User talk:Bidgee

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Busy desk.svg This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | English | Español | Euskara | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Simple English | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


Contents

More than one account[edit]

I have more than one account because I (along with user:J_Bar) was being stalked a while back by User:Adam.J.W.C., who was following me around and undoing my work via the sockpuppet PoorPhotoremovalist, which was eventually blocked after I got Checkuser to investigate. Since then I haven't especially needed the extra accounts, but they're still there. Are you an admin by any chance?

Sardaka (talk) 06:27, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I always understood it wasn't necessarily a problem to have more than one account provided they are not being abused, as Adam was abusing his. Does "disclose" mean that I have to say I'm Sardaka on the user page of each account? This might defeat the purpose, since the purpose was to shake a stalker off.

Sardaka (talk) 06:33, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm in the process of putting tags on them now. As for ANI, I would have been happy to go to them if I thought I'd get any help out of them. In my early days, I felt I was being stalked by User:TheRingess and went to ANI, but they weren't in the least bit interested. I've found it's very hard to get any action out of them.

Sardaka (talk) 06:39, 28 March 2013 (UTC) I've done Clytemnestra. Sardaka (talk) 07:19, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Marquee (The Star Sydney) grand opening[edit]

Hi. I noticed you added all the photos from to Category:Marquee (The Star Sydney) grand opening to Category:March 2012 in Sydney and removed the uncategorized tag. But:

  1. Category:Marquee (The Star Sydney) grand opening is already in Category:March 2012 in New South Wales. (I put it there at the time because it wasn't clear to me, being from outside Australia, whether "suburb" meant adjacent to Sydney, or inside the Sydney city limits. It actually to be well inside the city limits.)
  2. The uncategorized tags were there because none of those photos have been categorized by person yet. There is no other way to properly add things to Category:Media needing categories, is there?

Am I missing something? I know enough about VisualFileChange.js that I could probably do a mass change of some kind if need be, like knocking Category:March 2012 in Sydney off things that are already in Category:Marquee (The Star Sydney) grand opening, or maybe even trying to guess a category name from the file name. --Closeapple (talk) 15:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh man. I just realized that I misspelled "Sydney" in Category:Marquee (The Star Syndey) grand opening! I can change that at the same time as the rest of the stuff so that, maybe, each file only gets one edit. Let me know. --Closeapple (talk) 15:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Tomascastelazo[edit]

Hi Bidgee, I've been the whole day off (and I don't I can write sort of statement in some hours). Does it make sense to wait until I can say anything or we'd better to close it down without further drama? Best regards and many thanks into advance --Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 19:16, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

I thought that it would be best that you knew of the thread on AN/U. Though the ball is still in Tomascastelazo (talk · contribs) court and if he keeps up, he'll be seeing an interaction ban or a block. Bidgee (talk) 23:39, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
On that topic, there is a bit of a study I did of the problem and it seems that there is some merit to Tom's complaints, I put up an analysis there.
What I came here about is that picture, the sourcing is a mess actually, and I see no way to fix it, the image is actually a collage and both image pages don't say as much and the original has a mess on it where sources or derivatives or whatever are supposed to be, so I'd say it's far from done, but I couldn't much care, if everyone else is happy with it then that's good enough. Penyulap 01:16, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Grendas-modern-bus.png[edit]

Hi Bidgee,

I removed the category Category:Buses in Victoria, Australia from Grendas-modern-bus.png because I was going through all bus photos in that category and moving them to better locations (mainly Category:Buses in Geelong‎ or Category:Buses in Melbourne‎) but in the case of Grendas-modern-bus.png it was already in Category:Grenda which is nested in Category:Buses in Melbourne‎ so I simply removed the Category:Buses in Victoria, Australia. I should have stated COM:OVERCAT and my reasoning in the edit summary, sorry. Can we reinstate my edit?

I also have two questions to ask:
1) is Category:Grenda needed? Should we just move the three photos in it to Category:Buses in Melbourne‎?
And 2) I've noticed that you move files from wiki to commons, could you please move the following files for me? [1] [2] [3] [4]

Thank you in advance. Liamdavies (talk) 13:23, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi again, just wondering if you've had a chance to give this some consideration. Liamdavies (talk) 07:19, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
I didn't notice the Grenda but your edit summary wasn't very helpful, I suggest to have a little more informative. Yes, the Grenda category is needed. Bidgee (talk) 09:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I know my edit summary was vague to say the least, sorry, people usually don't look over my categorising, and I can get a little complacent. I'm generally better though. If we need Grenda, should we also have categories for 'National Bus', 'Ventura', 'Sita' and 'Smartbus'? There are three or more photos representing all of those companies, what criteria is there for when a category should be established? Sorry for bombarding you with questions, but I've spent most of my time categorising trams, which can be a little easier. Also, would you please be able to move those photos (if not that's ok, I just don't know how, and don't want to mess it up). Regards Liamdavies (talk) 15:41, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi again, again, I'm guessing you're to busy to move those files from wiki to com, do you have an advice regarding categories? Liamdavies (talk) 15:28, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, been very busy with Commons drama and completing my Uni essay. If you ever need a file moved, best tool to use is the "Move-to-commons assistant" or "CommonsHelper 2", though the Toolserver is a bit slow of late. Doesn't matter if there is just one photo, having a category for the bus company helps later when more files are added. Bidgee (talk) 09:48, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Bidgee, I know the essay feeling, I got one in last week and have another handful due by the end of semester. I had a look at the helpers, but one was down, and the other just confusing, so I thought I'd ask someone else rather than cock it up. Regarding the sub cats for buses, I might go through as a procrastination to avoid class work. But I may reshuffle a few cats around, if you have any problems just tell me on my talk and I'll be as helpful as I can. Regards Liamdavies (talk) 12:53, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Canberra Airport terminal (10).jpg[edit]

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | česky | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Canberra Airport terminal (10).jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Danrok (talk) 00:52, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Please ignore the delete, I have fixed the information template so that the source is correctly displayed. I think you may have uploaded a number of photos with a broken template, due to faulty software or similar problem. Danrok (talk) 01:04, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

It was caused by a bot and I've yet to see the error caused by it fixed. Bidgee (talk) 10:25, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Outing[edit]

Also it would be wise to advise administrators, that if they don't want their name revealed, they should not rig votations using sockpuppets having their realnames. It's not me who created the sockpuppet and voted twice on a friend adminship candidacy.

At least Ecemaml admitted the sockpuppet was his and therefore that he double voted.

I suggest you to also oversight the image that Ecemaml uploaded on Commons linking the two accounts (the EXIF data shows his real name). That way, no evidence of his dishonesty will be available.

There was a legitimate complaint that an admin had used sockpuppets to vote twice. I posted the information proving the user dishonesty. And I also stated that I had no further intention, nor I asked for a sanction (moreover, I specifically said give Ecemaml the chance to admit his wrongdoings).

Be confident, however, that I won't post it again. Please advise administrators not to rig votes. -- Magister Mathematicae 01:03, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Regardless if he used is real name or not, it doesn't give you the right to post links that contain personal information. Bidgee (talk) 01:08, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello Bidgee, I have been following the discussions on user Ecemaml and am not surprised to see that his personal information was revealed by user Magister who has a long track record of revealing private information and of taking advantage of his former check-user privileges (at es.wiki, he still has these privileges in Commons), using this information when it best suits him and to his own benefit. This was one of the reasons why he was subjected to a desysop process at es.wiki where lost by a vote of 50 in favour of keeping his flags to 62 against.
Prior to that, many users from es.wiki expressed their concerns about his habit of revealing private informatiom and of misusing his check-user privileges during the 2012 stewards elections and confirmations. I believe that what Ecemaml did 8 years ago should not be held against him at this stage of the game, but regardless of my opinion, I firmly believe that private info should be treated as such, and user Magister should cease to reveal private info in his own personal vendettas. Sorry for bringing this up here and of having you involved in this nasty episode, but revealing personal info on another user without the user's consent is totally unethical and should be strictly forbidden. Regards, --Maragm (talk) 08:25, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
I slightly edited Magister message above. I don't think it's adequate that as a reply for revealing a real name he posts both in the talk page. I'm unsure about hiding them. 19 revisions would be affected (sorry, was going to do it earlier but forgot). Platonides (talk) 23:58, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Forward[edit]

I am just forwarding copies of emails from the rights holders as I type this. Chanel and her photographers fully understand the rights they are releasing but are still learning the hoops of commons. It should be resolved soon with all images in her category correctly lincensed.--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:08, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

No worries[edit]

Hey Bidgee, I just wanted to stop by and say no hard feelings about your removal of my comment on that board.

I was just trying to inject some COM:MELLOW into the situation, but really, No worries, either way.

Have a great day!

Cheers,

-- Cirt (talk) 16:13, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Cheers, at least you can see that I'm trying to keep AN/U for what it is designed for but it has now been hi-jacked and has become a joke. I just wished they would use VP and not the AN boards for their "off topic" chat but with the added insults, I would've blocked them if I wasn't involved. Bidgee (talk) 11:11, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

File:CcdVideoCamera.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 08:04, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Concerning the restriction on Penyulap[edit]

Hi Bidgee! You asked on COM:AN/U that if I had any better ideas to the current restriction, to put them down and let people debate them. I've posted there the kind of this I would consider as an acceptable alternative and would like your input on the matter. I appreciate you're busy, so if you don't get to it immediately, I'll understand. Thanks :) BarkingFish (talk) 10:12, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

TUSC token 42df8438ae9dd77ebf0cc8a5dcaf8c3a[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Request for protected page edit[edit]

Hi, sorry this is a bit last minute, but I was looking for a currently active admin in hopes for getting a protected page changed. I have a picture that's being featured for Picture of the Day tomorrow (April 29th) and was hoping to expand the description before it went live tomorrow. I didn't realize that POTD images locked the day before so I wasn't able to edit it. I have a protected edit request on its talk page HERE. I would be grateful if you could help. Evan-Amos (talk) 11:56, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Disregard this, another admin jumped right on it. Thanks though! -- Evan-Amos (talk) 11:58, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

File:FIFA Logo(2010).svg[edit]

Hi, I just reverted this page to its previous version before protecting it, in response to the discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections#File:FIFA Logo(2010).svg. However, I didn't notice that it had already been protected by you. Do you care either way? I would have asked if I noticed the page was already protected, sorry –⁠moogsi (blah) 16:52, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I've just realized you commented at the thread linked above before you protected the file. I reverted the file to the version you protected. Sorry, I really messed up, here :/ –⁠moogsi (blah) 18:37, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bidgee. Could you please reply to my question in that thread? Thank you. --Leyo 20:57, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Yahoo hid the Flickrmail option too[edit]

Dear Bidgee,

Just to let you know that Yahoo also hid the flickrmail option I notice as i discussed it here with Delaywaves. This flickr 'redesign' gets worse and worse sadly. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 03:08, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Aircraft registration categories[edit]

Hi there, I thought we really need to include aircraft 's type in the name of the individual aircraft's category so that people could find what they are looking for in a museum's collection. Xyz (aircraft) tells the user nothing. How do we discuss this further ? Regards, Rod. Rcbutcher (talk) 06:41, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Free licenses[edit]

At Commons:Deletion requests/File:A commemorative plaque being unveiled at a parade to mark the change of name of the 19th Regiment Royal Artillery.jpg, you're thoroughly wrong about one of the most basic facts you need to know on Commons—in order for something to be freely licensed, it has to be copyright. I don't expect this coming from an admin. —innotata 17:14, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

I suggest you rethink and strike what you just said. I've read the OGL and understand it, but File:A commemorative plaque being unveiled at a parade to mark the change of name of the 19th Regiment Royal Artillery.jpg clearly isn't licensed OGL when you don't have the Ministry of Defence marking it with a green tick on its image repository and you also have "Crown Copyright: This image may be used for current news purposes only. It may not be used, reproduced or transmitted for any other purpose without first obtaining a copyright license available from the MoD, Crown Copyright Unit. ipr-cc@dpa.mod.uk", hardly what I call "free use". Bidgee (talk) 22:26, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
That's a different issue, and I'll address it on the page. Your previous deletion rationale was obviously incorrect, so I stand by what I said. —innotata 01:54, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
If you're going to act with bad faith, consider it the last time I license review your uploads which I had done so in good faith. Bidgee (talk) 02:36, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
What's your issue with my complaint? What I said is that what you wrote was incorrect, and now it seems to me you were just a little unclear. I can't tell what you're referring to as "bad faith": I understand that to mean harmful motives, an intention to hurt the project, or something of that nature. And if that's what I'm doing, why would you act with bad faith in response?
Now, I've pointed out that there is a "broad site notice" on this photograph's source, so can you reply on the DR? —innotata 18:54, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

File:General Sir Peter Wall in No 1 uniform.jpg and File:General Sir Peter Wall, Chief of the General Staff.jpg[edit]

The links you added do not work—because of the design of the Defence Imagery website. I fixed them, to use search results for the image number rather than direct image URLs. Try the links. —innotata 02:07, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Your URLs don't work and place do not modify the URLs added in the license review template, it was the URL I used for the review. Bidgee (talk) 02:38, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
I said, try the links. Yours reliably don't work ("illegal parameters"), the ones I added do reliably—I've tested this (with different images, previously) on multiple devices and browsers, etc. Broken links aren't useful anywhere; you can't even get to the Defence Imagery main page from the links you added. Are you sure you haven't confused them? —innotata 04:08, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Capparis spinosa category[edit]

I've listed the category at Commons:Categories for discussion/2013/06/Category:Capparis spinosa in the Ukraine, although this should be rather obvious on the grounds of consistency.

I noticed this since I was checking if you'd addressed my concerns above in any way; I'm still waiting for responses. —innotata 16:13, 19 June 2013 (UTC)