( talk) 01:35, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
( talk) 21:56, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes Lefika Skodda ( talk) 00:13, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
I click on it but it keeps on restarting to the same page LD.leira 18:57, 2 November 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quinn Leira ( talk • contribs)
I am on an iPad, I try to press start the file upload wizard but nothing happens DatBoy101 ( talk) 00:45, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
Still nothing DatBoy101 ( talk) 23:08, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
I've tried several times today to upload some photos using the wikimedia upload wizard.
I get as far as the "Release Rights" page, tick the "These files are my own work" radio button, but when I click the "Next" button, nothing happens (literally nothing, no processing, no error message)
I've tried half a dozen times over a 6 hour period (approx 5pm to 11pm GMT)
The "Next" button is definitely enabled as a button, because the cursor changes to a hand when I hover over it
I've tried it on my PC (Windows 7) with Chrome and with Internet Explorer 11
I've also tried it on my Pixel / Android phone with Chrome — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enchufla Con Clave ( talk • contribs) 22:45, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Ok - Sorry - I didn't relise. I'm fairly new to this — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enchufla Con Clave ( talk • contribs) 12:33, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
How can I grant permission to the copyright owner before I upload a copyrighted image? FourBowl5905100 ( talk) 12:52, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
It appears that there is no way of marking an article as a screenshot of Microsoft Windows. If there is, then it's unclear. – Batreeq ( Talk) ( Contribs) 01:34, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
I clicked on the link in Safari, Chrome and in the Wikipedia app. Nothing happened Mplungjan ( talk) 19:27, 24 October 2017 (UTC) Mplungjan ( talk) 19:27, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
I am also "supposedly" using iOS also though I am confused on the process of how to use it l, perhaps I have no need for it...
Soxb2017 ( talk) 10:30, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Image upload does not work in mobile browser or the iOS app. Ititanthompson ( talk) 04:36, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
I want to add an image BP1771 ( talk) 03:54, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Need to an upload a sound file but I don't know how to do it. -- Dabblequeen ( talk) 21:17, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
This tool seems to be very buggy. I spent time entering all of the information and submitted it, then the file upload didn't complete and all the information I entered was lost. This occurred multiple times. Finally I got the file upload to work, but without entering the complete information needed for the file submission. Please fix this! -- Wykypydya ( talk) 06:37, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I have submitted an article and given an image from instagram, but they deleted the image as due to copyright issues? So can i use an image from google instead? if so how? Thewrecklessmind ( talk) 15:10, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
I WAS B
Can someone please fix this. It doesn’t work anymore with the IOS11 update. I need to upload some images to Wikipedia, not Wikimedia. DatBoy101 ( talk) 20:55, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Is someone even trying to fix this ‘because nothing’s happening DatBoy101 ( talk) 03:20, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, it doesn't work!! PoularChess1243 ( talk) 02:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Its opening the same page again and again Arshan Ali Khan ( talk) 05:49, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Yes it not worked Stronger starakas ( talk) 07:48, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
The problem seems to be related to the mobile version of the Wikipedia website. I had that problem but feedback I received was that it’s a bug with the mobile version of the website and to fix the problem I had to use the desktop version of the page from the “desktop” link at the bottom of the page. File upload works fine with the desktop version of the page. Adrian816 ( talk) 10:22, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
I’m trying to upload a picture to Wikipedia website but the upload wizard doesn’t run when I click on the link Adrian816 ( talk) 19:12, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Solution worked, thanks Adrian816 ( talk) 10:24, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
(see previous post for context) - Please can an administrator of the project page add a note “If you are using an iPad or safari browser select the desktop version of the file upload page to avoid compatibility issues due to the mobile version not working.” I can post comments here on the talk page but the file upload page seems to be protected. Adrian816 ( talk) 10:33, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
That, and be able to copy a previous form if the details are all the same apart from the file and its name. Chrisdevelop ( talk) 21:53, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
Yes Sii.mohamed.56 ( talk) 15:32, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Okay sir Niazi Ali zaman ( talk) 07:19, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Sprung bab scripted
The wizard currently asks that the image be such that "Its use does not negatively affect the commercial interests of its owner".
If you follow the link, you get: "Respect for commercial opportunities. Non-free content is not used in a manner that is likely to replace the original market role of the original copyrighted material."
This is sometimes significantly different. I just uploaded a copyright ad by the tobacco industry in order to discuss recent marketing practices; this is clearly fair use, and there is no way the Wikipedia article, or its use of the ad, will somehow replace the ad's function (selling a product). But critical discussion of the ad might reasonably be considered to negatively affect the commercial interests of the company that owns the copyright. This has broader implications for any "criticism and review" application; obviously it is not forbidden to write, say, that critics panned a film, and why, even if you illustrate the statement with a movie poster, and even if some people read the article and then decide not to go see the film.
I suggest rephrasing: "Its use is not likely to replace the original market role of the copyrighted material", perhaps? HLHJ ( talk) 20:52, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I cannot get the upload wizard to start. When I click on the link, it blinks, nothing else. NMmedFarm ( talk) 17:01, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
I can't do it
Sameerbrkb ( talk) 10:14, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
It looks like an IP user copied content from Wikipedia talk:File Upload Wizard/Archive 6 and created Wikipedia talk:File Upload Wizard/Archive 7 with it. The bot has not archived anything there yet as it's still filling up archive 6. - kyykaarme ( talk) 14:44, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Shouldn't the file upload wizard widgets (buttons, radio buttons, file upload box, etc.) be uploaded to follow the new Wikimedia Design Style Guide? The code can be found on https://doc.wikimedia.org/oojs-ui/master/demos/?page=widgets&theme=wikimediaui&direction=ltr&platform=desktop#icons-mediawiki-ltr. Thanks for looking into this! Cheers, Daylen ( talk) 04:50, 9 August 2018 (UTC) (Please ping me in your reply)
Please help me in uploading picture Manns8447 ( talk) 07:52, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
gongz on.. Alxjohnhenry ( talk) 17:18, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
Please Help Me Uploading The Picture Faisalsahi919 ( talk) 18:35, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
Yea i want that if possible Ibrahima Kanteh ( talk) 19:48, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
I want to upload the pictures Lwazilwenkosi ( talk) 21:10, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Well that's lame. With all of the cellphones in the world you would THINK that Wikipedia would be able to come up with some kind of coding that would allow a person to add photos to a page. Afterall a photo is only digital coding pulled together into a classified unit with a designated file type. A photo can be opened by the antiquated DOS program, so why can't they utilize that to translate photos? Amazing... ToddlyLovesJesus2 ( talk) 07:13, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
@ Future Perfect at Sunrise, Hawkeye7, Maile66, and TheDJ: Please replace the Wikitext of Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard with Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard/sandbox to fix lint errors. — Anomalocaris ( talk) 16:35, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
I think I spotted a bug in the form. In Step 3, when I do the following:
... the textarea id="NFPurpose" has been removed from the uploadDetails panel id="detailsNFMisc". The result is that all required fields cannot be completed and the Submit button remains disabled. The only fix is to reload the page and start all over again.
I think there's a javascript bug which removes the textarea. Cnbrb ( talk) 11:26, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
OK. DroopyFate12345 ( talk) 16:50, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
TL;DR: could you please change the text "titlepage of a book" to "cover or dustjacket of a book" in the text that is presented to the reader for non-free fair use rationales. That is, change
|style=""|<span id="placeholderOptionNFCover"></span> |This is the '''official cover art''' of a work.<br/>This is the titlepage of a book, the cover of a CD or video, the official release poster of a movie, or a comparable item. It will be included as that work's primary means of visual identification, at the top of the article about the book, movie, etc. in question.
to
|style=""|<span id="placeholderOptionNFCover"></span> |This is the '''official cover art''' of a work.<br/>This is the cover or dustjacket of a book, the cover of a CD or video, the official release poster of a movie, or a comparable item. It will be included as that work's primary means of visual identification, at the top of the article about the book, movie, etc. in question.
Reason given below.
One of the choices given when the uploader selects that the file to be upload is non-free but is believed to be fair use is (emphasis added) is:
This is the official cover art of a work: This is the titlepage of a book, the cover of a CD or video, the official release poster of a movie, or a comparable item. It will be included as that work's primary means of visual identification, at the top of the article about the book, movie, etc. in question.
The highlighting is to show the conflicting advice given regarding books.
For books, "official cover art" (generally meaning the dustjacket if there is one, the actual cover if there isn't) and " title page" (a page inside the book, giving the title and publishers name etc.) are very different things indeed.
Both are works of craft, both are copyrighted, and both serve mostly decorative functions in the article. But a book cover/dustjacked it much more a work of craft, with the artist often credited and sometimes being a notable graphic designer, while a titlepage is simple and uncredited. A title page has no commercial value, a cover/dustjacket can have some. And a title page conveys no useful information to the reader, being purely decorative, while a cover/dusjacket can provide at least a bit of contextual background of how the work was presented to the public.
The advice is contradictory, but when it drills down specifically to books it does specifically say "titlepage", so that would supersede the more general instructions. And titlepage would be the more conservative choice.
But the "titlepage" advice given is wrong, for these three reasons:
Which is why I asked for "titlepage" to be changed to "cover/dustjacket" rather than another change. Herostratus ( talk) 14:01, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
A new user found this wizard helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edwardj 123 ( talk • contribs) 17:19, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Its very helpfu. Mohammad Mohiuddin Hasnat ( talk) 19:32, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Quite useful Jp creation ( talk) 09:05, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
I've never uploaded a photo before, but I've done three today--very easy, no trouble. Also, I really appreciated the template for adding the photos to articles, which I promptly did. N'Awlins Contrarian 02:48, 3 February 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by N'Awlins Contrarian ( talk • contribs)
my self shivshyam mishra s/o shreeram mishra from allahabad uttar pradesh, india — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shivshyam pandit ( talk • contribs) 11:41, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
I just want to say thanks for letting the file upload process be more seamless; I had to upload a book cover the other day, ( File:Warriors, The Sight, Second edition cover.jpg), and it helped me through the copyright and fair use process better than I would've done myself. (I probably would have screwed up somewhere.) Anyway, thanks! – Ben79487 ( talk contribs) 02:28, 12 February 2019 (UTC) www.interwork.com/
This
edit request to
Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please prepend <noinclude>{{pp-template|small=yes}}</noinclude>
to the start of the page. It is currently template-protected (see
the protection log) but the page is not currently tagged as such. Thanks, --
DannyS712 (
talk) 06:10, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
I am trying to upload images, but I currently am not able to because the link only reloads this page Erfson ( talk) 20:54, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
👌🏼 Nooneknowsme12 ( talk) 02:43, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
me too Urania 13:21, 21 December 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angiel ( talk • contribs)
I am clicking the upload wizard link but nothing is happening Redeem7 ( talk) 00:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
I am trying to upload images, but I currently am not able Bharatkumarmahto ( talk) 15:55, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
I am clicking the upload wizard link but nothing is happening Bharatkumarmahto ( talk) 15:56, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
I am clicking on the upload link but nothing is happening Agnas Anil ( talk) 17:37, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
You have to click the Desktop site button at the bottom of the page to work Islameditor47 ( talk) 15:41, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
Nothing is working for me WikiWiki5678 ( talk) 17:39, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
I found out a way to do so. Mobile users, click on the "Desktop" button at the bottom of the page. Then the page will reload. Once reloaded click the "Click here to start the Upload Wizard" button again. You should be able to see a new page and not a reload. Islameditor47 ( talk) 11:10, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
How to upload মোঃ চঞ্চল মাহামুদ ভারুয়া ( talk) 23:48, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
How to upload মোঃ চঞ্চল মাহামুদ ভারুয়া ( talk) 23:49, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
ဖိုင္မ်ား
Nice Fagmmmu ( talk) 01:05, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
how অভিজিৎ চক্রবর্ত্তী ( talk) 21:39, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Is it possible to add more FURs like Template:Non-free use rationale poster and Template:Non-free use rationale video cover to this page? -- Kailash29792 (talk) 11:58, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Is it possible to add more FURs like Template:Non-free use rationale poster and Template:Non-free use rationale video cover to this page? -- Kailash29792 (talk) 11:58, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Is it possible to add more FURs like Template:Non-free use rationale poster and Template:Non-free use rationale video cover to this page? -- Kailash29792 (talk) 11:58, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
I believe that the file File:Traci Lords signature.png should belong to the Common.-- NeoBatfreak ( talk) 06:16, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
I have been having the odd issue with editors that see the empty "n.a." fields that are no wholly required to meet NFC complain that these have to be filled in to meet NFC. I have tried pointing them to past discussions here where its been agreed those are not mandatory fields and the "n.a."s are fine.
I think it might be helpful that on the upload, if this wizard could spit out an additional line after the rational tables along the lines "This rationale was generated through the Upload Wizard, which by design may leave some fields as unfilled but otherwise meets the minimum requirements for NFC. If you make any edits to this rationale, please remove this text." This would make it clear that we broadly do not have problems with missing "n.a." fields that are generated by the Upload Wizard, but as soon as you make any rationale changes, you should try to complete those better. -- Masem ( t) 23:05, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
The wizard uploaded the file, but lost my rationale. See Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 69#Can't find rationale I typed up. HLHJ ( talk) 03:24, 30 September 2019 (UTC)