(cur) (last) 19:43, 3 November 2006 Gmaxwell (Talk | contribs) m (Null edit to note that I'm not the author, I am only renaming it as his request and I copied the info exactly.) Wow, I didn't ask for that... Well I guess someone saw your talk page and decided to help me :) Thanks a lot, anyway. --Emc217:46, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cool Cat, I request for your own sake, please disregard this user. It appears that he is attempting to draw you out. I recommend you completely ignore any remarks he makes from here on out, as well as ignore his userpage. If you believe he is acting against you, you have other admins on the Commons aware of it who can determine and act as intermediaries. You are a worthwhile contributor here and I hope that you will continue to do so, and not get wrapped up because someone else has it in for you. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bassdemandez18:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
İyi günler. Öncelikle Wikipedia ya yüklediğiniz resimler için teşekürler.
Birşeyi açıklamak istiyorum, commons daha çok bir medya (fotograf, film gibi). Yazdıgınız yazılar tr:Vikipediye daha güzel yakışacağına inanıyorum. Commons kuralları çerçevesinde katkılrınızın oraya taşınması gerekmektedir.
Sayın Cool Cat, uyarı ve bilgilendirmenizden dolayı teşekkür ediyorum. Birşeyler yazıyor olmama rağmen sizler gibi bilgisayar mühendislerinin yanında teknik konulara yeterince vakıf olmak için kaç fırın ekmek yemem gerek bilemem. Buradaki maddelerin benzerlerini Vikipedi-tr ye de girmiştim. Bundan böyle fotoğrafları buraya, metinleri de diğer ansiklopediye yazarım. Vikipedi-tr de yönetici adaylığından çekildiğinize de üzüldüm. Sağlıcakla kalınız.--Hasan Sami Bolak21:30, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
İyi günler. O zaman izninizle buradaki metinleri Vikipedi-tr'ye taşıyorum. Tabi isterseniz bu işi size de bırakabilirim. Bundaki maksat bir cümlenin bile silinmemesi.
Of course I do not own the Forum. Silly question, isn't it? But I think I understand what you mean. In fact, this is a huge problem, since ALL flags and logos used in any Wikipedia project are created by users without being formally affiliated with the respective institution. Take these:
Madden does not own the United Nations, and David Benbennick is not the owner of Turkey. But both users uploaded the flag and released it into the public domain. I agree with you that in legal terms this is highly problematic. And I pointed to that problem here and here on Commons and here, e.g., on the German Wikipedia. But the majority of users obviously wants to ignore that. So I decided not to push the issue any further. Thanks! Henning Blatt19:55, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, various international treaties such as the Geneva convention forbids any kind of restriction for combatant identification. Copyrighting national flags (restricting their usage) is a breach of these international treaties and is technically a war crime.
Same does not apply to forum logos and flags. Therefore unless you can provide any kind of documentation from a reliable source establishing its copyright status with a free license, I am inclined to delete it.
I did some checking operantly this forum is not some random internet website. I wish you had specified this. I'd still prefer some sort of citation establishing it as PD. --Catout22:03, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this time I actually do not understand what you mean... What do you want me to provide? A citation establishing it as PD? I created the picture, so I am the owner of the copyright. And in fact I already stated that I released it into the PD. What is a "random internet website"? If you want to delete the picture, please tell me first why you do not want to delete the UN-Flag and the Flag of Turkey, too. Henning Blatt09:07, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am not going to debate the UN flag or Turkish flag. They are irrelevant to this debate.
It doesn't matter if you drew the image yourself. What you have created is a derivative work of the official forum logo. You need to provide info that the logo itself is copyrighted with a free license (or is released into the pd).
Why is the UN flag irrelevant to this debate? Where is the difference? The UN and the Forum are both International Organizations. Please tell me where the difference is! Henning Blatt13:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
For starters, United Nations has a military role which means as per Geneva and other similar treaties, combatant identification is required. Furthermore thats the flag NOT the logo.
If you cannot provide me any data establishing this images pd status it will end up getting deleted. If I do not, someone else will eventually. I am really uninterested in discussing the fine points of copyrights and international law. All I need from you is any info establishing that the image in question is either pd, or is copyrighted with a free license
This is ridiculous. Please don't treat me as a baby. I am not new to the Wikipedia.
And I am quite familiar with International Law and the Geneva conventions. Please let me assure you that a possible copyright violation is not a war crime, as you said. The protection of the UN flag has nothing to do with combatant identification. The UN has never contributed own troops to any conflict. The blue helmets are technically not UN forces. You can find this information in any text book on the United Nations or on peacekeeping.
Despite that I really like to know why that matters in copyright issues... There is a template for logos and flags that show how they are treated in the Wikipedia: {{Insignia}}
But, okay, take the UN flag as it is. Just forget it. Here is a list of various International Organizations logos and flags and their uploaders:
I think this is enough. All these pictures have been drawn by users. And none of the respective organizations is owned by any of these users. So, please again, tell me why you want to pick out the Forum logo and delete it, leaving all the other logos untouched? I would consider that highly arbitrarily and a misuse of admin rights.
To make this clear: there is absolutely no legal difference between a flag and a logo. But just in case you insist on a difference, I'd like to point out that there are enough logos in the list, and most of the flags in fact are logos, but they simply are not labelled correctly.
Please don't feel offended just because I uploaded a new Forum pic only a couple of hours after you deleted the old one. The deletion was okay, since the old pic was not in the PD, but my picture is, just like all the other flags and logos of countries, organizations, enterprises, etc., that have been released into the PD by their uploaders.
I am debating the image you have uploaded. Just because other people violate copyrights do not mean you get to violate copyrights as well. I can and will delete all the linked images should I find them to be copyright violations. Thank you for bringing them to my attention, I will be nominating them for deletion soon so as to clear the matter.
{{Insignia}} only means that additional restrictions apply to the image independent and regardless of copyrights.
All you need to do is provide evidence that this forum logo is indeed available with a free license or has been released to the PD. Your work is a derivative work so you cant release someone else's work to the pd.
I am holding back a deletion because I trust that the image can be available with a free license, I however need evidence supporting it. We wouldn't be even talking if I hadn't believe this.
Sayın Cool Cat, Burada yazılması uygun olmayan metinleri Vikipedi-tr'ye taşımak yerine silmenizin daha uygun olacağını düşünüyorum. Çünkü o metinler daha geniş bir şekilde orada da var. Yani "bir kelime bile silinmesin" diye endişe ve üzüntü duymayasınız diye bu konuyu belirtiyorum. Yoksa takdir sizin.. Bundan böyle elimdem geldiğince resim yükleme v.s. konusunda çalışmalarımı sürdürürüm.
Buradaki çalışmalarınıza baktığımda katkılarınızın sayısı ve kalitesini gördüm. Bence "Takdir edildiğiniz yerde" bu tür çalışmalara devam etseniz daha iyi olur mu acaba diye düşünüyorum. Bu konuda da takdir sizin..
"Bir yerde ki yok nağmeni takdir edecek gûş;
Tazyi-i nefes eyleme, tebdil-i makam et"
Sözü sizin ve benim gibi biraz fazla doğrucu (Benim için daha da açık bir tanımlama:aykırı) insanlar için söylenmiş gibi geliyor bana.. O bakımdan bir süredir yönetici oylamalarına katılmama kararı aldım.. Son oylamalarda bu tavrımı görebilirsiniz. Dünyada en kolay kaybedilen şeyin dostluklar olduğunu görüyor ve çok üzülüyorum. Lütfen beni anlayın. Sevgi ve saygılarımla..--Hasan Sami Bolak23:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think your "blocking structure" is OK but just too darn long! Things should not get to the 6th block. If they are not responding at all, 3 should be plenty, then indef. And make the first block shorter, as a real shock tactic to make them pay attention but not get too upset.
There are two ways you can know what language a user speaks: (1) what text they put on image pages and (2) which wikis the image(s) are used in. This is often a great tip.
My last tip: don't do any admin action you're not prepared to defend with your full brain. Know what I mean? Don't give them any ammunition. And if you do this, then when you are criticised (and you will be, of course), you can sit back and let meatball:DefendEachOther take place. We can't defend you if you do it first. And we can't defend you if you're not prepared to stand behind every single admin action you do and say, "I believe I was doing the right thing and improving the wiki." But if both those things happen, then it really won't matter what anyone says. It'll be water off a ducks' back. But both those things are up to you.
You know... there's no prize for being mentioned the most times on COM:AN. Are you planning to burn out like a supernova or would you like some longevity to actually achieve some good? In your successful RfA, you said Why do I want to be an admin? I am tired of staring at various backlogs. Is that what you've been doing? Is it so impossible for you to guess which actions will be controversial, and avoid those ones? Or at least space them out between 100 non-controversial ones??
Seriously, there's no other admin that a month after being adminned, I have to read about them three times in a week. Please... go and be as boringly productive as possible. Hundreds of other users manage it every single day. --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 12:01, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Do not worry, I am not seeking a prize :P
Have you reviewed my contribution history? I have made hundreds of deletions. I have cleared two months worth of backlog from CAT:Unknown with over a thousand deletions. I am holding back on contributing to wikipedia as per real life issues (including the preparations wikipedia related panel on a conference in Turkey) taking too much of my time
I am not in any way stressed by all these incidents. The issue about 'Moby Dick' and 'Karl Meier' did raise concerns on my part but those concerns do not exist anymore as per the recent incident.
I am not particularly happy appearing on the ANB either.
Please note, while you made a modification to the image, you did not remove the no source tag, and therefore the image was deleted. I have restored it, but the no source tag remains, and you should make sure that this has been removed if all the issues have been resolved. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bassdemandez17:19, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Images which are not sourced are tagged accordingly and are speedy deleted. This is because image copyrights require verification. For certain images this is easy to establish, such as national flags.
While it isn't required, English license information is recommended. I would appreciate if you provided that license information in English as well as German. I cant really comment on the issue at all without this otherwise.
As your friend, it would be a big favor to me if you'd avoid using your sysop bit on controversial things, like debates and disputes in which you're directly involved, as well as blocks for all but the most obvious of vandals. I support your admin and believe that you can do a lot of good at Commons, and would regret it if the complaints piled up high enough quickly enough to get it taken away from you. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bassdemandez16:19, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Do you know when the image was made and by whom? If the author of the image died 70+ years ago, image may be in the pd. Additional details (Such as weather or not images copyright was renewed) would be needed for clarification.
On the page you linked the copyright notice suggests:
"You may save or print this image for research and study. If you wish to use it for any other purposes, you must complete the Request for permission form."
That doesn't necessarily mean it is available for commercial purposes nor does it necessarily mean alterations are allowed, both needs to be clarified. I recommend asking the library the details and getting that answer to permissions@wikimedia.org Thats the cleanest, fastest and most effective way to tackle it.
Hello, Cool Cat. I'm wondering why did you simply remove this pilot-test without waiting for the community opinion. Did I miss something? The problem is that pt:Wikipedia is being use to set homepages for users that don't do anything more than argue, or even nothing more at all. There are *no* internal quarrels. Many users are expressing their feelings against this kind of use of resources and, obviously, FML is the owner of the picture, and one of the most criticized, as you may confirm by reading the whole discussion here. But what really surprises me is how you can cancel a voting based on your own opinion. Please reply, -- Nuno Tavares☜PT16:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If he uploads his entire family album, I would delete it at an instant. To my knowlege he only has two and only two images on commons. I have kept the two since they are acceptable under Commons:Project scope:
... However it is allowed uploading in small quantity images of yourself and others as long they are useful for some Wikimedia project (for example an Wikipedia article, a Wikinews report, in a meta article, on a user-page)...
My idea of small quantity can be "5" personal images. Even then, I am more than willing to be flexible if I see any potential educational use. Those two images can have encyclopedic usage on articles talking about the matrix on projects that do not allow fair use. I have such a picture myself on my userpage which can also have an encyclopedic value such as an article about cats. You also have such an image on your userpage.
Harddrives are cheep. 4-5 images per person really doesn't use that much harddrive space. It would use more hard drive space when deleted (we are talking bytes).
Debates on commons are not required to last a certain time span. They can be closed the second they are engaged at an admins discretion. I just do not see a valid/acceptable reason for deletion at the moment since it is clear image is not a copyvio.
As a matter of fact yes. I too made a few modifications. I really want to maintain the wikistress meter though (to warn people when I am explosive :) ). table.toc doesn't appear to be a class. I can add it to the necesary mediawiki page... where is the original code for it? --Catout22:24, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure about the table.toc. Maybe it's just .toc... I'll try to find it in the hebrew wikipedia, and see if it's significant. About the Wikistress... May I suggest... and such? Yuval Y • Chat • 22:47, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please stop confusing me by copying all the conversions, and just tell me you have written a reply in your talk page? Thanks, Yuval Y • Chat • 12:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As you wish, however what I am doing is the standard way I communicate with everyone. It was never intended to confuse. --Catout12:47, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's just that instead of checking the history of your chat page, I'll have to check mine too. Besides, I check My contributions from time to time, to see if there's any change, so if it isn't something urgent, you don't even have to notify me at my user-talk. Don't worry, I would find your reply =) Yuval Y • Chat • 13:01, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed you deleted Image:Persepolis terrace 4.jpg. I just wanted to tell you that you should stop deleting the images from livius in the Category:Persepolis because a permission was given from livius.org yo use their images on Wikipedia under GFDL License. I wasn't in charge of the mail permission, but I asked fr:User:Pentocelo and fr:User:Céréales Killer to add the OTRS on the images on Commons. Please wait a bit so it is done and we don't have to ask you to undelete the images. Cheers, Fabienkhan17:22, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi cool cat. Thx for having paid attention to Fabienkhan's message. The OTRS process concerning the pictures from livius was completed a few days ago. I will oviously update the picture info page this afternoon. Regards Pentocelo08:44, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am just glad I haven't deleted free images (from what I understand from your comment). Be sure to include the OTRS ticket number on each and every related image. :) --Catout09:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to disturb you again, but I encouter some difficulties by applying the OTRS template on the images, could you please show me how to do for the picture above as an example? OTRS Ticket is 2006112210022386, thx for your kindness. Pentocelo10:44, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Cool Cat
I've seen you've deleted Image:Persepolis_terrace_4.jpg I listed in Detetion request and shortly after you restored it, saying « ongoing OTRS process ». What is an OTRS process ?
I posted also a message to the uploader about others pictures from Livius that have less license information (it is not precised « provided that no fees are charged for their distribution »). They are for example Image:Bishapur_relief_2_1.jpg and Image:Kangavar2.jpg (see his contribution list). I asked him to give more information to know if Livius releases them in a free license.
Thanks for your answer. Sting17:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OTRS stands for "Open-source Ticket Request System". On Wikimedia projects, it generally refers to the ticket system where volunteers respond to emails that are sent to Wikimedia, including general information (in several languages), press queries and permission emails. On Commons, "OTRS" generally refers only to this later type.
Basically the copyright holder and OTRS people communicate. Image will be redeleted if OTRS doesn't work out. See the section above this one on my talk page. --Catout18:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cited source and the material are not remotely similar. The flag on the linked site is more like the french flag ([1]). The flag that was uploaded looked nothing like it. In fact it did not look like a flag at all. --Catout16:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is it is so frustrating to use Wikimedia Commons. I would love to just upload my pictures and not learn to do anything. But every thing I do leads to more frustration. I can't find the right liscence, because it turns out that it's not in the drop-down menu, but it doesn't tell me that in the drop-down menu, I can't figure out how to categorize because I think the tag that says 'categorize' is for putting images in categories, but it's not, its for finding categories, then I finally figure this out after months, realize why I couldn't find a picture I need, because it wasn't in the gallery, figure out how to put it there, and some unilatterally removes it from the gallery, and from my categories. Everything I do here just gives me a headache. This is NOT a user friendly site. And no matter how hard I try to do only things that won't irritate the heck out of me, or take two week breaks in between every access, I keep running smack up against complete and total unusability. I really think that Wikimedia Commons needs a beta-testing overall by non Wikimedia Commons users. It would get blasted. KP Botany01:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2.jpg){kind=small}
