User talk:Rotatebot/Log

log q's

3 things:

1. of the 15 photos in the log, at the time i'm writing this, the 1st & last photos are oriented pre-rotation, the other 13 are post-rotation. was just wondering why that was...?

2. would be nice to be able to access a log history/archive, going back more than just the last 15 files, & preferably tracing all the way back to the beginning. yes, i know it's available thru the "view history" function, but it's effectively un"search"able; you have to hunt around manually & blindly to locate anything. would be nice to have a system in place that's easier to access & use.

3. this tool really needs to be promoted more; i've been here well over a year & only found the thing by accident. what about including a prominent link to this/simillar useful tools @ upload?

might be nice to group/associate/organize the files needing work & the tools for working on them more efficiently, as a whole, but i haven't explored the situation well enough yet to sketch out suggestions in broader terms.

Lx 121 (talk) 12:39, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Lx 121,

1. That's a cache problem of mediawiki, it takes some time until mediawiki creates new thumbs of a image. You can purge the image and reload the page, then you should see it correct.

2. I don't see the usefulness of such a log. If you search for a image you can e.g. use wikiblame to search in the revisions.

3. Would be a possibility, one should discuss it on the talk page there. --Luxo 17:58, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Pole_Vault_Sequence_2.jpg

1. Check revision 63569215. It shows the image File:Pole_Vault_Sequence_2.jpg with wrong orientation, but the url contains action=purge. Do you know what's wrong? --Stefan4 (talk) 12:59, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Stefan, I started a new section for you (not really related to the above, hmm?). That is probably the thumbnail updating bug. 180px is correct. The thumbnail I see on the file page 450px is not. Reported . Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 17:14, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Log checking

It is not really useful if we all (maybe even four or five people) look at Rotatebot's log. Let's note here the time of the last version which has been checked. Or... write a message here instead if you will continue to look the whole day or until a specific time.
Btw: as you probably also have noticed it is enough to look through every second log version. --Saibo (Δ) 16:29, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

I've noticed that log checking can be simplified a bit by bookmarking javascript:if%20(location.href.indexOf('\?')%20==%20-1)%20location.href=location.href+'?action=purge';%20else%20location.href=location.href+'&action=purge'; to the bookmarks toolbar. It is sometimes necessary to clear the image cache in order to see the new image orientation, and that URL does the trick. It fails if the URL contains a # character. --Stefan4 (talk) 16:53, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, never noticed this. For me the thumbnails in the log are always right. If there are strange things in the log let me know. If you (or someone else) look at the images I will only look at the errors shortly to keep my overview up to date. --Saibo (Δ) 17:11, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Are you ready with the log from the last week? Now a wrong rotated image is correct fast, because the backlog is small. In my opinion the log should checked first, before we starting with the unused images. Der Umherirrende 15:39, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Just continue - there will be few wrongs in the log. But I will do a few versions now. Note to other checkers: I will reserve the time before I do it to avoid double checking. ;-) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 17:30, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Last log version which has been checked / note

UTC

2011-12-16T16:45:21‎ --Saibo (Δ) 01:52, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

The days inbetween ↓ and ↑ are  Not done.

+2011-12-21T22:40:51‎ --Saibo (Δ) 01:25, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

The versions inbetween ↓ and ↑ are  Done.

2011-12-24T23:44:32‎ ‎ --Saibo (Δ) 01:53, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

The days inbetween ↓ and ↑ are  Not done.

2012-01-01T15:51:23‎ --Saibo (Δ) 03:06, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

The versions inbetween ↓ and ↑ are  Done.

2012-01-11T22:36:21‎ ‎--Saibo (Δ) 22:44, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

now: times mentioned in the log 09:25, 18 January 2012 (UTC) until 00:50, 20 January 2012 (UTC) --Saibo (Δ) 01:00, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

2012-02-21 until 2012-02-22T09:15:46‎:  Done --Saibo (Δ) 19:14, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

2012-03-06 (Special:PermanentLink/67984386 until Special:PermanentLink/67992047) --Stefan4 (talk) 23:19, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Images rotated from 20:20, 6 March 2012 → 00:16, 7 March 2012  checked for wrong rotations - there might be copyright issues RE rillke questions? 00:24, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

errors with rotations

Can anyone please check what kind of error message the bot has set here?: „Great parts of EXIF could be lost.“ That doesn't sound well but the image File:Owingen Pfarrkirche Chordecke Schlussstein 3.jpg looks ok. --Geitost ^diskusjon 15:43, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

These were the changes to the EXIF (look in edit mode here!):

Just ignore that unless you want to invest much tim in manual fixing. The lost parts are not really important (as the whole EXIF information is). Those errors happen not seldom. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 02:06, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Jehan de Beaumanoir 2.jpg should be reverted back before the rotation, don't know why it has been tagged for rotation this morning but it's the only edit of Sevytu on Commons until now. Could it be that the thumb in fr:Arthur Guéniot which he also edited today didn't look the right way and just needed to be purged? Shall I force the bot rotating it back or how do you do this without bot? Perhaps it would be a good thing to just purge all files on Commons once per bot to avoid such problems? --Geitost ^diskusjon 16:02, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Rotation reverted. --Stefan4 (talk) 19:00, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. --Geitost ^diskusjon 01:17, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Yup, just revert wrong rotations. The mass fix is done - so there should be only few files with EXIF from before October 5th. Purging is probably too much work and causes other problems. The rotate gadget purges - no if the user follows the instructions of the gadget he cannot do anything wrong. --Saibo (Δ) 02:06, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

The same error as above with the Image File:Owingen Pfarrkirche Chordecke Schlussstein 3.jpg: [1], image looks ok. Don't know where you've found the data above or what to do with that now. --Geitost ^diskusjon 01:17, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

EXIF data will not affect the image's look in any case (well, maybe in case of color profiles?). Also note the bot message: "minor" vs. "major" errors. Ignore! :-D Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 02:06, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Ok, that's what I like to do: ignore such errors. :-) --Geitost ^diskusjon 02:42, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

If the errors are really severe (maybe using another tool or completely stripping the EXIF would be needed) the file is not rotated and not uploaded but reported as error. --Saibo (Δ) 03:42, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

2 notes:

• I let image File:Patterns on Brows Bridge - geograph.org.uk - 703182.jpg rotate such that it's now bottom up (180° rotated from the original). Because I think it's right that way and not the other way round. (If anyone wants to take a look …)
• And File:Klosterkirche St Märgen Decke.jpg is now 90° rotated in comparision with the original which would be right (0° – which means, the windows would be at the bottom and not on top). But you can see the 2 big pictures in the middle better this way. I also asked Andreas about this photo – what he likes more. --Geitost ^diskusjon 02:42, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
  • @1: don'T know. Could also be right by rotating the original by 180. You did rotate it 90°.
  • @2: Yup, just let andreas decide. Strange over the head photo... ;-) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 03:42, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
    • Andreas rotated photo 2 back to original position with the window at the bottom.
    • And to 1: Yes, but now it's 180° rotated. :-) I think the green at the bottom of the picture could be just before the water under the bridge. If it were on top I would wonder where that much green came from. If I read the description of the image right, then „the ripples (made by swimming waterfowl)“ must be at the bottom. Now the photographer must stand under the bridge where „The water in the canal under the bridge was unfrozen“ (or be in a boat?), and the other way round he photographs from top of the bridge. So I don't know. ;-) Now that I've written all this I'm just seeing the link on the file side to the source which is now looking different (photo taken from top of the bridge). Perhaps I better let it rotate 180° again. Otherwise the users might wonder about the different rotation of the two images. But then I don't understand the thing with the swimming waterfowl. :-/ --Geitost ^diskusjon 12:07, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
      • 2: stripping all EXIF is a bit rough. ;-) Just the Orientation tag needs to be corrected.
      • 1: Ich glaub du drehst dich im Kreis - naja.. fast - nur 270° ;-) Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 19:34, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
        • Und ich glaub, jetzt hammers aber damit fertig. :-) Das 2. wurde ja jetzt echt oft gedreht. ;-) --Geitost ^diskusjon 00:34, 14 January 2012 (UTC)