User talk:Feldmahler/archive3


Encrypted Files

Hi, user Johnnyb76 already mentioned it: there a several encrypted files (Alkan...and maybe some others, too) which can not be printed out. I think all files at IMSLP should be printable, because most of the users want to download files in ordner to print them out, normally. If the work is in public domain according to law and doesn't contain any trademarks / logos, this should be possible. The scan work itself or the search for scores in library (even if it's a bit hard sometimes :)....) is no reason to claim copyright. It's no problem to remove the encryption, I already tried it. Shouldn't we check the uploaded files here on IMSLP and make them printable or at least put a hint to the submission guidelines!? What do you think? Hobbypianist 02:39, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

I had intended to put up a guide for this, but was very busy today, so forgot to do it... I'll put something up tomorrow :) --Feldmahler 03:04, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

French numbers

I apologize if I did something out of line with regards to the resorting using the French numbers. My feeling is that if a piece by an English-speaking composer were titled "Ten Pieces for Piano" it would be sorted under T, not P, and using the same logic, if a French piece is called "Dix pièces pour piano" it should be under D. Just wanted to explain my thought process, if that's not how you want things done here then by all means change it back, I was just trying to clean things up a bit -- love this site, keep up the good work! Massenetique 11:46, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

Linking across projects

Hi Feldmahler, I was thinking that it might be useful to have a page on IMSLP dedicated to linking across projects. It could be used for:

  • info on linking from Wikipedia to IMSLP: description of existing templates in various languages and their usage
  • discussion on linking to Wikipedia: currently most links point to en.wikipedia; it might be useful to find a solution such that e.g. Italian users get a link to it.wikipedia (if available)
  • discussion on possible links between IMSLP and CPDL: this should be coordinated with the CPDL people, but I think it would be great to link from IMSLP composer categories to CPDL composer pages, and back
  • possibliy other...

If preferred, we can obviously discuss in the forum instead and use the proposed page only to note the results. What do you think? If you like the idea, what would we call it: IMSLP:Linking across projects?

Nice... if you have time you can start this page (yes the title is fine) :) I'll add what I know to the page. About CPDL, I think it is a great idea! I'll ask them about this soon. This should be beneficial to both CPDL and IMSLP.
Insofar as Wikipedia is concerned, there is actually some discussion on the Italian Wikipedia [1] about the interwiki links... unfortunately, the application for an interwiki link has troubles with naming, which I hope to fix soon :)
Wow, how did you know about the Italian discussion? I had already forgotten about that one... Anyway, I have started some brainstorming: IMSLP:Linking across projects
It had shown up before in the logs (as a referrer). :) --Feldmahler 13:54, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
I'm an admin at CPDL, and it appears sensible to me to setup templates to allow (almost) automated linkage between the two sites, as well as each site adding the other under interwiki links. One problem with doing this completely automatically is that by and large we've specified composer names naturally (e.g. Ludwig van Beethoven) rather than surname first – as it is evident from unusual names that Wiki editors by and large don't know how to distinguish which bit of the surname actually is the surname. I suggest you interwiki link CPDL as something like [[cpdl://<blah>]] and we likewise make interwiki link format [[imslp://<blah>]]. Regards -- Philip Legge @ © Φ 01:41, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

By the way, I think the Composer Category Layout Transformer can be removed now (or maybe moved to the IMSLP history museum :)). As far as I can tell, there are only two old style composer category pages left: Category:Iliev, Grigor and Category:Sellers, James-Michael Morgan, both of which have a biographical text in english only, so it seemed pointless to me to internationalize them. --Leonard Vertighel 05:24, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Done! Thanks for helping with the transform btw :) --Feldmahler 11:44, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
Not worth mentioning. I'm just having fun "spamming" Wikipedia with IMSLP links (first only Italian, then I went ahead even with languages I don't understand, including Japanese :)), and while I was navigating through the category pages, I fixed what needed to be fixed :) --Leonard Vertighel 13:30, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
Hehe... sounds like your the IMSLP's ambassador to Wikipedia ;) Nice! --Feldmahler 13:54, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

If you/IMSLP and Philip/the CPDL people agree, we can just go ahead and start linking manually between IMSLP and CPDL. We just need to specify how, then I can sign up at CPDL and help with linking (bit by bit, after all we're in no hurry, are we?). I don't know if you have any new insights, but I'm afraid that trying to automate the process might actually be more complicated than doing it by hand. Anyway, just to let you know that I'm ready to help... --Leonard Vertighel 13:49, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

I'd agree that it might be even more trouble to automate it (if that is possible at all) than to just manually do it. I'll change the composer category now and you can start manually linking the two wikis whenever you want :) --Feldmahler 16:25, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
Perfect. I'll just wait to know how to make the links in CPDL, and then I'll start ASAP ;) --Leonard Vertighel 16:56, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

Padre Antonio Soler's Sonatas

Hi boss, I'm submiting the whole work of this spanish composer from, where they state that they are submiting these works as Public Domain (see here ). Now, I've started uploading the first ten, but suddenly I realised that it was better to put them in groups of 10 as they total output of Soler's sonatas is 120! and it would be quiet annoying to have 120 entries for the "S". So, I don't know how to erase the first articles I've created (Sonata No. 1 to Sonata No. 10). Let me know if you are OK with grouping them... I will continue uploading the rest of Soler's works in sets of 10 sonatas. cheers / nachoBA

Grouping them is a very good idea :) I'll delete the articles you don't need. --Feldmahler 15:34, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Boss let me know if you think it's OK to continue uploading the remaining 50 sonatas I await your orders ;).

We'll wait for a day and see if Peter has any further suggestions or comments... and if everything is fine (there are no objections), you can submit the remaining files the day after tomorrow :)
I agree, let's wait for Peter's comments. Cheers.
Boss, let me know when do you think we're clear to upload the rest of Soler's works. Cheers /nachoBA
I think now is fine, since Peter hasn't said anything :) Plus I think it's rather obvious anyway... though, it might be a good idea to put this in the "Misc. Notes" section of the file entries (you can just copy and paste it in):
In the public domain according to [ this].
Just to prevent any misunderstandings :) --Feldmahler 13:02, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
Ready boss, now IMSLP has 99% of Soler's keyboard works (There's only one two keyboard concerto missing). I've also added your suggestion to the previously uploaded sonatas. Cheers / nachoBA

composer name change

Hello, NachoBa messaged me about mixing up the first names and surnames of Theodore Dubois and Emmanuel Maurice. Instead of messing it up, I would ask you how to change composers nice and neat? cheers, Peter 18:45, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Actually, I've reworked the work page template so that the composer name is gotten straight from the page title, which means the only thing you have to do is move the page, and the composer category will change on its own :) --Feldmahler 18:54, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
Also... I think I've fixed it already... :) --Feldmahler 19:01, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Have you seen?

Have you seen my S.206? :) --Funper 12:42, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

Hmm... I can't seem to find it... do you mean a work page or an image file? Though I can't even find it in the unused images section... weird. What happened with S.206? --Feldmahler 16:25, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
Ohh haha, No.. S.206 is the "opus" for Trauervorspiel und Trauermarsch (if you haven't heard it, here is a midi). No, I just wanted to know if you had seen that particular piece. I have looked everywere for it, DC-hubs, google, but I just can't find it. Do you know where I could look? I could buy the piece ofcoarse, but that is just a waste of money (its PD and it should be free, right?) --Funper 16:40, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

Link to help page

Hi Feldmahler, is it possible to link 'Hilfe' in the box on the left of 'Hauptseite' (German Main Page) to the german help page Hilfe ? ...I just finished translating it :) Hobbypianist 17:12, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

I'll do this shortly... currently fixing another issue :) --Feldmahler 20:21, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
And done! :) --Feldmahler 21:28, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

Correction on Beethoven

Boss, the WoO on Nine variations for piano on 'Quant'e piu bello' from Giovanni Paisiello's opera La Molinara, WoO 70 should be 69 and not 70. Sorry for that. Cheers / nachoBA

I see Funper already beat me to fixing it :) Funny thing is that Funper moved the page about 2-3 seconds before I clicked the move button haha --Feldmahler 18:07, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

Molly on the Shore/US Server uploaded

Hey there,

Just wanted to let you know that I've (finally!) scanned Molly on the Shore and uploaded the files to the appropriate spots, so there's a file on US_server_uploaded_request. Thanks! --Emeraldimp 03:48, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

Fixed :) You'll need to adjust the file size though... --Feldmahler 03:50, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

Pieces on a page?

I have a really simple question... What is the maximum of pieces in a workpage? 30? 40? or even 50? --Funper 20:00, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

The hard limit would be 15, but the recommended number of pieces is 10. This is for relatively substantial (in length) pieces, very short pieces (like the Bach Chorales BWV 250-438) is another matter. The point of the 10 piece limit is more to control the number of files on that page (to keep it within 20), rather than anything else; this is also why the Bach Chorales are done differently (all of them are on one page), since the actual number of files is not that many. --Feldmahler 20:21, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
Huh... but I already have 19 pieces on Hungarian Rhapsodies... And I'm planing to upload an additional complete edition.. BUT I WON'T SPLIT THE ARTICLE! NEVER! But you say that the limit is only there to have control of the files, if I found an alternative way to keep that control, would I be able to upload as many files as I want on the same workpage?
I will show you what I mean, let me just upload the files first... --Funper 10:42, 5 April 2007 (EDT)
I am done, here. --Funper 18:39, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
Hmm... this is fine navigation-wise. I'd accept it for that page, though generally it's still a good idea to break up long pages into smaller ones if possible (but not too small, or else there'd be too much on the composer page). The reason is that each edit is very costly with a large page; the entire page has to be saved.
IMSLP has already grown so much over the last 2 months that what originally was a rather non-busy server (for the lack of a better phrase), has become an extremely busy server at peak times (the load sometimes hovers around 2 for the 15min interval measurement). And so I've been thinking of ways to lighten the load on the server... I know that splitting pages doesn't matter all *that* much, but still... and of course the other thing is to hold back saving edits of large pages if you know your going to edit it again.
Anyway, it is fine for that page :) --Feldmahler 19:11, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
No it is only that I am very keen on Liszt, e.g. all the Hungarian Rhapsodies should be uploaded as S.244 since they are catalouged with that number. But I think that the page is overcrowded... I will work out another way to list the rapsodies later, in a more bandwith-friendly way. Now, it is 02:14 am and i want to sleep. --Funper 20:13, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
Oh before I sleep, how about the songs I uploaded on Liszt? I think it whould be nice with a subcategory (as you mentioned in some posts above this) since the songs take to much space on the category. --Funper 20:16, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
You mean category intersections? I.e. [2]? --Feldmahler 20:32, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
No, under "subcategories" [[3]] --Funper 20:44, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
That would be category intersections (look at the source of the Schubert page) :) --Feldmahler 21:07, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
Ooow..! I am going to make those intersections for Liszt! How do I do? --Funper 21:10, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
Look at the last three entries in the Schubert sub-categories; should be self explanatory :) (use the {{Intersect}} template) --Feldmahler 21:18, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
Heworika (or how you spell it)! I know how to solve our issue with the overcrowding on Hungarian Rhapsodies. I will show you later... --Funper 16:06, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
I have done a testpage. My thought was to have a main article and then, placing something like section 4 on top of it. As you might noticed, I have placed a modified description template in the testpage, otherwise there will be an overcrowded category page with hungarian rhapsodies going 'loose'. This will also solve any bandwidth problems. What do you think? --Funper 20:58, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
Hmm... I'd rather no "special" description templates be put on the page, because it is a pain to maintain (and removes all the translations too), and breaks automated scripts. Another way is to just have all of them on separate workpages, and use category intersection to single them out if necessary; you can add an ad-hoc category to each of the Hungarian Rhapsody pages, and intersect the Liszt category with it (thus producing only a list of Hungarian Rhapsodies). I know this is also not ideal, but unfortunately I don't think there is an ideal solution for this situation. It is just that I'd like to keep the pages as standardized as possible, so that I can process them with scripts if necessary (I'm going to be forced to do this soon). I'd rather sacrifice the bandwidth (which is really not a lot) and storage space for the all-in-one page than have custom pages... Nice try though :) --Feldmahler 22:37, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
Well I am done now, as you can see in the category it is rather full with 200+ pieces.. You know, this is what I thought of subcategories, as on wikipedia. --Funper 16:06, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

Empty work pages

Hi again Feldmahler, I was wondering if it would be better to delete empty workpages and composer categories after a while (maybe after a week or so). For example, Category:Flecha (el viejo), Mateo contains only an empty workpage. I believe that this could be quite disappointing for visitors looking for works of this specific composer. I have seen other instances, but I forgot to note them.

I there an easy method to find empty workpages/categories? Should they be listed somewhere/tagged for deletion when accidentally stumbling across them? --Leonard Vertighel 12:10, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

Well... there isn't really an easy way to automate it, unless a rather large hack is done. I agree that empty work pages and categories should be deleted, and I'm going to delete it now :) I'm actually looking for another moderator/admin who would keep a lookout for such things... would you be interested? --Feldmahler 12:35, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
Humm... I think I could do it, at least for this year or so. I have been admin at it.wikipedia for a while, until I had to stop because of exam preparations. Then I never volunteered again, because of ... a certain change of climate (basically people blaming everything they didn't like on the admins. Including the weather). But I suppose the IMSLP community will never grow that big (being far more specialised), and smaller communities tend to be friendlier. So, for how long should empty pages/categories be left, a week? --Leonard Vertighel 13:31, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

PS: Have you heard from Philip (CPDL) recently? He hasn't replied to my question yet. Still waiting to start crosslinking... :)

Well, I haven't personally heard from him... I guess he might be busy? And maybe it is a nice idea to bring this up on the CPDL forums? :) --Feldmahler 12:35, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
You know what? That sounds like a clever idea. Should have thought of that myself, huh? --Leonard Vertighel 13:31, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

Do we have some template to remind users about empty categories and work pages which they have created (so one doesn't need to type the same things over and over again)? And if not, can I make one, and should I respect a particular naming scheme for templates of this kind? --Leonard Vertighel 05:37, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

And by the way, shouldn't we move all non-work-pages (or at least those that are not music related) like e.g. Optimizing PDF Compression to the IMSLP: namespace? --Leonard Vertighel 06:13, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

Yup, this is a good idea. About the empty composers and work pages, you can edit the {{MsgWelcome}} template to include something about this. Or, you can edit this page: IMSLP:Special:AddComposer/MainText... maybe that's more effective? :) I'll add a page like that for the Add Works special page right now. --Feldmahler 22:37, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

Unused images

Hi again and sorry for bothering you non-stop: if I'm not mistaken, this seems to imply that there is a lot of work to be done: 416 unused files, among which some 130 PDFs that likely need to be added to some work page (or possibly deleted, if they are duplicates/copyrighted/whatever), is that right? I could try to help a little, but I'm not much of an expert, so I don't know how far I can get... (I could notify the uploaders, however.) --Leonard Vertighel 08:44, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

This has indeed been on my mind for a while... my original plan was to do a "spring (or summer) cleaning" when I get the free time. But it'd be nice if you could do a little bit of it from time to time (you don't have to clean out everything at once or anything). You'll have to first check whether the file is actually necessary or not... there are times when another version of the file has already been submitted to IMSLP by the uploader, and that the unused version is simply broken or a duplicate. If that is the case you can just delete it without having to notify the uploader. Otherwise, it might be a good idea to create a template, and use it on the user talk pages. Most of the unused files seem to be in copyright (either because of the CDSM logo or just simply copyright status), so you can just delete them, and notify the user on his/her talk page. If your unsure, just leave them and I'll deal with them later :)
Also, leave the unused PNG/JPGs alone since they are actually being used for thumbnails/previews (don't know why they show up as unused images...) --Feldmahler 11:26, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

About the copyrighted ones, I'm a bit wary of deleting them, lest I make some mistake (wasn't there also a method of fixing the CDSM stuff by removing the logo? But if you want me to delete those, I can do it, since this is a clear case with no risk of mistakes). Is it of some use if I put a FilenotPD on the files that I suppose to be copyrighted, so that someone with more experience can review them? --Leonard Vertighel 13:36, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

For example, is there a reason why you have deleted only one file of those by Arguncakir? Should I delete all the rest as well? --Leonard Vertighel 13:43, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

Actually, I was thinking along the same lines you (i.e. leave it there so the CDSM logo issue can be fixed later), but I now think it is a good idea to just remove the CDSM scores, to be on the safe side. I've already been doing this with new submissions, so it probably should also be done with orphaned images. For the copyright review issue, there is a template {{CopyrightReview}} which does exactly this :) --Feldmahler 14:15, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
All right, I'll delete the CDSM stuff. For the rest, I've tagged some stuff as you said. Probably I'm to cautious; but I think that once I've gathered a little experience, I'll take more decisions by myself. For the reviewers, it is sufficient to tell me to delete e.g. all the files that I have tagged up to a certain point in time, I'll take care of the deletions then. --Leonard Vertighel 14:56, 7 April 2007 (EDT)


What's that? 2 German Dances D. 769 (Schubert, Franz), Violin Sonata No. 3, Op. 128 (Raff, Joseph Joachim), Minuet in D Major (Schubert, Franz) (sorry for being such a pain in the neck today - anyway, it's late here, going to sleep now ;))--Leonard Vertighel 16:35, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

Hehe... I'd _expect_ a new admin to ask many questions ;) About the MYSQLFETCHERROR, it indicates that the file is not in the IMSLP index database. The file is entered into the database only when it is submitted via the add file/add multiple file page; failing to do this results in MYSQLFETCHERROR. Usually the reason can be found looking at the page history. It should be because of someone hand editing the "File Name=" or "Index Number=" line; if it is not, then it is a bug and you should report it to me. To fix this error, just resubmit the file, and delete the new file entry; the old entry should work after that :) If there are too many of them I can write an extension to allow admins to manually add the file to the database, but I don't think that'd be really needed at this point... --Feldmahler 17:26, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

Just a minor glitch: here I have resubmitted the file by entering the name with underscores (copied from link URL), and the index still appeared broken. To fix it, I had to change the file name in the work page to use underscores instead of spaces as well. It would probably be better if underscores and spaces were recognized as equivalent (as it is the case for page titles/file names). --Leonard Vertighel 05:25, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

Actually, I cannot fix this problem yet :/ This is because there are duplicates within the indexing system because of some issues at the early months of IMSLP.
At first, the indexing system just recorded the file name entered verbatim, and so someone could submit a filename with spaces, and later with underscores, and they would have two different catalog numbers even though both are the same file. Later, I fixed this issue by doing a replace on submission; but this didn't correct problems with previous indexes, and indeed may have contributed slightly to duplicate submissions within the index.
Unfortunately, I cannot do a replace-on-lookup because that'd break the indexes which only have the file name without underscores. However, this will be fixed when I implement the new indexing and imaging system, since the index will be associated with the internal image id and not the actual filename. So for now, just make it work somehow :) --Feldmahler 06:06, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

.sib files and popups

Since you expect me to ask lots of questions, here's the next: What to do with orphaned .sib files and the like?

They should be treated like PDFs :) The only major issue is that all .SIB files are retypesetted, and so there might be copyright issues, but otherwise it is the same as PDFs and the others.

Like Image:Rimsky-Korsakov Sinfonietta on Russian Themes-Mvt1-allegretto.sib - should it go somehow on the (currently empty) workpage Sinfonietta on Russian Themes (Rimsky-Korsakov, Nikolai)?

Unless the file itself contains all attribution and copyright information, it is better to delete the empty workpage and file, and leave a note on the user talk page. This treatment is for retypesets only, because most of the time a copyright review is impossible.
Right, but it seems that I can't read them on my Linux box. Should I tag them for copyright review so that a Win/Mac user can check? And would it not be a good idea to always add a PDF version, which would be, as the name suggests, more portable (currently this seems to be suggested due to some version compatibility issues, but as you see that's not the only problem)? Should we set up a page with requests for PDF generation from notation files? Or should we (ab)use the wishlist? --Leonard Vertighel 06:28, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
It is recommended (somewhere in the IMSLP submission docs) to always upload a PDF version of a MUS or SIB file, but obviously I cannot force people to do so. As for PDF generation, it'd be better to set up a separate page, so as to not make the wishlist do two things at once. I don't know how well it will work, but hey, one can always try :) I'd still be rather weary of asking people to convert an unsubmitted file, because there might be copyright issues; if the file has been left out to dry for a long time I'd just delete it and give a shout on the user talk page. --Feldmahler 12:41, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
If the file is a scan, you can request a copyright review if the file is significant enough; otherwise you can leave a note on the user talk page and delete the file if there is no reply within a few days.
Significant being what? Works of which no other edition is available in IMSLP? --Leonard Vertighel 06:28, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
That is one important dimension; other factors can also be taken into consideration. For example, a one or two page PDF file is usually rather easily replaceable; and files of rather small sections of a larger work (like the second movement of the Grieg Sonata we're talking about) are also less "significant". The reason I make this distinction is that if, say, a scan of a Mahler Symphony comes along, it will be treated with more attention than if a two page scan of a popular edition of a minor piece comes along. This is just not to overload the copyright reviewers. Though, to be honest, if a "significant" upload comes along and the uploader does not submit it, I'd probably have submitted it if it passes copyright checks. Maybe at the beginning you can just submit everything to copyright review, and I'll remove them if I don't think they will pass, or are significant enough to warrent the time spent on researching it.
Actually, I take back what I said in the previous reply about the few days; it may be a good idea to just to notify the file uploader and let the file sit there; I mean, it does no detriment to IMSLP. And then periodically we can clean out the really old and stale files (files that was uploaded, say, more than two months ago). Basically, do the following checks when deleting:
  1. If file is a typeset, delete
  2. Check if the file is a duplicate or broken version of a file already on IMSLP
  3. Check if there is enough information in the file to pass the file as public domain (may be a good idea to familiarize yourself with that public domain page, so that you can decide most of the cases on your own)
  4. If there are CDSM logos, delete
  5. All the files that have passed so far you can submit to copyright review :)
Huh... this is getting slightly confusing... :) Let me see if I get that right:
  • CDSM logo -> delete straight away (OK, we had that before)
  • Duplicates and broken files -> delete straight away (that's clear I guess)
  • Work not PD (composer died less than 50 years ago and the work was published after 1923, right?) -> delete straight away
  • Everything is correct so far :)
  • Extract from a larger file available on IMSLP -> ...huh... dunno.
  • If the extract is a standalone small portion (i.e. it is not part of a series of files which are basically the larger file split into chunks), delete right away. Otherwise (i.e. there is a complete series of files which are chunks of a larger file already on IMSLP), you can submit them back to IMSLP. There were two cases in the past where submitters had abandoned split files in favor of a single file, and the end result was that I resubmitted the files back, because it gives more flexibility to the IMSLP user.
  • Typeset -> notify user and delete after 2 months?
  • This is fine. Actually, why don't we make it 1 month (since it's a nice round number). The idea is to delete it when the user clearly has no intention of submitting it. Sorry for screwing around with the numbers... but I've so far been doing things on more or less a case by case basis, so I haven't come up with a standardized guideline. But I think 1 month is good enough and easy to remember :) And I won't change it again I promise :)
  • Scan that has enough info (i.e. composer + editor + publisher - by the way, can the info be deduced just from the plate number [is that the right term?] where present?
  • Unfortunately no :/ Or at least not usually. Plate numbers are useful, however, for matching online library searches. But right now you do not have to worry about this. Just take care of the files which has the copyright date, etc. clearly stated on the first page. When you get more comfortable with admining IMSLP I'll tell you the copyright research methods :)
What else would I look for? I told you I'm not much of an expert...) -> tag for review (no, wait - did I have to apply the relevance criterion here?)
You mean "significance" criterion? Theoretically yes, but at the moment just tag all the scans that you cannot process by any other way with the review tag. We'll add the significance stuff later :) Or rather, I think you will slowly get a sense of what is significant and what is not after you admin IMSLP for a while :)
  • All other scans -> notify user and delete after 2 months
  • At the moment you should just tag all the other scans with the review tag :)
How many answers were correct? Do I have to repeat the exam? Am I fired? ;) --Leonard Vertighel 17:53, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
Haha... no :P I know it may be hard starting out because IMSLP has be admined mainly by me on a case-to-case basis, so I don't yet have any hard rules... but we'll both learn as we go along I guess :) Also, don't worry about it too much; I'll cover for your mistakes if there are any. :)
Also, this discussion is only about orphaned images... just to clarify :) --Feldmahler 18:54, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
P.S. And yes, you've passed as long as you read my comments ;)

Let me start again at the left margin ;) I think (hope) I'm getting closer; are you telling me (for now) to notify users only for typeset files, and tag for review all scans that I do not delete there and then? And even in case I misunderstood you, can't we just tell our "review experts" to liberally tag for deletion what they consider insignificant (yes, I meant "significance" - "relevance" would be the German Wikipedia's equivalent of the English Wikipedia's "notability" which killed our first IMSLP article - my brain is melting) --Leonard Vertighel 19:18, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

Actually, forget about it: For now, I'll just delete the CDSM, duplicates, etc., and notify users about unused typeset files (I'll deal with PDFs only for the moment, since I can't read the notation files). And then we'll see what (and how much) is left, and discuss that. Should have done it like that from the beginning, huh? --Leonard Vertighel 03:52, 9 April 2007 (EDT)
 :) --Feldmahler 11:02, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

And what about files with funny popups (or whatever they are called), like Image:Grieg sonata 2.pdf - good/bad? Add to workpage/delete/back to sender/keep as souvenir? --Leonard Vertighel 05:44, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

Popups are undesirable but ok, partly also because I'm going to run every PDF file on IMSLP through a PDF file regenerator, which will probably remove them (this will also happen with the Great Imaging and Indexing System Overhaul [GIISO] hehe). However, in that particular case, I'd leave a note on the user page, and delete the file if there is no response within a few days, because the file itself does not contain any indication of whether it is in the public domain or not. Plus, there are already two editions of the Piano Sonata on IMSLP, so that file is not absolutely necessary or anything. --Feldmahler 06:06, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
For once I have decided to delete immediately, since a) this was the user's only contribution, back in July 2006; it's unlikely that we will ever hear from him again, and b) if needed, we could retrieve the file from --Leonard Vertighel 07:00, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
Good call. :) --Feldmahler 12:41, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

image sizes

Hello Feldmahler,

I'm getting confused with the image sizes (editing Template:File test of course ;)). Was there a mediawiki update that changed the image syntax? Since today, the original aspect ratio is not respected anymore when specifying two sizes (160x160px), and when specifying only the width (160px) there is nothing. (the syntax is explained here.

Peter 11:15, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

Actually, it seems to work for me. I think it may be because of your browser cache? Try clearing your cache and trying again. I know for sure that it works on Firefox here. :) --Feldmahler 12:41, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
String Quartets, Op. 17 (Haydn, Joseph) keeps on displaying distorted images after clearing cache in FF and IE... However, old pages like Große Fuge (Beethoven, Ludwig van) are correct. Weird...--Peter 18:05, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
After talking with the Mediawiki devs the problem is apparently a rather obscure corner case. Basically, it works as follows:
  • Mediawiki will not thumbnail PNG files that has more than 12 megapixels. Instead, the entire file is sent back to the user, and the browser is requested to do user-side thumbnailing. This is the case with the Haydn thumbnail.
  • Everything less than 12 megapixels will be thumbnailed by Mediawiki.
  • Theoretically, the specification ___x___px specifies the maximum width or height. In other words, the image aspect ratio (width:height ratio) is not changed. For example, for the current specification of 200x160px, the Beethoven thumbnail is scaled to 113x160px, because that is the maximum height.
  • Unfortunately, this does not work correctly when the non-thumbnailed image is displayed. This is because Mediawiki sends a request to the browser to scale the image to 200x160px instead of calculating the maximum aspect-ratio-respecting size. This is a bug in the version of Mediawiki IMSLP runs on (1.8.3)... I'll be trying this on Wikipedia to see if I can reproduce it. If I can, then I'll be filing a bug report; otherwise this problem will be fixed in the next IMSLP upgrade (in 1-2 months) :) --Feldmahler 18:54, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
Apparently, that particular bug is fixed, but another one cropped up, and so image resizing is still broken in the latest Mediawiki. I've filed the bug here. --Feldmahler 19:19, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

Invisible pages

Really hate to bother you again, but I spent more than an hour trying to figure this one out, without success: The following pages appear empty, but they are not (click "edit"):

The only thing I managed to find out is that the page content reappears after throwing out the Description template (which obviously is not a solution). What's up? --Leonard Vertighel 13:01, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

Wow! What the hell happened here. I'll check it soon. Thanks for reporting! --Feldmahler 13:59, 9 April 2007 (EDT)
I've finally fixed this bug. The bug is a rare case of breakage in the upcasing of the first letter due to encoding issues (argh). The only pages affected are those that 1. has a custom sortkey, and 2. has a letter with an accent as the first letter in the sortkey. Good thing it is fixed :) I'm rather worried about Mediawiki blanking the page after a parser error (the category tags got screwed up), but apparently it was fixed between 1.8.x and 1.10.x, so it shouldn't be a problem after I upgraded MW in a month. --Feldmahler
Great job! (Encoding? Shouldn't everything be utf-8?) I believe that right now there should be no other parser-blanked work pages. In fact, after stumbling upon the first of those pages by chance, I found the others by looking through the list of uncategorized pages, so in theory I should have caught them all. And by the way, by fixing this problem you have reduced the number of orphaned files by 11 - including your own Debussy :) --Leonard Vertighel 19:01, 9 April 2007 (EDT)
Haha... good :) The encoding issue is me being stupid not thinking about multibyte characters; I essentially did something like mb_strtoupper( $string[1] ) ($string[0] is the '|' at the beginning of the sortkey). But this has been fixed to correctly work on multibyte characters ... so rejoice :) --Feldmahler 19:36, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

Deleted files & Files to be deleted

(When) should broken entries like the first in Boléro (Ravel, Maurice) be removed? --Leonard Vertighel 05:02, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

Immediately :) Back then I went for a no-delete policy, but many such entries have piled up, so I've started deleting them anyway. --Feldmahler 09:46, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

Should I affix some deletion warning tag to the files that I might delete after the one month grace period? (They are listed in my "scratchpad".) --Leonard Vertighel 08:28, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

That'd be a nice idea :) --Feldmahler 09:46, 10 April 2007 (EDT)
Can I use {{Delete}} with the end of the grace period as the argument, or do you want to use this tag only for pages that should be deleted immediately? --Leonard Vertighel 13:15, 10 April 2007 (EDT)
I think it is more efficient to just create another template... you can also link the template to a different category too :) --Feldmahler 14:04, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

Good idea, yes indeed..

Maybe it is a good idea to put the piano reductions of the Liszt Symphonic Poems under the "Symphonic Poem" category? This way it'd work much nicer with the subcategories; plus people would realize from the page title what it is anyway :) --Feldmahler 00:23, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

Since the transcriptions are indeed called "Symphonic Poem" they should be added to that category. So yes, it would be a good idea to put them there since they match the criterias. Now put the pieces in the category :) --Funper 09:54, 9 April 2007 (EDT)
Actually you can just put a link to the category in the Symphonic Poem template you have there, and it should work nicely :) I'll do it this time so you can see how its done and can do it yourself next time :) --Feldmahler 18:06, 10 April 2007 (EDT)