• Technical problems and programming orders: enter a bug for extension UploadWizard (known bugs)
• Strategic community discussion: below. See also: "upload wizard" threads at Commons:Village pump

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump&oldid=879363766

While uploading a file through Upload Wizard, why can I only license it under CC0, CC BY 4.0, and CC BY-SA 4.0? I even tried modifying the default license on Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-uploads, but nothing happened.

Also, is caption now mandatory? Why? Has the community been consulted in that regard?

Can I change the way Upload Wizard works for me? I know what I'm doing when uploading something through it. The new version just makes it a pain in the neck—more than it already was. RodRabelo7 (talk) 05:13, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi @RodRabelo7, you can add another license by providing the correct template in the "other license" step. As for captions, we're going to make them not mandatory if you disallow the option "same as description". Sannita (WMF) (talk) 12:40, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

I noticed this change too, and found it weird. @Sannita (WMF) Was this very major change made with community consensus? If not, this seems like a clear and worrying case of WMF overreach.

I went through the Upload Wizard again and didn't see any "other license" step or option. If, for example, I'm uploading a derivative work that needs to be licensed, due to the original work's licensing terms, under, say, the ABC123 license, how am I supposed to do that when ABC123 isn't an option? This seems very problematic. Cremastra (talk) 06:00, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, "enter a different license in wikitext format" is back, so thanks to whoever made the change. Cremastra (talk) 15:36, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

And while we're griping about unwanted changes, why does the wizard blank out everything when the Upload more files button is clicked? Older versions used to remember everything that was previously entered (which made life a whole lot easier). Useddenim (talk) 15:57, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

@Useddenim This bug too is known and is being worked on. I apologise on behalf of the team for all the disruption happened with the last update. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 10:47, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Flickr public domain mark - use correct licence tag

Currently, when importing flickr files that are marked as "Public domain", UploadWizard uses the {{PD-US}} tag. This is incorrect, as this tag should generally only be used for files with copyright expired in the US. The correct choice is {{PD-author-FlickrPDM}}. Would be good if someone could fix that. ~TheImaCow (talk) 17:06, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Really, any one tag is bound to be incorrect for many files here. Anything that comes from Flickr and is marked with the PD mark should be put in a maintenance category to be hand-checked. If the photo is original by the Flickr user then, yes, {{PD-author-FlickrPDM}} is valid, but it is also the only way on Flickr to mark something as being PD for whatever reason. - Jmabel ! talk 18:24, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Geographic coordinates

How to add geographic coordinates? When I tried to specify the geographic coordinates for a file, the loading wizard gave an error that it should be less than or greater than the number 18 (I don't remember the error text exactly), in the case that I had extracted the numbers from Google Maps. Mostafamirchouli (talk) 15:55, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

@Mostafamirchouli: I'm going to guess what it said was "less than 180" (the maximum longitude). If you can indicate just what you typed/pasted, someone can probably give you a useful answer, but without knowing either what you did or the precise error message you got, it's hard to make guesses beyond that. - Jmabel ! talk 05:44, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

@Jmabel Hello.

Longitude: 57.67625780

Latitude: 36.20780049 Mostafamirchouli (talk) 07:30, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

@Mostafamirchouli: Certainly legitimate. You don't mention what file, or what exactly the upload wizard did, but you can always add {{location|36.20780049|57.67625780}} to the file page. -Jmabel ! talk 10:01, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Screenshot used on this doc page

The screenshot used on this page is currently File:UploadWizard uploading multiple files.png. It shows a "use" step but I just tried out the Upload Wizard and couldn't see that tab. The screenshot is 14 years old. A mobile screenshot may be a good addition. Commander Keane (talk) 01:30, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Error in default code using Upload file with template:PD-shape

At some point in time, the upload wizard has taken to adding the line {{self|subst:Custom license marker added by UW}} when using {{pd-shape}} as the license as seen at File:BSicon rLIN denim.svg. This results in an error on the page, and suppresses the expansion of {{self}}. It looks like it should instead be {{self|{{subst:Custom license marker added by UW}}}}, and {{Custom license marker added by UW}} needs to be fixed in order to not expand into nothing upon substitution, or it needs to be {{self|{{Custom license marker added by UW}}}} to retain the template as a hidden flag. VanIsaac (en.wiki) 20:32, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

@Vanisaac Thanks for the feedback. I tried to reformulate your intervention as a Phabricator ticket, and I think I managed to subscribe you to it. Please, review it at your convenience to see I reported correctly your bug. Thanks again! --Sannita (WMF) (talk) 13:59, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

@Vanisaac The bug should be solved now. Can you please confirm me you don't have the problem any more? Thanks! Sannita (WMF) (talk) 11:49, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

@Sannita (WMF): Confirmed. VanIsaac (en.wiki) 17:40, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

How many upload Wizards are there?

I noticed via Phab:T364150 that some upload wizards may have issues (User:Jarekt noticed it). For example listing "pd-old-100" under "own work". So I checked Campaign:dk and it had the same issue. Also it suggested cc versions 3.0 instead of 4.0.

I thought I could fix Campaign:dk but it is more complex than I thought. For example it mention works in the US are PD if they are earlier than 1929 but 1929 is not mentioned on that page.

So I looked around and first I checked Special:Campaigns there are a number of campaigns but most of them are wlm. Also fa (that was mentioned in the phabricator report) is not on the list. So I guess the list is not complete.

Then I looked around again and found Commons:Upload Wizard/defaultConfig and that also seems to be stuck at 3.0 instead of 4.0. Also it suggest licenses like cc-by-sa-3.0-foo (language specific).

So I was thinking that perhaps there are not supposed to be "local" wizards like Campaign:dk because they are replaced by the great Wizard of Commons. But if there are supposed to be more wizards then "someone" should clean up all the wizards.

Perhaps someone can help figure out if some wizards should be deleted or if they should be updated. MGA73 (talk) 22:56, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

MGA73, I am quite confused about those configurations as well. The page Commons:Upload Wizard/defaultConfig suppose to be JSON version of ; however it was not updated for a decade while the php version had 16 changes in 2024 alone. I added an "inactive" template to it.

Various campaigns seem to be used by different Wiki Loves Monuments competitions or provide custom Upload Wizard for uploads from different Wikipedias. I think most are not used much and the ones used can get stale configurations, like cc-by-sa-3.0 instead of cc-by-sa-4.0. I also think some of the configurations lead to upload with Lua errors like caused by {{self|subst:Custom license marker added by UW}} "license". I do not know if there are any projects or people maintaining or cataloging campaign pages. Also some unused pages probably could be deleted. --Jarekt (talk) 22:13, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

@MGA73 @Jarekt Thanks for raising the point. I've put it on the dev's radar, they will probably look at it next week for triaging. I'll be sure they'll discuss it at the earliest possible meeting. I will keep you updated, but in case feel free to ping me here or on my talk page about it. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 14:17, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Earlier than 1929

Mentioned when choosing license, but this is now 1930 (probably better to use an analog to {{years ago|96}} in general). — Alien  3
3 3 16:35, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Alien333, thanks for the feedback. Can you please be a bit more specific about the problem you're raising? I want to be sure to report it correctly to the team. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 14:15, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

• go to the Upload Wizard.
• add any file
• click "continue"
• click "this works was created by someone else and is free to share"
• click "this work is not protected by copyright law"
• Among the options, it says: "First published in the United States before 1929."

This should be corrected to "before 1930", as all that was published in 1929 is in the public domain in the US since yesterday.

I was also saying, in general, that rather than update it every year it might be better to use a function that would always give the current year minus 94 years. — Alien  3
3 3 14:19, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Yeah that is what I tried above but I could not locate 1929 in the code. :-) Hopefully we can clean up the confusion about the Wizard(s). --MGA73 (talk) 14:55, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

There it is, I believe, in the i18n messages. — Alien  3
3 3 15:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

It may be a good idea to make the year a variable, so that the many, many i18n files do not have to be corrected each year. — Alien  3
3 3 17:55, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

@Alien333: Thanks for the reply, now it's more clear. I opened phab:T382917 to try to resolve the problem. It will likely be discussed beginning of next week. In general, I will push for a rewording or an automation of the message. Hopefully it won't take long. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 18:32, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Trouble adding specific public domain tag

I've been uploading several files to Commons using the Template:PD-Art (specifically with the {{PD-Art|PD-old-100}} tag) using the Upload Wizard however, when trying to click continue to go into the Describe section of the wizard, the area where I put in the public domain tag becomes stuck on loading and I'm never able to get to the next section. What can I do about this? Colohisto (talk) 18:11, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

@Colohisto Sorry for replying this late. This is a bug that we're trying to fix, please see phab:T383415 about it. I hope this will be fixed early next week. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 16:21, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

@Colohisto: Yeah, well in the meantime the tool's become useless – for me it hangs on {{PD-shape}} – so why not revert to the previous version that at least worked? Useddenim (talk) 05:38, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

@Useddenim: I doubt Colohisto can revert a software version. He's just another user who reported this. Even Sannita presumably can't do that himself. (It's good that he responded on the weekend to acknowledge the problem, but he's not a hands-on developer.) I'm sure that as the work week starts, this will be attended to pretty quickly, but it's unlikely to be fixed on the weekend. - Jmabel ! talk 06:21, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

@Sannita (WMF) Thank you for the information! Sinigh (talk) 12:01, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

@Colohisto @Sinigh @Useddenim @Jmabel a patch has been already made to solve the issue. Please have still a bit of patience while the patch is merged into the code. I guess another 24 hours, maybe 48 tops, and the fix will be deployed. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 14:16, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

@Sannita (WMF): I have a question that is a little more meta. Is any sort of regression testing done when a new version of the Upload Wizard goes live? It seems to me that this is not the first time that we've seen a bug that I would have expected to be caught in any decently designed regression test. - Jmabel ! talk 18:47, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

@Jmabel: Evidently not, and that is a darn shame.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 19:13, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

@Jmabel I'll push for more testing, but AFAIK we do this kinds of test before going live with any kind of modification to the code. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 13:54, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

So did nothing in the regression test cover using a custom license? - Jmabel ! talk 18:12, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

UploadWizard has QUnit tests which test the JavaScript components but they are fairly bare bones and only really test the basics such that they would only fail if a major part of the UploadWizard had an issue (such as an entire step failing to load altogether). Selenium tests might be a good idea to add to UploadWizard for end-to-end testing, but they can be more flaky. Dylsss (talk) 18:51, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Merging in some aspects of Commons:Video2commons

We have a 2019/2020 RfC which supports allowing the uploading and automatic conversion of MP4 files to WebM.

We at Wiki Project Med in collaboration with User:Brooke Vibber are looking at updating the Upload Wizard to do this. We have this phab ticket.

If we build it should we initially limit its use to editors with a certain number of edits? Or specific flag? Other thoughts? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:05, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Doc James, I think the limitations should be discussed more within the community than WMF, I guess we can just apply what the community decides on this matter. Also, thanks for reporting me the ticket, I'll share it with the team so that they know this is happening. Thanks again! Sannita (WMF) (talk) 12:14, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Agree limiting the tool to certain editors is a community decision. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:42, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Great news! Thank you everyone, as the current v2c maintainer I totally support this move :) vip (talk) 20:25, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, this feature should be restricted to some editors, like uploading MP3 is now. Yann (talk) 20:37, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

How does it work for MP3? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:17, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

@Doc James: Autopatrolled only, as controlled by Special:AbuseFilter/192.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:33, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

@Sannita (WMF): I  Support such limitation.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 23:38, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

@Doc James is there a rough timeline of what is being done by when? i dont mean to push you, but if a feature is soon enabled in wizard, then volunteer effort in coding and maintaining that for v2c would not be necessary. RoyZuo (talk) 15:48, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

It will likely be a couple of months. But not sure. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:04, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

that's fast enough XD.

here're a couple of things that come to my mind:

1. as restrictive as mp3 upload (autopatrol) should be fine. if too restrictive it can always be easily relaxed afterwards.
2. maybe include https://github.com/toolforge/video2commons/issues/244 av1 codec support if possible.

RoyZuo (talk) 16:45, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

"undefined" appears instead of valid CC-BY license.

Fyi, "undefined" appears instead of valid CC-BY license on multiple Flickr uploads today. Is this a known issue?

Here is one of many examples: -- Ooligan (talk) 07:11, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

@Ooligan: Special:Permalink/1045486191 has a more succinct demonstration of the problem. @Sannita (WMF)?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 09:33, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

@Jeff G. @Ooligan Please report that in a Phabricator ticket, I'll see if someone can take care of it. Being Flickr (again) at it, I'm not sure it falls within the Structured Content team focus. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 10:10, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

@Jeff G.- Can you submit a "phabricator ticket" as suggested by Sannita? I can do it, but I have never done that.

Hello @Sannita (WMF), your page has your title listed as: "Movement Communications Specialist (Product & Tech) Wikimedia Foundation." I mention this because you wrote,

• "Being Flickr (again) at it, I'm not sure it falls within the Structured Content team focus."

So, I researched this Structured Content Team from a link on your User page. That page states that:

"The Structured Content team, in the Wikimedia Product department at the Wikimedia Foundation, focuses on enabling growth and consumption of visual (and other non-textual) knowledge content on Wikipedia. We started our current line of work in Fiscal Year 2023-2024, as part of last year’s Annual Plan, and we will continue to provide support for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 as part of objective and key result WE2.3 (“Guide contributors to add images and references that comply with project guidelines and increase trust in content, for example, by flagging potential issues during their upload/addition”)." (Bold & Underline added)

• There was no "flagging" of "potential issues" when the UploadWizard tool did not add any license, but instead added the word "undefined." A lack of "flag" before uploading files certainly "... falls within the Structured Content team focus?"

When you wrote, "Being Flickr again ..." do you imply that Flickr.com was the cause of this issue? All Flickr file links I checked had Commons compatible licenses.

Or are uploads by UploadWizard from the source Flickr.com treated differently from other sources?

Please, note that this affected over 100+ newly uploaded files. See here: .

Additionally, I received 4 bot generated "file license" tags on my talk page, before I could fix all the "undefined" (no license) files. Here, here, here, here.

Thank you for the phabricator ticket suggestion. Respectfully, -- Ooligan (talk) 22:31, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

@Ooligan I see, I probably mis-interpreted the problem. I'll see what I can do, but first I need a Phabricator ticket with the problem identified, so that I can put it on the dev's radar. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 08:28, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

@Sannita (WMF): Please see Phab:T397527.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:08, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

@Jeff G. Thanks, I'll immediately forward it to the devs. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 15:37, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

@Sannita (WMF): You're welcome.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:57, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

And thank you for fowarding the Phab ticket to the devs. However, @Sannita (WMF) you did not respond to my two questions about Flickr. They are:

1. "When you wrote, "Being Flickr again ..." do you imply that Flickr.com was the cause of this issue? All Flickr file links I checked had Commons compatible licenses."

2. "Or are uploads by UploadWizard from the source Flickr.com treated differently from other sources?" -- Ooligan (talk) 18:33, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

@Ooligan: with Flickr having suddenly changed what licenses they are offering, and (presumably) changing their API correspondingly in an area that had been stable since before any of our built-in upload capabilities, it is no surprise that this would lead to a failure. - Jmabel ! talk 20:39, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

@Ooligan: Re 2, they may be using Flickr's exclusive API.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 19:34, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

@Jmabel & @Jeff G.- Could you please provide me some links to more detail about what is probably happening here. I would like to learn more in depth about this potential or probable cause. Thanks to you both for responding. Best regards, -- Ooligan (talk) 22:00, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

I don't have a link, but as a Flickr user I can tell you that they've almost completely changed what licenses they are offering for new uploads (for example, from CC-BY-SA 2.0 to CC-BY-SA 4.0), and also changed some of the selection UI (really annoying: "All rights reserved" used to come first, and now it's last). I'm sure there was a corresponding change in the API. I don't know for sure if the API has changed for old files, but new files would give some value that previously would not have been a possibility, and that you couldn't reasonably expect existing software to account for. There was probably advance notice somewhere if people were paying attention, but it doesn't surprise me if they weren't. We've had bigger recent problems about their UI (like them cutting off access too the API from the toolserver for several days). - Jmabel ! talk 22:31, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

I did not know about loss of access. I found this at Flickr.com, which states that there was only a problem on the 16th of this month here:

I appreciate the additional information @Jmabel. -- Ooligan (talk) 00:20, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Thanks @Jeff G. for submitting a Phabricator ticket. -- Ooligan (talk) 18:27, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

@Ooligan: You're welcome.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 18:32, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you indeed @Jeff G.: for filing the ticket and for linking this discussion from there − that’s how I found it :) Hopefully we soon get input from the dev team cc @Sannita (WMF) Jean-Fred (talk) 14:44, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

@Jean-Frédéric: You're welcome. Until this is fixed, perhaps AntiCompositeNumber can configure AntiCompositeBot to add {{Cc-by-2.0}} and {{Flickrreview}} when encountering a file with "undefined" license that was uploaded from Flickr, rather than tagging the file with {{No license since}} and notifying the uploader.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:22, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

@Jeff G. and @Jean-Frédéric, Yes, the suggestion by Jeff G. to the bot owner would be great. I just found out here User talk:Ooligan#Copyright status: File:Lone Fir Cemetery, Portland, Oregon on July 17, 2008 - 2.jpg that UploadWizard is also placing the word "undefined" instead of the correct CC-BY-SA 2.0 license. I thought it was just PD licenses. I fixed other similar files by replacing the error with the CC license from the source, before the bot found them. @AntiCompositeNumber, Maybe that license could be added to the bot, if you decide it is possible. Thanks, -- Ooligan (talk) 18:01, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

Unfortunately it's happening for non-free licenses as well. I don't really want to be appending fake licenses in that case. WMF must maintain their software. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 03:52, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply @AntiCompositeNumber.

• Perhaps, @Sannita (WMF) can provide an update on the status of any corrective action(s) by the "devs." Best regards, -- Ooligan (talk) 04:05, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

@AntiCompositeNumber: If there is a license on Flickr, can it get that license from Flickr and write enough information to either get the flickr review bot enough for continuation or tag as a copyvio?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:36, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

@Jeff G. If I was going to put significant development effort into this issue, I would just fix the UploadWizard. That is the easiest and best thing to do. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:04, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

@ all: there is a patch incoming, if everything goes right, it should be up with the next deployment train, i.e. next week. Sorry for keeping you wait. --Sannita (WMF) (talk) 13:41, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

• @Sannita (WMF), could you please have the "dev team" check the UploadWizard tool's current performance in uploading various licenses not allowed on Commons?

Photos with the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license on Flickr are now allowed to be uploaded by the UploadWizard tool. I believe that the UploadWizard tool previously prohibited uploads of Flickr photos that had licenses not allowed on Commons.

• Could there be other licenses not allowed on Commons that this tool may currently allow to be uploaded to Commons?

Normally, the UploadWizard tool's first step after Flickr photos are submitted for uploading to Commons is a license check before uploading, which displays the result by either:

1. a green-colored circle icon containing a check mark for Commons compatible licenses - (OK to upload).

Additionally, in order to advance to the second step, the tool displays at the bottom of the page, "All uploads were successful!" and has a "continue" button on the right.

or

2. a red-colored octagon (stop sign) containing a exclaimation point - (Not OK to upload).

Normally, if UploadWizard's first step has one or more red-colored octagons (stop signs) with exclaimation points, the tool will not allow the user to advance to the second step and not allow uploading. (Also note, in this situation the tool does not show the words "All uploads were successful!" and does not display the "continue" button.)

I believe UploadWizard has not previously allowed uploading of Flickr photos with licenses not allowed on Commons.

Thanks, -- Ooligan (talk) 01:17, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

• I seem to be having same or similar problems, image on Flickr with CC BY 2.0 licence, the same uploaded here but the licence wasn't transferred: FunkMonk (talk) 13:12, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Is this page still relevant or in need of updating?

Commons:Upload Wizard/defaultConfig. Thanks, -- Ooligan (talk) 22:46, 26 June 2025 (UTC)