User talk:DatBot

I can't explain this edit, which removed a necessary closing brace. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:18, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just my two cents, but this bot makes comparison pictures like [1] practically and functionally worthless. Might as well just delete at that point. Haruyasha (talk) 22:57, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Haruyasha I join you, even while your message was older than 1 year. I think the original resolution was good. I think someone should solve these problems. (Addition: Looks like Template:Non-free no reduce is suitable for you.) RuzDD (talk) 14:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone able to fix File:Goddess of Commerce, Tacoma, Washington.jpg? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:46, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear DatBot,

Size reduction of this report image makes it illegible. The image supports and illustrates the article Trinity_(nuclear_test)#Energy_measurements where this unclassified eyewitness report by famous physicist Enrico Fermi already was quoted long before

About 40 seconds after the explosion the air blast reached me....would be produced by ten thousand tons of T.N.T.

Readers can verify the whole report by themselves if the original image is retained. So

• Could you please restore this image to legible size? Then it makes more sense as proof and illustration.

Thank you, the uploader of this report image, Hansmuller (talk) 07:26, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone rename File:RB Leipzig 2014 logo.svg to File:RB Leipzig logo (2020).svg? This file must be renamed. This file has been in use since 2020, not 2014. Therefore, it is appropriate that the file name should be 'RB Leipzig logo (2020)'. For the 2014 version file, it is an image with two lines of edge, which is different from this one. User:Everish 11:11, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is anyone able to fix File:Bust of Jean Baptiste Point du Sable, Chicago.jpg? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:03, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:53, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you fix the problem? File:SaptaSaagaradaache.jpg please fix it. ᵃʳᵘⁿ (talk) 06:41, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone able to fix File:Children's Fountain, Chicago.jpg? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:53, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:49, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone able to fix File:Chevron sculpture, Chicago.jpg, please? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:59, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Another Believer: I'm not sure what it is with your phone that sticks the orientation tag, but this should be fixed from now on. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 01:33, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:41, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please delete the older version of the image transparent with your bot? Because I've undone this transparent image logo Vietnamese cite as they are new uploads.

• File:Logo TP. Ninh Bình.svg
• File:Logo TP. Hải Dương.svg
• File:Logo thành phố Bảo Lộc.svg
• File:Logo TP. Bắc Ninh.svg
• File:Logo Da Lat City.svg

Bonthefox3 (talk) 05:10, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

please ArmenAir (talk) 10:02, 18 December 2023 (UTC

On January 3, 2024, Datbot uploaded a reduced-size version of the image. I am requesting that the previous version of the labelled file be permanently reinstated on the basis that the extensive labelling on this image already serves as a watermark, i.e. the labelling already prevents use of the unlabelled image because the labelling is permanent and cannot be removed according to the following statement extracted from Apple Support ( https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/preview/prvw1501/mac ): "Note: If you annotate an image file, you can’t edit, move, or delete the annotations after you save the image.”

Additionally, I had already reduced the size of the original Google Maps’ screenshot from 5.7 MB to 1.87 MB, a reduction of about one third.

Fulfilling this request will help make “Wikipedia the best that it can be”. Robert Neustadter (talk) 19:26, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, in the reduced-size image, Google's credits on the bottom of the Google Map image are illegible. Legible credits are mandatory (see https://about.google/brand-resource-center/products-and-services/geo-guidelines/#required-attribution ) in order to credit Google and the many third-party data providers that contributed to this image. Robert Neustadter (talk) 20:38, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong on Wikipedia. 92.40.192.162 (talk) 17:07, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Acrobat_(novel).jpeg 265 × 425 (22 KB) gets resized to 249 × 400 (77 KB). How does resizing it make it take up more space? Dream Focus 23:26, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dream Focus Looks like it's using the same JPEG quality for all files, without looking the original quality. For example, if you exported it with the quality of 20%, it can be using 50% so the space is wasting for no reason. And that shows robots cannot do tasks as good as humans. I think bots should not go into file processes unless they have a artificial intelligence engine, because for example this bot will not downgrade the quality enough for a very basic file while it will downgrade the quality too very much for very detailed images for example a screenshot of a computer program. RuzDD (talk) 13:17, 7 February 2024 (UTC).[reply]

I recently uploaded File:World of Horror screenshot.jpg and didn't resize it, but the DatBot autoresize ended up butchering/compressing much of the legibility of the interface due to the way the game is laid out surrounded by borders along with the small icons, so I ended up resizing it myself in a slightly different way that produced a sharper result with a slightly larger resolution (by which I mean, only 450 × 253 compared to 421 × 237), which ironically produced a smaller filesize, only for the bot to "fix" that by shrinking it down and re-obscuring the image, which makes it significantly blurier in addition to being smaller. Totalibe (talk) 19:41, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Totalibe That's a huge example of this fact: robots cannot do tasks as good as humans. RuzDD (talk) 13:19, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Iostn correct pinging. RuzDD (talk) 13:23, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please resize Derek Chisora’s new image? If possible to 570 × 713 (585 KB)? Thank you. LRQ 98 (talk) 10:28, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've created an userbox template TGGC member and used with one of your (non-)free images, Turkish GGC emblem. Is it usable? Kys5g (talk) 07:48, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have uploaded File:Three Little Pigs - Fuller Brush Man 1933 and 1948.png to illustrate the difference between the original 1933 release and the modified 1948 release. I was careful to size this image so that neither frame exceeds 320x240 pixels; however, because there are two frames in it, the total image size is approximately 650 pixels wide and is slightly more than 0.1 megapixels. I think that this should suffice to meet the non-free media guidelines, but DatBot keeps resizing it. Is it possible to exclude this file from DatBot? —Tim Pierce (talk) 17:02, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on File:Mickey, Donald, Goofy - The Three Musketeers poster.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

some reason

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Travis Jaico R (talk) 20:42, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The film From Morn to Midnight is in the public domain, both in the US and its native Germany. Therefore, stills from the film can be safely transferred to Wikimedia Commons. Since I don't have permission, can you move these files? OGPawlis (talk) 12:24, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done, belatedly. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 18:56, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a weblink where users can downsize a larger image to about 267 × 374? Cosmic2992 (talk) 23:16, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cosmic2992: I'm sure there is, but I personally use Photoshop for images and InkScape for SVGs. I've found online resizers introduce compression. You may have better luck in the question desks, although I'm not quite sure which is the appropriate one for the question. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 18:56, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Derek Merrin, 135th General Assembly, Ohio.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file's talk page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 21:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DatGuy: could you please check? There have been no updates to User:DatBot/newpagesbacklog since 29 September. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 15:05, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Thanks. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:23, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DatGuy: When DatBot makes a report to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism/TB2, it is doubling namespace when populating the |page= parameter of {{False positive other}}. For example, in Special:Diff/1255999182 and Special:Diff/1255985640 where it started the page name with User:User:. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:06, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should be resolved. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 20:31, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DatBot Hello, The bot appears to have put {{Orphaned non-free revisions}} in my non orphaned image see here. I have reverted his edits. Nedia Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 00:45, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Nedia020415: the tag is not for the image, but rather for a specific revision. The image has a previous oversized revision in the file history which should be deleted, but not the image itself.

Hi DatBot. This edit, destined for the talk page, and probably not intended behaviour. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 00:42, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, there's a check to resolve redirects intended for renames targets. I've made it skip messages that aren't in the user talk namespace. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 21:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your instructions above say

Images that are uploaded on individual Wikipedias rather than Commons are non-free. One of the criteria is 'minimal usage', which in part includes that images should be rescaled as small as possible to still be useful as identified by their rationale, and no larger. Currently, that number stands at 100000 pixels, or 0.1 megapixels... For further information on the image resolution guideline, see Wikipedia:Non-free content#Image resolution.

But what that guideline says in full is (emphasis added):

There is no firm guideline on allowable resolutions for non-free content; images should be rescaled as small as possible to still be useful as identified by their rationale, and no larger. This metric is very qualitative, and thus difficult to enforce. Some legal proceedings have discussed the issue, but are inconclusive here. At the low pixel count end of the range, most common pictorial needs can be met with an image containing no more than about 100,000 pixels (0.1 megapixels), obtained by multiplying the horizontal and vertical pixel dimensions of an image.

I think you should rewrite your instructions to make it clearer that your bot is not enforcing a mandated and rigidly-defined metric.  — Hex • talk 11:32, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to part of your concerns after being notified you started a simultaneous grievance on the Wikipedia Discord server, and I'll respond to the rest (along with [2]) here: I've added some ambiguity to the messagebox, as well as a line that the file size is not a major concern. Your emphasis is already indicated in the various conditionals in the messagebox. If you're confused about them, it adheres to RFC 2119. Additionally, as no detail was lost in the resizing and the image conveys the same information with the lower resolution, I find the reversion inappropriate. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 11:19, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DatGuy Now that thumbnails come in discrete sizes (see Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Tech News: 2025-16), we end up in a situation where film posters are getting reduced to somewhere between 254px and 260px wide (depending on where their aspect ratio falls on the 1.481:1 to 1.545:1 scale) and then resized again by the thumbnail processor to a slightly different size, resulting in an unnecessary loss in image quality and sharpness. I'd recommend that the bot detect if the final image width is going to be +/- 5% of one of the new thumbnail widths (20, 40, 60, 120, 250, 330, 500, 960), and, if so, "snap" the width to that value instead. Therefore, a 2:3 image that would be 258x387 with the current code would be 250x375 and not get double-rescaled, as would a square image that would be 316x316 with the current code and could be 330x330 instead (increasing the margin to 10% would allow a 3:4 image that would be 273x363 to be 250x333, but that may be too small). --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 21:08, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is this relevant only for the width of the image, or the height too? Additionally, are the sizes mentioned here (and in mw:Help:Images#Thumbnail sizes) the current variables in use by the wiki, or the defaults? DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 21:18, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, if possible could you put project banners inside the banner shell (example)? Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:49, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should be resolved. I also removed the |class=File parameter because it seems WPBS does it automatically now. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 12:31, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. Yes it does — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:19, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This one wasn't put inside the shell ... — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:23, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Heya--could you as an expert give this a once over? I even had GPT run through my math several times to double check for ffmpeg and unless reality itself is off-kilter, this should be 1000% compliant now for fair use. But I want to make sure. It's exactly 0.09999 mp.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Saru,_Star_Trek_Discovery_%E2%80%93_signature_walk_gait_from_hoof_boot_design.gif

Thanks for your time and work! -- Very Polite Person (talk) 01:31, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DatGuy (just pinging in case I'm supposed to! I'm not sure.). -- Very Polite Person (talk) 01:33, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Very Polite Person: it is just under 0.1 MP. Re whether it meets the contextual significance requirement, I'm not a frequenter of FFD, but I'd say it should be fine. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 12:31, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Five World Trade Center Proposed Design.jpeg File:Bionic Tower rendering.jpg File:Tower M architectural rendering.jpg File:Chicago Spire.jpg File:X-seed4000.jpg File:Kingdom Tower, Jeddah, render 2.jpg File:Nakheel Tower.jpg File:Shimizu Mega-City Pyramid concept from Extreme Engineering.gif File:Burj Al Alam.jpg File:skycity1000 01.jpg File:Azerbaijan Tower.jpg 90.168.204.255 (talk) 15:31, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I have put in more than 10 references but I see over time they were removed/edited out by various other editors/bots. I will try to add them- if I can find them. Please can you remove the proposed deletion notice for now? I am currently traveling and may need to get back in front of my computer once home to try and figure things out. Thank you for your help. . Lsmithcoops (talk) 10:21, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, could you possibly please upload a new version of this logo at this following link? https://mmo.aiircdn.com/1478/6824d86792c05.png

https://1878-66bcc8974a818.radiocms.com/player/cfjr-104-9-fm/

This logo is for a radio station, CFJR-FM in Brockville, Ontario, Canada.

Thanks! :-) Scorpy43B (talk) 04:20, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of the most helpful bots on the site. I would like to see more bots like this, particularly when it comes to copyediting. It would be great if we could flag articles for copyediting (spelling, grammar, dashes, etc.) and have a bot like this show up. Viriditas (talk) 00:20, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In the case of blocked users, it might not be a good idea to notify blocked users that their files/images have been nominated for a deletion discussion. Often this can encourage undesirable behavior (socking, talk page nonsense, etc). It appears policy does not require them to be notified, only option of any user, but since a blocked user cannot even participate in the discussion it just might be contributing to talk page noise. TiggerJay (talk) 01:42, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DatBot,

Can you Please add this Poster named "2024 NPL Final poster" from Instagram to 2024 Nepal Premier League final Wikipedia page as you added File:2024 IPL Final poster.jpg in 2024 Indian Premier League final.

Here is the summary of the 2024 NPL Final poster

Description: This is a poster for 2024 Nepal Premier League final. The poster art copyright is believed to belong to Cricket Association of Nepal.

Source : NPLT20 on Instagram

Article: 2024 Nepal Premier League

Thank you 2400:74E0:0:E25B:28E9:88BA:634:C418 (talk) 13:22, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DatGuy: Not sure how to describe the problem, so I'll just give you the diff of the bot malfunction. In addition to posting a PROD notification, it also reposted Cabayi's message about WP:KEEPDECLINEDUNBLOCK... many times. There are other diffs of the bug in Special:PageHistory/User talk:Raymarcbadz. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:30, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@HouseBlaster: very interesting, seems like a Parsoid bug. You can see it happening with edits in the history that use an automated tool, i.e. the Reply tool. DanCherek even chastised Raymarcbadz for doing it. I've filed a Phabricator task, T403925. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 21:40, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi — just documenting a case that reveals a logic mismatch between bot behavior and template expectations.

The file File:Marcus Eli Ravage c.1960 low-res.jpg was manually uploaded in reduced form (300×378 px, 33 KB) with no prior revisions. Nonetheless, JJMC89bot added `{{Non-free image reduction}}` on 18 October 2025, likely triggered by structural cues rather than actual image size.

To suppress redundant tagging, I added `{{Non-free reduced|300×378 px}}`. However, this triggered a phantom “Error: Invalid time” message — even though `{{Orphaned non-free revisions}}` was not present in the source. This suggests that subtemplate logic or maintenance scripts are activating orphaned-revision checks based solely on the presence of `{{Non-free reduced}}`, without verifying actual revision history.

On 19 October 2025, DatBot uploaded a new version of the file (281×354 px, 62 KB) and immediately added `{{Orphaned non-free revisions}}`. This created a revision history that did not exist before — meaning the orphaned-revision tag is now technically valid, but only because a bot itself created the orphaned revision.

This sequence reveals a structural flaw: - There is no clean way to signal “already reduced, no prior revisions” without triggering misleading cleanup logic. - Bot-driven “reductions” can paradoxically increase file size. - `{{Non-free no reduce}}` would be semantically misleading in this case, as the image *was* reduced — proactively, before upload.

I’m documenting this here in case template logic or bot behavior can be refined to better handle clean uploads and avoid false-positive tagging.

Thanks for your work, and happy to clarify further if helpful. Tartigradesinspace (talk) 03:02, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Tartigradesinspace: {{Non-free reduced}} isn't used in that manner, it's used to indicate that it was previously too large, has been resized to fit the minimal use criterion, and the unused revisions should now be deleted. In fact, {{Non-free reduced}} is a redirect (alias) to {{Orphaned non-free revisions}}. The revisions in this case are referring to previous file versions, not edit history. Typically non-free images are resized to contain no more than 100,000 pixels. The bot permits a 5% margin of error, but anything larger is scaled down. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 22:54, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Starry~~(Starlet147) 22:45, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from [[Fifth Kazakh-Dzungar Wars]], which you proposed for deletion. I object to this deletion as i improved the page with replacing the old copy pasted material with original wording, sentence structure & while all citations and links are the same to the original one to support the actions or battles on the war. This now meets Wikipedia's originality standards. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Regards, Khan of the Universe and Hoofed animals HorseBro the hemionus (talk) 09:47, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The old photo of the logo is on the CKWR-FM page.

Please use this image https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b1/Logo_as_of_Fall_2025.webp Thisisdjjd93 (talk) 22:15, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Short Solent 3 - G-AKNU Sydney - Aquila Airways - Funchal.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file's talk page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Alx 91 (talk) 04:36, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]