User talk:Kanonkas
From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
|
/Archive 1 /Archive 2 /Archive 3 /Archive 4 /Archive 5 /Archive 6 |
Contents |
[edit] Little service
Hi there. This picture on en.WP was imported and I deleted it at once as a copyvio [1]. The importer asked me to have the original deleted on WP as well, but I'm not active at all over there. Would you please take care of that? --Eusebius (talk) 20:38, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Eusebius. I've taken care of the issue. Please ask me if you need any further assistance. Best regards, — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 20:53, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Bot request
Hi Kanonkas, would you have a look at this request. As he already did extensive testing, could you flag it? -- User:Docu at 13:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Docu. I would prefer if we could wait a day or two before proceeding. Sounds good? — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 14:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
- Ok for me (it's not my request). It's just that I wouldn't want him to get discouraged in the meantime. -- User:Docu at 14:14, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Again my bot
Hello! I would like to ask you if it could be possible to make a little modification to my bot. I talked with this user, who is taking himself the hard work of organizing the categories about Italian administrative entities (regions, provinces and comuni). He asked me to give to the categories of comuni only the name of the comune without the province (e.g. Category:Venetico), instead the pattern you suggested me (e.g.: Category:Sesto Campano, Isernia), because:
- It would make easier the search of a category by the comune name, because not always people knows which province the comune belongs to;
- There is a proposal, made by the Italian Government, to abolish the province institution, leaving only regions and comuni. If such a thing would happen, indicating the province a comune belongs to would become quite useless.
Can I modify my bot in order to create the category names only with the comune name? I don't know if such a little thing should need another approval, but in doubt I asked you... Thank you for your attention, best regards. -- Vonvikken (talk) 00:56, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hi again. No approval needed for that. Just be sure that it's the proper way to categorize. Multichill can probably help you if you need any. Best regards, — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 14:03, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] File:Eagle closeup.jpg
File:Eagle closeup.jpg should probably be deleted. It seems to be a copy of en:File:Eagle closeup.jpg (no source). -- Common Good (talk) 22:06, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Done by PeterSymonds (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights). — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 11:05, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Edit question
Hi. I don't know what this is all about. What's the situation? Wondering, cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 19:06, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Infrogmation. Please see your inbox. Best regards, — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 21:16, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] File:Parque das nações lisboa portugal.jpg
I don't know why this is still not deleted. There is no evidence the uploader knew the right license. Uploader's talkpage revealed other copy vios. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:53, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- You should tag it with {{copyright violation|your reason here}} instead of taking it to DR. It speeds up the process. Turelio took care of your request. Best regards, — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 09:30, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
