User talk:Lar

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

Jump to: navigation, search

I recognize that this user page belongs to this Wikimedia project and not to me personally. As such, I recognize that I am expected to respectfully abide by community standards as to the presentation and content of this page, and that if I do not like these guidelines, I am welcome either to engage in reasonable discussion about it, to publish my material elsewhere, or to leave the project.

Please post new messages to the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.
Start a new talk topic.

Commons maintenance announcements [+/−]
Backlogs:
as of 25 September 2009

Note: I like thank yous! I collect them for the English Wikipedia at w:User_talk:Lar/RFA 1 but generically thanking me for voting in their Request for adminship. Or bureaucratship. Or botship. Or checkusership. Or anything else that could possibly be voted on there... is kinda boring. (So please don't.) Say something special if you can.

Note:

Interpersonal communication does not work when messages are left on individual users' talk pages rather than threaded, especially when a third party wishes to read or reply.

Being a "bear of very little brain", I get confused easily trying to follow conversations that bounce back and forth, so I've decided to try the convention that many others seem to use, aggregation of messages on either your talk page or my talk page. If the conversation is about an article I will try to aggregate on the article's talk page.

  • If the conversation is on your talk page or an article talk page, I will watch it.
  • If the conversation is on my talk page or an article talk page and I think that you may not be watching it, I will link to it in a note on your talk page, or in the edit summary of an empty edit. But if you start a thread here, please watch it.

I may mess up, don't worry, I'll find it eventually.


Contents

Hi! I am Larry Pieniazek and I am not notable. For more information, see: Wikipedia:User:Lar

Feel free to leave me messages here, as an admin, 'crat, and Checkuser, I do check here a lot. If I do not respond right away, feel free to leave me a message by either emailing me, or by leaving me a message on the english Wikipedia: Wikipedia:User_talk:Lar. Thanks!

My archived talk
Archive 1 — start through about 1 Nov 2006
Archive 2 — about 1 Nov 2006 through about 1 Mar 2007
Archive 3 — about 1 Mar 2007 through about 1 Aug 2007
Archive 4 — about 1 Aug 2007 through about 1 Jan 2008
Archive 5 — about 1 Jan 2008 through about 1 Sep 2008
Archive 6 — about 1 Sep 2008 through about 1 Nov 2008
Archive 7 — about 1 Nov 2008 through about 1 Jan 2009
Archive 8 — about 1 Jan 2009 through about 1 March 2009
Archive 9 — not set up yet


[edit] Cedar Point

My maternal tong is the French so my level in English isnot perfect . Could you upload other photos of Cedar Point on Wikipedia Commons ? Because for the major rides , we have a great number of files but for the other rides , we have only one or two photos like Gemini , Iron Dragon ... Cedar Creek Mine Ride has no image . (I speak for the French articles , but in realty , we translate English articles). I do the same thing for European parks I visit last year like Walibi Belgium and Plopsaland. Thank you . JÄNNICK Jérémy (talk) 07:33, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I will take a look to see what I have but I did not take a comprehensive set of pics, I was just taking a few random ones here and there so some of the rides I don't have pics at all... :( Thanks for your interest and for your uploads of other parks! (let me see, how many days till the Point opens again?) Best wishes (and PS, your english is just fine). ++Lar: t/c 11:17, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion Help

Looks like the Ford images have caused a brouhaha. As I mentioned to you at the time I uploaded them, they were tagged on Flickr with cc-by despite having a cc-by-nc watermark. The Flickr checker bot verified this at the time and I did e-mail Ford at the time with no response. It doesn't matter what the situation is now, the license at the time can not be revoked or changed, even if it was a mistake. It is just too bad for Ford. It isn't our responsibility to determine intent, we go with what they chose in the license box on Flickr. According to the Flickr terms of use, the license they choose is the license that it is licensed under at that time. Since it is the official Ford Flickr stream, they can not say that they were licensed unofficially. I request that these images be given safe harbor until we can negotiate a more suitable situation with Ford regarding future images. Even if we cannot negotiate an acceptable resolution, I believe we are legally entitled to the images for my preceding reasons and thus they should not be deleted. Right now I am extremely busy in school, which is why I haven't been around since the Slim Virgin brouhaha (things just haven't been letting up at school and so I am still on wikibreak). Would you please have a look at this and maybe run interference for me? If you look through my en-wp talk archive, there is another admin who is also interested in Ford images who might be able to help resolve this. BTW, Hope you are doing well! --Dragon695 (talk) 15:21, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Replied there. Who is the other editor? ++Lar: t/c 18:39, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
en:User:GeeJo --Dragon695 (talk) 10:38, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] everywhere but frwikis?

dear lar, if you have time, could you please take a look at the 2 pics which are now here? thx! oscar 21:24, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I will look, but I think what governs is where the pic was taken, not where it is used, else we would have a rather tangled set of wikis to worry about... remember that frwiki is used by the Quebecois (at least the francophone ones) among others, not just by the residents of France. I could be wrong though. My suggestion is that you try to see if you can get permission somehow (from the estate?) ++Lar: t/c 21:58, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Message

You have 1 new message on your Meta Wikimedia talk page. --Wallsuches (talk) 11:26, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Nudie pics once more

G'day Lar - public place + long lense + boobs = what exactly? thoughts much appreciated. cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 02:51, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

ps. as ever, there are many more where that came from. Also - I'd appreciate your thoughts on whether or not categories can be misapplied in the area of sexual content? - we've now got things like this and if you take a look at this you'll see.. um.. some rather specialist categories. Does an increasing focus of categories at some point become 'out of scope' or a net detriment to the project in your view?
pps. a propos nothing in particular, I spoke on wiki self-determinism and self-regulation at a recent 'Wiki Wednesday' here in Sydney - it was refreshing to have a nuanced balanced discussion of some of the issues, and I was pleasantly surprised by the support for finding some middle ground in moving forward - I'm a bit busy to push much at the mo, but will continue to ask questions, and nom. the odd pic. here and there to try and help out - your advice on my approach is always welcome, and never ignored ;-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 03:14, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

PM: I just don't know what to think. I despair of ever resolving this issue. ++Lar: t/c 14:06, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

don't despair Lar - it'll all come out in the wash :-) - I have been pleasantly buoyed recently by support from various quarters on this sort of stuff. I've made some replies at the deletion request, and in the mid term would really like to see a greater awareness of the subject's knowledge / intentions / permissions taken into account. You previously advised that pursuing this through new policy was a poor choice, I guess we're now navigating through some deletion discussions to see what direction the project will take... we'll see :-) Privatemusings (talk) 00:28, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Bot requests

Your comments on asking permission even if a bot flag is not needed make sense (does that mean I should have requested permission to use AWB on Commons? I have only used it a couple of times, on my own images so far). It would seem sensible to put something in writing, and probably start a new page called, say, Requests for permission to use a bot. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 08:41, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

AWB I think we handle via the AWB request page's talk page (AWB on Commons is like it is on en:wp you have to be an admin or on the list)... but a pointer to it from the bot page is probably a good idea. I did a request for larbot back when although all I ever did was AWB runs. ++Lar: t/c 14:06, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Closing time

Hi Lar. Isn't it better to let a bureaucrat chat start instead of extending this to another week? I recall this incident, where the bureaucrats started a chat after the ending time - rather then extending it to another week. Best regards, --Kanonkas(talk) 14:46, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

See your mail. Also, I think this extension is favored by a clear majority of 'crats. ++Lar: t/c 16:00, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
My problem is that the majority of the current bureaucrats have participated. I'd rather let a neutral, as 5 of the current bureaucrats have voted (I'm not questioning that the current bureaucrats can't be neutral) - I think it's better to let the two remaining bureaucrats make the call, as they have not yet voted. If they have already given their opinions, then sorry. I just think it should be clarified. --Kanonkas(talk) 18:09, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
If you are asking that one of the two 'crats that has not voted be the one to formally extend the time... that's process wonkery, it's not necessary, but OK, sure... that can be done. However, what I find more concerning are two other points... 1) I mailed you privately and in my response to your first post I again pointed out that I mailed you, which is a fairly obvious invitation to take this conversation to email... yet you did not. What does that say about your sense of when to keep things private and when to keep them public? That's a very important characteristic of a good 'crat. 2) (and this is a biggie) You are opposed by 5 of the 7 current crats and two highly respected former ones... what does that tell you? Kanonkas, I'll say it again, you are much improved from your initial impetuous approach to adminship (block too soon and too often was how I characterized it) but I think you still have some seasoning to go. Your next candidacy should be one in which you have unanimous support from your prospective fellow 'crats. That may mean you should make sure you have it, before you run, instead of just impetuously running. ++Lar: t/c 19:09, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Hebbot

I think 15 days is long enough for Commons:Bots/Requests for flags/Hebbot to be archived. :) MBisanz talk 10:10, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

{{sofixit}} ? ++Lar: t/c 11:33, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] PD review

PD review is now on. List of pertinent pages is here: User_talk:Rlevse#PD_review. I'll start when I get home this evening by marking images I know are solid PD. Ideas on how to advertise us are welcome (Admin board, etc). We'll also need to check the files needing review cat regularly. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Cool. I think a post to the admins noticeboard would be good. Finding some files that need this review to "prime the pump" might be a good idea too. ++Lar: t/c 12:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
The templates are ready now. So let's get to it. Can you write the noticeboard posting please? Two files are already in it. Several of of recent uploads are eligible as they are from the Civil War, I'll tag some. — Rlevse • Talk • 09:52, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Done. Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#PD_Review, advise of needed corrections or whatever. I'll watch and try to catch some untagged so I can do at least one and familiarize myself with the process. Thanks for spearheading this! ++Lar: t/c 11:19, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] User:Jack Merridew bot

Hi. Just a quick fyi that yon bot is up, but inactive. I'm going to use this on Wikisource first w/John. I'll go through the policy and approval process here once I've cut my teeth elsewhere and have ideas for here. There's a fuller discussion and more links at:

Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks. If you go to COM:A (which is easy to remember) you'll find the links to COM:BRFA where requests are made. the latter is embedded in the former as it turns out. ++Lar: t/c 12:06, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Email

You have email. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 12:54, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Got it. Trust me, I read my email a lot. :)... replied in both places. ++Lar: t/c 13:13, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Giggy

Did I miss something, or isn't Giggy supposed to have the admin and crat bits back? See this --MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

He did get them back, but then I think he asked that they be turned off again, see [1], which Dungodung did, see [2] ... the archive probably should note that it's off again (if it doesn't) ++Lar: t/c 20:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
after edit conflict
I am not Lar but I have the answer:
You missed this he/she asked for removal of his/her access again after a month. A great loss for Commons :(
Best regards,
Huib talk 20:31, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I updated the archive to note the removal. ++Lar: t/c 21:11, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I did miss the removal request. Thanks. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 12:54, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Commons:Requests and votes/Wutsje

If I understand your edit correctly, you thought that Spacebirdy forgot to cast his vote, but he's actually voter #2. –Tryphon☂ 01:38, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Not quite... sorry if I was unclear. My vote is a support based on Spacebirdy's nomination. My fellow steward is a very good judge of character and that she chose to nominate Wutsje is about as strong a recommendation as it's possible to give, so it's an automatic support from me. ++Lar: t/c 04:54, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Oh, I see... sorry for the misunderstanding, all clear now. –Tryphon☂ 10:16, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] permanent deletion

Hi Lar - I saw this deletion of yours, and wanted to find out whether or not you might support a system for a more permanent deletion - it doesn't seem appropriate to me that images like that one (or this) should remain available to all commons admin.s - thoughts? Privatemusings (talk) 03:28, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I have oversight here and I debated whether I should have made those deletions not visible to admins or not... such action is governed by the Oversight policy absent a more comprehensive policy at a particular wiki (which cannot be more "lenient" than overall WMF policy), and it was not clear to me that it was necessary. But I may be wrong. ++Lar: t/c 03:36, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
I agree it's a close call, but personally speaking, I'd be happier if the images above were in some way permanently deleted. Does oversight accomplish this? - or does it just restrict the ability to view the image to people with oversight? Presumably out and out child pornography would be removed from the server completely somehow? Are you aware of whether or not this type of issue has been discussed / resolved previously in any way, by any chance? (hope you're good, btw... :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 03:50, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
It would require a developer to get something so deleted it's not still on the server. Oversighters are chosen on the basis of trust. Including the trust that they are not going to misuse oversighted information. Commons has 3. Total. See m:Oversight for details on policy and pointers to implementation information. ++Lar: t/c 11:20, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
I wonder if you happen to know if the full deletion thing being developer only something that's been around commons since its inception? - I totally agree that the risk of any of the 3 commons oversighters doing anything nefarious seems very slim, though I note that there seem to be 42 other people with access to all deleted media (presumably access to said wouldn't appear in any log monitored in any way? - perhaps a server log, but I don't really know how they work) - I also note that positions such as priests and teachers generally speaking require trust, though sadly the controls to ensure that trust isn't abused have proven necessary time and again.
Presumably thus far, exploitative and extreme imagery (such as child pornography) hasn't been a problem at all - although images skirting the edges have been - it's my view that we'd do well to think about this a little ahead of a time when events overtake..... Privatemusings (talk) 05:13, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
ps. just realised it wasn't entirely clear - the 42 other people are stewards + dev.s + jimbo - and the no.s are wrong regardless, because I see you're also a steward - I didn't check the other commons oversighters.... you get the idea though ;-) Privatemusings (talk) 05:15, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you're driving at, I'm afraid. Can you put your question in the form of a question that admits of a yes/no answer? ++Lar: t/c 15:18, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

< heh! how's this;

  • Has 'developer only' deletion always been the case?
  • (follow up) - Is every file ever uploaded to commons therefore available to admin.s unless oversighted?
  • Does viewing an oversighted image result in a monitored log entry?
  • Has child pornography been uploaded to commons?
  • (follow up) Do you think the policies and practices are currently in place to handle uploaded child pornography appropriately?

It's a bit hyperbolic, but you get the idea :-) thanks Lar - apologies for waffle.... Privatemusings (talk) 21:40, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

OK... this is complex. For accurate details you would want to see the history of the mediawiki software. Which apparently is not documented all that well
  • Has 'developer only' deletion always been the case?
  • Yes. Files are a special case... they are not saved as Diffs in some table somewhere. Instead they actualy live out on the file system and what is kept in the DB is a pointer to the file itself. Each time you upload a new version, the MW software puts it somewhere, and creates a new pointer... So when a file is "deleted" it's merely made invisible. To actually get rid of a file the pointer needs to be deleted, and the file needs to be deleted. Deleting the pointer (just like deleting any other "diff") requires DB access. Deleting the file requires shell access to the system...
  • (follow up) - Is every file ever uploaded to commons therefore available to admin.s unless oversighted?
  • or thus deleted as above. A bit of history. Very old MW didn't support files at all. Then, when file support was added, it was not possible to replace files. Or delete them. Then we got deletion, which means only admins can see the pointer. Then we got oversight, which added an additional layer of deletion. Oversight really is just deletion that even admins can't see, only oversighters. Then we got revision deletion which is a "better" oversight since it allows more fine grained control
  • Does viewing an oversighted image result in a monitored log entry?
  • I have no idea
  • Has child pornography been uploaded to commons?
  • Surely. But if it's brought to the attention of responsible folk it is dealt with.
  • (follow up) Do you think the policies and practices are currently in place to handle uploaded child pornography appropriately?
  • I have no idea, you'd have to be more specific.
Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 00:27, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
helps a great deal, Lar - thanks for your time :-) - here's a final few for now to try and nail that specific bit;
  • You mention that child pornography has surely been uploaded to wikimedia commons - are you personally aware of any instance?
  • Would you presume (or perhaps you know?) that dealing with this material includes developer removal from the server?
  • Regardless of your presumptions / knowledge - would you agree that removal from the server is both necessary and desirable?
  • Would you further agree that policies and practices need to be established to ensure that appropriate law enforcement agencies are informed etc. - are you aware of any such practice?
jeez - well my 'couple' turned into a few... though hopefully these are relatively easy to answer (I really hope that you don't feel 'on the spot' at all - I'm hoping that simple, direct questions might work better than my usual waffle! cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 06:00, 24 May 2009 (UTC)


OK, more answers interspersed (and I suggest my talk page is the wrong venue for a wider discussion of this topic, all you are getting is my opinion)

  • You mention that child pornography has surely been uploaded to wikimedia commons - are you personally aware of any instance?
  • What something is often becomes a bit of an existential discussion... is the Virgin Killer image child porn, for example? I do not presume to be able to definitively declare what is or isn't a thing that society itself struggles with at great length. We get all sorts of vandals uploading all sorts of things... among the millions of images I would be greatly surprised if there wasn't at least one image that fits your definition. I don't know which one or ones with certainty as I don't personally review all of them.
  • Would you presume (or perhaps you know?) that dealing with this material includes developer removal from the server?
  • I do not know how dealing with them is, or should be, done, in cases where I wasn't the person that dealt with it. I'm not clear that developer deletion is required, legally, and I'm not competent to make that assessment. You could ask Mike Godwin.
  • Regardless of your presumptions / knowledge - would you agree that removal from the server is both necessary and desirable?
  • I'm not sure I agree that out and out removal is necessary. Again, that's a question for Mike Godwin, not me. I think personally, once it is very clearly of a certain nature, out and out removal is desirable, but that's a personal opinion. There is also the issue of slippery slopes here.
  • Would you further agree that policies and practices need to be established to ensure that appropriate law enforcement agencies are informed etc. - are you aware of any such practice?
  • I do not think that the WMF at this time routinely forwards information of this nature to law enforcement agencies. I do not have a well formed opinion on whether it should or should not. Again, that's a question for Mike Godwin, not me.

Hope that helps. As for feeling "on the spot"... I do in fact feel that way. I get the impression you are going somewhere, and you want a particular answer or answers from me, and you are not going to stop worrying the bone until you get them... I'm the wrong person to ask, I think. Not because I am unsympathetic, but because it's not within my remit to solve this problem. When stuff is brought to my attention I try to deal with it to the best of my ability. ++Lar: t/c 16:42, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Forgot to block someone...

Hi, Lar. I'd like to point you to Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/MRDU08, where you'd said that you had blocked all the users you checked. Well you appear to have missed one; DRB394. Just thought I'd let you know! Thanks! —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 03:17, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! That user at the time was blcoked, but it subsequently expired, which I missed. 22:38, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey again, Lar. I just noticed a new sock from this group pop up at enwiki, and followed him back here and noticed a flurry of restored copyvio images. Check out RepDom809's contribs, where you'll note the author for each image is the sockmaster (see for example File:Flag of the Muncipality of Puñal.PNG). No idea if there are more sleepers to find. Sorry if the appropriate course would have been to reopen the RFCU or open a new one; I'm not familiar with Commons vs enwiki processes, so I hope you'll excuse me if this is the wrong place to ask. I'm going to go ask about the contributor at enwiki. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 22:03, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Reopening the RFCU is ok as is nudging me.. things are a bit more informal here. I'll take a look. ++Lar: t/c 03:03, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Looked. No new sleepers found, but that's a hit. Blocked. thanks for letting me know. Case updated. Contribs need addressing though. ++Lar: t/c 03:16, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Newbie admin question

Hey, thank for promoting me to +sysop. I just have one quick question: where can I find a directory of all the deletion/project scope/vandalism user templates? Thanks in advance, –Juliancolton | Talk 18:22, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Try Category:Message templates. (Please remember that Commons is multilingual, but also please remember that users prefer not to be templated) ++Lar: t/c 20:37, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
That's exactly what I was looking for, thanks! –Juliancolton | Talk 21:09, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] CU

Hi Lar. Could you (and your colleagues maybe) have a look into this, this and this? Thanks. Lycaon (talk) 21:56, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Has this been requested at COM:RFCU ? Don't want to duplicate effort. If not, why not? (feel free to mail me if it's sensitive). If so, does it have some rationale attached? Just asking us to run through contribs looking for a reason may not be the best way to go (again, feel free to mail me if it's sensitive). ++Lar: t/c 22:35, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
It is a multiple vote issue at FPC. I'll open a request at COM:RFCU. Thanks. Lycaon (talk) 05:46, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
I ended up doing a little digging and I warned a couple of the accounts. If the problem continues advise, I'll block the lot of them except one, chosen randomly. ++Lar: t/c 05:55, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Lycaon (talk) 05:59, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Another sock of MRDU08?

Hello Lar, I'm not sure of the process on Commons for amending to a closed CU investigation (Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/MRDU08), but I think Inefable001 (talk · contributions) might be another sock, as he/she seems to have uploaded a lot of Dominican Republic related photos that are almost certainly not his/her "own work". Thanks Andrwsc (talk) 23:37, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Probably ping a CU and add it to the case (going forward... I'm working this one now) ++Lar: t/c 02:09, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't think this user is related. If the behaviour is problematic I advise blocking. Have updated case. ++Lar: t/c 02:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for checking. The uploaded files weren't exactly the same areas of interest as those of MRDU08, but two of them were Miss Dominican Republic contestants, so that's what caught my eye. Andrwsc (talk) 04:37, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Merging my old account into my new one.

I own User:AeronPrometheus and now User:AeronPeryton because I changed my name properly on en.wikipedia.org and opted for a global account not thinking that I still had my old name here. Could you help me merge them together so I can keep my contribs and such in place? Thank you. AeronPeryton (talk) 08:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Please see COM:CHU. Account mergers (in which two accounts contribs get credited to one) are not possible at this time. However renames are. Pick the account with the contributions you want to keep, and request a rename there. LMK if that helps. ++Lar: t/c 16:10, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] COM:VP

Please don't miss this. While there wasn't a problem this time, the policy is in place for good reason; you're bound by it; and I can't criticize others for breaking the policy unless I also criticize you (well, unless I'm a hypocrite). According to a few other people there was some behind the scenes machinations you couldn't reveal publicly; AFAIK your posts to stewards-l still get through without a problem. Thanks for your response.  — Mike.lifeguard 19:04, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I am aware of it. I think your approach leaves a lot to be desired, because it assumes, or appears to assume, that I didn't have a good reason for what I did. You should have raised your concerns privately. ++Lar: t/c 04:27, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] TUSC token 917cb3e310ae63129dbda738b1cd0efd

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

[edit] Changing username

Thanks for your help. Treehill 16:45, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

No problem, you're welcome. ++Lar: t/c 17:37, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] changing username

pleas proceed now [3] --КаіСорен (talk) 16:25, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Did. Advise of concerns, if any. ++Lar: t/c 18:54, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Botting in

Hi Lar, sorry for "botting" in, but I noriced you have been active here today. Do you recall I had my bot request on hold for a few weeks and that I needed to do a test run. Well, I am back and I have made a test run, and another users has said it seemed OK for him. I you have the time and agree that the test run is OK, I would be very happy to have a bot flag flipped, such that I could set it to work ;-) --Slaunger (talk) 19:22, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Done... will archive it shortly. ++Lar: t/c 19:41, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Wow, that was fast. Thanks. I will get my bot moving then... --Slaunger (talk) 19:48, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm on holiday, you just caught me when I happened to be on. Best. ++Lar: t/c 21:18, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] I already posted it on AN but what does CU mean?

You said CU request page would be the appropriate place.But I Have no idea what CU stands for. The Count of Monte Cristo (talk) 00:59, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Checkuser. When allegations of socking are made, probably best to bring it before the checkusers. Try COM:RFCU if necessary. If AN is handling it, good. ++Lar: t/c 11:13, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Colons

Hi, I noticed that you removed removed the colon from the License MediaWiki Template. Unfortunately in the german Version it is still there. I now finaly found the right page. Can you please edit this too MediaWiki:License/de? I will watch these pages an write you, if someone complaines. --Schlurcher (talk) 21:37, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

It had been deleted (it's good practice to use the default versions of MediaWiki messages if at all possible) so what you were seeing is the installation default. I restored it, so it's non-default again. The version I restored already is missing the ":" so you should be all set. Advise of issues. ++Lar: t/c 09:13, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Hey, this message is used on the upload form as the label for the license drop-down menu, and there it should have the colon! Lupo 09:22, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
In all languages? I certainly don't have any clear idea of the right answer here. I tink maybe we need a wider discussion. ++Lar: t/c 09:26, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
In most. The problem is that the server-side software uses this message for both purposes. Maybe file a bug report (assign to Michael Dale) about it? I think it'd be better if the software used two different messages for this. Lupo 09:28, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
If you file a report I'd vote for it. I could file it but I'm not 100% certain I can describe the problem correctly. Will look in later today. ++Lar: t/c 18:27, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
bugzilla:19966. Lupo 07:05, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Voted. Thanks! Best. ++Lar: t/c 07:26, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Possible fix

Hi, sorry to bother you again. I had an idea on the colons problem. But I do not have the rigths to test it. If you use the following code in for example the german Version MediaWiki:License/de it should do the trick:

{{#ifeq: {{NAMESPACE}}|{{ns:6}}|Lizenz|Lizenz:}}

It will use the "Lizenz" version in Namespace 6 (File) and hopefully the other version in all other cases. This would be a simple trick to use the same Template for both uses without software changes. --Schlurcher (talk) 10:28, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... interesting. I have found that sometimes some of the magic words and parserfunctions don't work in the MediaWiki namespace though (when the text is used directly by the interface to display, it sometimes isn't run through the full parser, or so I speculate). Some testing would be needed I think, but it seems worthy of investigation. Commons may not be the place for it. Maybe get an admin ID on the testwiki and try it? ++Lar: t/c 16:31, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
I try. I will inform you of the results. --Schlurcher (talk) 09:08, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi, me again. I tested it on the Testwiki. And it works. Unfortunately the license message is not used, so I use the MediaWiki:Upload-maxfilesize. The code here [4] and there [5] produces the correct message in the upload form, and at the same time it produces the other message at a file: [6]. After the change I had only to wait until the template was updated. Changes in Language also work. --Schlurcher (talk) 21:49, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
THANKS for testing this! I will take a look at those and try to determine how to apply that here. Appreciate your taking the time to work on this. ++Lar: t/c 23:40, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Grundtvig memorial church.jpg

Hi Lar, as requested, I'm here to request a Flickr review for the above. Many thanks. --Mcginnly (talk) 11:18, 31 July 2009 (UTC) (aka. Joopers)

OOps - wait! I've just noticed someone's already uploaded it as File:Pv jensen-klint 05 grundtvig memorial church 1913-1940.jpg. Would you mind deleting my one instead. Wipes egg from face.....sorry. --Mcginnly (talk) 11:21, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
You uploaded the biggest version available, arguably more useful... (if for example someone wants to make a crop of a certain detail for something) so it's your image that ought to be kept. But the other image's paperwork is "better" :)... good categories, geolocated nicely, and has better links to Flickr, as well as having been reviewed. Since you still have that big image locally, presumably, can you upload it at the other file name, replacing the one there with the bigger version? Use "replace with larger version of same image" in the edit summary. Then tag yours for speedy using {{duplicate}} (add File:Pv jensen-klint 05 grundtvig memorial church 1913-1940.jpg as the parameter, so it's clear what it's a dup of...) Thanks for your efforts to secure a high quality image! ++Lar: t/c 18:28, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
God this is complicated, but I understand and wilco. Has anyone produced a flickripper tool, where you point it at flickr images you like with the correct licenses that are then ported over here automagically? --Mcginnly (talk) 18:54, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes. However it's currently not working for lack of a sufficiently knowledgeable maintainer. Contact Bryan if you know of someone that might be able to take it over (requires time and mad coding skillz...) ++Lar: t/c 19:17, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Ah, Tryphon has beat me to it. I'm afraid I don't move in those sort of circles. --Mcginnly (talk) 09:31, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm a bit thick today, beat you to what? ++Lar: t/c 22:08, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Adminship

Now that the August 1st deadline has rolled around, I plan to do a little bit of post-event cleanup and then relinquish the bit on Wednesday or so (coinciding with my plans for a good long wiki-vacation). Just wanted to keep you updated on my time table. Dragons flight (talk) 19:18, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the heads up. ++Lar: t/c 06:01, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Final warning

Hello Lar,

How are you doing?

I think we give User talk:24.159.24.87 two times the final warning, my message was also mend as first and final warning :)

Best regards, Huib talk 17:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm well, thanks! you? I started editing before you did, and I wasn't going to throw it away :) so I made it an "elaboration" of yours. The next thing 24... does that's off, a short block is in order, maybe I'll beat you to it, who knows? Perhaps you could try to get Erik9 to calm down too? A much defter touch there is needed, I think. Best. ++Lar: t/c 18:02, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Ah, I see you have. As have others. Thanks! I think your last edit you forgot to sign, though? Best. ++Lar: t/c 18:05, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I forgot to sign, thanks for the note about that.
I hope both the users will calm down and that no other actions are needed, it looks to me like the are both taking it a bit personal and the IP user is trying to provoke a aggressive reaction by removing content from the page.
The way its going in now is kind of useless to discuss because both are just on a collision course with the other, but when they not calm down it would result in a blockade, and I would prefer to not let it come that far. ( I still dislike blocking)
See ya,
Huib talk 18:15, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
nod, I don't want to see anyone blocked either. Hopefully Eric9 and 24... will take the hints and mellow out. ++Lar: t/c 18:19, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Temporary retirement

Hi Larry

I've been shaking off the effects of a chest infection for the last three months, and am feeling a bit jaded. At the moment I don't feel motivated enough to put in the time and effort here that I would like to, and I'd be grateful if you could for now at least remove my admin and 'crat bits. A rest should do me good and enable to to return invigorated in a few months or so. If the community thinks I should reapply in the normal way when I return (as I fully intend) to admin-type duties I will be happy to do that. In the meantime, I plan to drop in and out and perhaps use some of the time to contribute a few photos from my new camera. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:01, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

✓ Done - Have a good rest. In my view, all you need to do is ask for your bits back and you shall have them, but it's your call. Best wishes, have fun with your new camera, and don't be a stranger! ++Lar: t/c 20:18, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Like I told in the email Michael take care, Lar is it needed that I temp remove Michael of the list of administrators and crats? Huib talk 20:22, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes, someone should. I suppose I should but if you beat me to it I'm not going to get upset. :) Let's just comment him out (wishful thinking! :) ) ... Thanks for remembering! ++Lar: t/c 21:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
✓ Done I just hope he gets back soon :( Huib talk 18:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] commons categories

hi1 Who do you have to sleep with to rename a Commons category, and why is it impossible to discover this information by navigating from the Community portal? Johnbod (talk) 01:25, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi! See COM:CFD... not sure who you have to sleep with, though. Where do you think this should be linked from? Does the Comm Portal need better links? Did you check COM:VP? Should it be linked from there? Meta has a list of common places you might want to go that is embedded in a lot of those places so once you find one you can find a lot of the other ones. ++Lar: t/c 01:49, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks - it is on a template at the VP, but I never thought of looking there. To judge by the level of traffic, not many have found it. Johnbod (talk) 20:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Genevieve Nnaji's picture

Hi. Your assistance is needed in this case here. A few days ago I uploaded this picture to wikimedia commons. I then got the written email permission from the owner of the picture and forwarded the email to permissions-commons-at-wikimedia.org. After that I contacted someone with an OTRS account, Trixt. Trixt confirmed the permission and fully released the picture under the required license. A few days later Trixt tagged the picture with the "Personality rights warning" tag. I asked Trixt why this is being done. You can read the reply of Trixt here and here on our talk pages. Finally, Trixt wrote me, saying that his english is bad, that I should get in touch with an English admin, that he doesn't know what to do.

I have checked through many wikipedia pages and have taken a close look at the pictures used from wikimedia commons. There are loads of pictures that do not have the "Personality rights warning" tag. Trixt claims that all pictures of living people should have that tag. This claim makes the whole issue suspicious. If all pictures of living people must be tagged with the "Personality rights warning", and the only way to properly upload pictures into wikimedia-commons is to get the approval of someone with an OTRS account, then what happened to all those pictures AFTER they were confirmed by someone with an OTRS account? How come those people with OTRS accounts didn't immediately tag these pictures with the "Personality rights warning" tag, the way Trixt did to the picture I uploaded? This looks like a double standard, and I thusly ask you to look into this and please remove the "Personality rights warning" tag from the picture in question.

The picture in question shows a nigerian actress, Genevieve Nnaji, in 2008 at a public event, the launch of Genevieve's new fashion label. Genevieve Nnaji is one of the top nigerian Nollywood actresses. She is also a model. Her pictures are all over Nigeria and Africa on billboards (she is the Face of Lux 2004), and she has played in over 100 Nollywood movies. Thus Genevieve Nnaji is a "person of contemporary history". She is a public figure. The picture I uploaded was taken by Niyi Tabiti, a nigerian journalist. Mr Tabiti has fully agreed to the full usage of the picture under wikimedia commons license. There are no personality right infringed with the usage of this picture. If wikimedia-commons claims, like Trixt does, that all pictures of living persons SHOULD be tagged, then this rule must apply to all pictures on wikimedia-commons. The fact that wikimedia-commons has loads of pictures of living persons without the "Personality rights warning" proves that different standards are being applied to different pictures. I thereby ask you to please remove the "Personality rights warning" from this picture. Thank you.
Amsaim (talk) 14:49, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

The Personality Rights Warning template adds a caution to re-users of the image, that they should keep in mind that they need to honor the rights of the subject. It applies whether or not the subject is a famous person or not. (remember that the CC-BY-SA license allows derivative images. For example, someone could take that image, and a freely licensed image of a horse, and put Genevieve's (G's) head on the horse (or on someone's freely licensed nude torso, for example).... from a license perspective, that's allowed, but it violates the personality rights of G... and G might have a case to sue, depending on the jurisdiction, for defamation. Adding this template is a way to try to increase awareness among reusers that they need to respect G's rights. It's not a restriction on reuse of the image as is in WMF projects, nor is it a reflection on the subject or the photographer.
As to whether other images should have it, in my personal view, pretty much all images of living people should carry this warning, that we don't do a good job of doing that is not a credit on us.
So I'm not inclined to remove the template. It's not doing any harm to WMF users, it's not a reflection of either the subject or the photographer having done any wrong, and it may do some good. I hope that helps explain matters. If not, perhaps we should take this conversation to the appropriate place (the VP perhaps?) for wider input. Best. ++Lar: t/c 15:45, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for swift reply. The text in the template itself does not state the same thing which you've written. The link in the template leads to this page. There the following is written:
Re-use of the image - Commons images are released under wide licences, but without any guarantee that they are free of non-copyright legal restrictions on re-use. Someone re-using in a derogatory manner an unexceptional Commons image of an identifiable subject might run the risk of the subject suing for defamation. But since neither the photographer, the uploader nor the Foundation have encouraged such defamatory use, the image itself is still perfectly acceptable to Commons. The fact that a photograph is capable of being misused does not mean, in itself, that it is objectionable here.
The last sentence in that text says it all. Just because misuse is possible, doesn't necessitate tagging of all the uploaded pictures of identifiable persons.
The question still remains: why are some pictures tagged and some aren't? There seems to be a very clear-cut line of approach which is being taken by wikimedia-commons admins in tagging pictures, and it evidently has nothing to do with trying to increase awareness amonst reusers. If increasing the awareness of reusers was the motif for tagging pictures, then how come there are loads of Hollywood actresses, Hollywood actors, artists, songwriters etc. who have up to 20-30 pictures in their wikimedia gallery, and not even one of these pictures is tagged with the "Personality rights warning" tag? The wikimedia admins that confirmed and approved these uploaded pictures, weren't they informed that they had to place the "Personality rights warning" tag unto the pictures they just confirmed and approved? The fact that not all wikimedia admins tag all pictures of identifiable persons with the "Personality rights warning" tag shows that there is no direct regulation concerning tagging pictures and thus tagging pictures is left to the mood of the wikimedia-admin. If tagging pictures of identifiable people is a must-do action, then all wikimedia admins would have done so.
Placing this tag on the picture I uploaded is done in discrimination against my picture. If there is any rule for tagging my picture, then that rule must and should be applicable to all other pictures of identifiable people. Any other situation leads to double standards and uploaders feel discriminated against. So, if wikimedia admins want to tag my uploaded picture, then they should also place the same tag on all other pictures of identifiable persons. Please remove the tag. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 16:59, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Placing the tag should be done on just about every picture of a living, identifiable person. As I said above. It is by no means discrimination against the picture that was uploaded that it was tagged. Rather, it was that we are volunteers, and apparently somewhat overwhelmed. If it makes you feel better, go and tag some other images that are of living people, who are personally identifiable, and which are not yet tagged. I hope that helps clarify this matter. For reference, although this is not en:wp, you may want to review w:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS which deals with this same principle applied to a different scenario... that item X doesn't have tag A but should, is not an excuse for item Y's uploader wanting tag A removed, and that item Q, not currently up for deletion is of type R does not excuse item P also up for deletion which is also type R. ++Lar: t/c 18:24, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] ping

Hi Lar, You have some time for IRC? Best regards, Huib talk 18:41, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Maybe tonite... ++Lar: t/c 19:50, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for your help and nomination. I look forwarding working with you and the others. Best regards, Kanonkas (talk) 15:05, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure... I look forward to working with you as well. However, in view of this comment, please do give some thought to your tone in interacting with others. Herby is a stalwart contributor here and your comment, even inadvertantly, called his judgement into question. ++Lar: t/c 15:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
It certainly wasn't on purpose, just FYI. I wasn't even aware that I did that, so I'm really sorry if that is how it was being interpreted. Kanonkas (talk) 15:21, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Please see Commons:Bots/Requests/MaximaximaxBot

You may want to review this again. In other words, should we grant a bot flag or not? I think the latter, but it would be nice to have your opinion on this. Best regards, — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 07:20, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Needs to be closed as not granted. The bot owner is not responsive. ++Lar: t/c 13:10, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the help...

Thank you for removing the deletion reason. --J.smith (talk) 23:54, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Yep, thanks for the help. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 23:56, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] CheckUser

I would like to draw your attention to this. Thank you, Tiptoety talk 04:34, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, commented there. ++Lar: t/c 11:42, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion request

Hi Lar, As discussed, can you please delete the following pages/categories? The pages have no links to them and the categories are empty and defunct. Thanks.

upstateNYer 04:11, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Sure... did you end up moving images to new categories or just leaving them out of the "by ..." cats ? ++Lar: t/c 12:54, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. I ended up replacing the transclusion of User:Wadester16/Template:Credits with User:UpstateNYer/Credits on each of my images (350+), like this, as well as changing the author. The template adds the category Category:Images by UpstateNYer, which supersedes Category:Images by Wadester16. It was actually a good thing to go through them all; a lot of them needed clean up and weren't to the standard of images pages I fill out now; something I had been putting off a while due to the required effort. Good thing I didn't do it before! Thanks for the help. upstateNYer 01:16, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Btw, I just did this. Are there any other pages that need updating? upstateNYer 01:18, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Not sure. The list of lists is at Commons:Administrators/Lists of administrators if you want to triple check. I think I got all the lists on that list updated correctly, please check my work if you would be so kind. ++Lar: t/c 01:44, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
No more links to User:Wadester16 from Project space. upstateNYer 02:54, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Trying to understand

Hello Lar, Sorry for my late reaction to your comment. I needed some time to get better and to take yet another look over my contributions. All the time I was trying to understand what did you mean, when you said to me: "That includes you contributing peacefully and productively, in a way that doesn't stress you, or others out." May I please ask you what of my contributions you consider to be unpeaceful, and what of my contributions were stressing other contributors out? I would also like to ask you what did you mean, when you said: "But I hope everyone can set this episode aside and try for a fresh start." Who's everyone? slaunger, maedin, lycaon? Do you believe any one of them is in need for a fresh start? Oh, yes, because I doubt Martin H. would have a time to answer the question I asked on his nomination page, maybe you'll be so kind to tell me if in 2+2=4 situation CU would have been the right thing to do, and if "yes" why yes? I would also like to find out if you personally believe that a person with my block history has a right for a fresh start? (I would only like to point out one more time that I've done what I've done not to hide my block record, but avoid being harassed. It was my only reason). Please do forgive me, if these questions of mine are stressing you out. I'm simply trying to learn from my mistakes. Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:46, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

  • p.s. although Martin responded my question about CU, I would still like to ask you to address it in your response too. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure what more I can usefully add. ++Lar: t/c 15:48, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
If you have nothing more "usefully to add" to respond my very particular and important to me questions, then I believe it might have been a good idea not to comment on the post on AN/N all together. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:26, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
I don't agree. ++Lar: t/c 18:11, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Lar, for you Commons is just a website. For me commons is a rather big part of my life. Even if commons is just a website, there are absolutely real people behind that website, people, who could get hurt by unreasoned comments, especially made by somebody like you. I asked you few particular questions: what of my contributions you found to be unpeaceful and what of my contributions were stressing out other contributors, and, if you administrator, bureaucrat and checkuser , you personally, would have granted CU request in that particular situation, and who do you have in mind when you said ... (anyway no need to repeat, all my questions are written above and none of them is answered). The only response I have got was that you have nothing more "usefully to add", which looks to me as you're trying to avoid the answer. Once again, I am deeply sorry, if my questions are stressing you out. Please do believe me, it was not my intention at all. I'm simply trying to understand the comments that were made by a person, who I used to respect. So please let's leave it here. It matters to me no more.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:03, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Commons is "just a website", maybe, but it's also an important one to me. I try to keep a sense of perspective, neither "nothing" nor "everything". If you really want an answer to your specific question, I consider it reasonable to carry out checks when I am presented with reasonable evidence for there being multiple accounts controlled by the same person, and that those accounts are acting in ways that might be disruptive, such as multiple votes in one question (RfA, FP candidacy, deletion discussion, what have you) or if there is some other sign of possible disruption. In this particular case, I may well have decided to check, although at the time I wasn't asked. I tend to trust the judgement of my fellow CUs as well, so if one or more of them had said they saw reason to check I'd tend to go along with that, and if one or more of them had said they saw no reason to check, I'd tend to go along with that as well. I hope that helps address the question. I go back to what I said before, I hope you find ways to contribute in ways that you find fulfulling, and that everyone else finds collegial. But when I see comments like this [7] I'm not sure if it's all going to work out. Please try to assume the best of everyone, not the worst. You and I have conversed at length in the past, and I was happy to try to help you where I could. But when you switch from conversing to accusing, then I'm not sure there is much more useful I can say. In our recent email exchange, I tried to explain where things went awry, and I tried to apologise... but it all seemed to end badly. So I'm not sure what else to tell you, except best wishes. ++Lar: t/c 21:42, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Lar, I am afraid we're talking different languages. I asked you not about CU policy in general. I asked you about my very unique and very specific situation. I did not run multiply accounts ( user:mbz1 was blocked on my own request at the moment), I did not vote two times anywhere, I did not do any disruption.
My comments you refer to were made on my own talk page only, and BTW after you made your comment on AN/N. I did not go to involved user talk pages or to AN/N as they did. I wrote them on my own talk page to express how I've felt. If you believe the comments to be offensive or uncivil or whatever, why didn't you remove them? Why didn't you warn me about them on my own talk page? Why didn't you block at least my other 2+2=4 account, which of course I use no more? Don't you understand that it was me, who was and still is stressed out by the comments made on my FP nomination, on my talk page, and on AN/N by other users and you, Lar? I did not start to use another accounts because I suddenly decided I want to have a fresh start and get rid of my blocks record. I started to use another account because I (and not only I) felt I was being harassed on my old one as Mbz1. To me using that other account was kind of a Witness protection program, except I was not a witness, but a user, who was being harassed on Commons by two other users.I consider my questions to you unanswered, but as I said few times already I am more that willing to let it go now, because your unwillingness or inability to respond them is already a good enough response IMO.Sorry I took your time. Best wishes to you too.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:44, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Lar, I'm sorry for overreacting in some of my above comments. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 10:54, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Note

As per your request, please note that I left a comment here -- User:Docu at 04:29, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Info

Hello Lar, I've noticed this request which it seems to me a clearcut case of WP:SNOW. Regards, — df|  19:36, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

More like disruptive behaviour based on cross-wiki contribs. I've deleted the page as vandalism. — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 21:14, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal to change votes

Hei Larry,

I made a proposal to change the 4 votes into 10 votes and made a other proposal to try and get more people to vote in a rfa, could you please take a look on it so we could change it before proposing it in the village pump. I placed the proposal here

Best regards, Huib talk 19:08, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Replied. Thx for letting me know. Nice work. ++Lar: t/c 19:37, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] OV

Hi Lar,

Would you look into this request (Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#File_history_revision). Conclusion of the discussion seems to be that COM:OV is needed. -- User:Docu at 17:41, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Rename

I see you're a bureaucrat, I'd like to ask you if you can change my nickname?.--TownDown How's it going? 00:02, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Please make a request at COM:CHU... make sure you read the instructions carefully, thanks! ++Lar: t/c 00:50, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
I was wondering. Thank You!. --TownDown How's it going? 01:52, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Oh yes! I know how to do it, COM:CHU, but I wanted to make a conversation.--TownDown How's it going? 01:58, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Oh. Sorry! Sure... What did you want to talk about? ++Lar: t/c 03:31, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Admin welcome

Thanks, Lar. In the meantime I translated to Spanish language Commons:Administrator and Commons:Guide to adminship, so I read this information, which is very helpful. Best regards, Alpertron (talk) 01:49, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Excellent! Thanks a lot, that's very thoughtful of you. :) ++Lar: t/c 03:35, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Wikimedia logo mosaic

Re:Wikimedia logo mosaic

Thanks, that was fun to do and watch it change :-). I remember my computer was really slow then and it died on every 2 or 3 edits. Now the Mosaic is a really good browser benchmark for rendering tables and images ;-). --Nux (talk··dyskusja) 11:08, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Towndown

maybe you weren'0t aware, but he's a known sockpuppeteer Heraldicos • Wikisole • Prodigynet • Prodigynet • Thecircle • Hambrientino • Americko • Elzodiacogriego • Vexilio

and he carries already blocks on all those wikis. -- Drini 15:57, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

No, I wasn't aware of the TownDown connection, actually, because I didn't check en:wp's case, AGF I guess. Thanks for letting me know... I better run some more checks and update the Commons and en:wp cases to crosslink. ++Lar: t/c 16:37, 12 September 2009 (UTC)


More linked accounts:

  • Allpex
  • Heraldry
  • TownDown
  • Thecircle
  • Pueblounited

-- Drini 20:54, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I've updated the enwp and commons pages with crosslinks. Thanks! ++Lar: t/c 07:34, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Edit request

Could you please fix a spelling error on en:wiki's current POTD? Image is here. Under "Other versions", the first image in the gallery is labeled as "unresored". Thanks. upstateNYer 02:19, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. –Juliancolton | Talk 02:43, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File upload problem

Error I'm getting when trying to upload over an existing file
svg locator map

Lar: I'm currently getting an error that will not let me upload over an existing file, at any time. User:ZooFari has been having the problem for a few days now, but it only just happened to me tonight. Error page is shown at left. Is there a fix in the pipeline? As a secondary issue, because of this problem, an update I planned to upload had to be uploaded under a new name, making this image useless. Could you delete it, please? upstateNYer 02:36, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I think I saw something on the VP about this problem, but I'm not the most up on what might be causing it. If there isn't a thread already on VP, you might consider starting one? You're both editors with enough time/edits to be autoconfirmed and SHOULD be able to upload on top of things I thought. If it happens again, you can tag the obsoleted file with {{badname}} I think, that way any admin working the queues can deal with it. I'll delete the obsoleted image for you though, as soon as I check usages (goes off, yep all set). Deleted. BTW how does ZooFari make those? I use Inkscape and I find drawing maps to be a lot of work. ++Lar: t/c 06:47, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
I gave him a file to base it on. The rest is his skill, which I extensive, but not anything I can yet comprehend. Thanks for the deletion. upstateNYer 16:23, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Ah. Stuff like this (shown at right) is about my best in that area, and it's done by importing TIGER images and then fixing up the result to correct multiple paths and the like. takes way longer than it should ++Lar: t/c 17:05, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
I don't use Inkscape because it has to run through another program on Mac. Plus, I find it non-intuitive and know enough skilled users that are happy to help. These people are rare commodities here, but they do great work. upstateNYer 21:16, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Inkscape is way counterintuitive. I find that I really have to want to use it to do so, and it's best used in large doses, get in a groove and crank stuff out while I remember the commands. But if you've found a mapmaker, keep him or her well plyed with their favorite vices to stay in their good graces. ++Lar: t/c 02:48, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Move request

Lar-- not sure where to post this. Can you move a page for me? I would like

File:HMS Calliope Under Sail 1884.jpg

retitled to

File:Calypso class corvette under sail.jpg.

thanks

Kablammo (talk) 17:20, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

{{rename|Calypso class corvette under sail.jpg|Your reason here}}
Put that edited template to File:HMS Calliope Under Sail 1884.jpg. From there a bot will take care of your request. A trusted user or an admin, has to make the last edit, otherwise the bot will refuse to rename the file. How long it takes depends on the bot. It's not something specific, FYI. I hope this helped. Best regards, — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 17:26, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Kablammo (talk) 18:56, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
File renaming for admins seems to have been enabled again (great!). As such I took care of your request. Best regards, — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 20:00, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks guys! It's great to have talk page watchers :) ++Lar: t/c 20:02, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] {{Current checkuser request}}

Hey, you said that the template should better use autotranslation, but I don't think that it's appropriate in this case. Autotranslate is mostly when you can't know which language someone's speaking the most. Likewise, you can't know who reads an image description page and their licenses, so you make it autotranslatable. But if we would just post the specific language message to the appropriate village pump then I think it's better to write it in the appropriate language. For example take a look at the German Forum: There are a lot of people from de.wikipedia who visit the Forum but might not use the German language setting. Also, many people who are more active on de.wikipedia have the Forum in their watchlist; if they then see a diff-link like {{Autotranslate|1=Some random guy|base=Current checkuser request}}, then they might just skip this as they have no idea what this is. If they see the text, then they maybe read it. Thus, I'd recommand to not use autotranslate here, but to transclude the templates directly. Creating /lang links might be an option, though I don't think that this is necessary. What do you think of this? I'd be happy if you and your fellow bureaucrats would approve the template, but if there's anything left to do, please let me know. Thank you. --The Evil IP address (talk) 19:04, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I think there should be a way to see the other language versions from the template, but perhaps not actually autotranslate. If you look at how some of our multilanguage templates looked, say 18 months ago, they didn't yet use autotranslate, but they DID have a bar that showed all the language versions you could see the template in.. and you manually clicked on each one to see the desired version. Can we do that? ++Lar: t/c 21:11, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Yes, possible and ✓ Done. --The Evil IP address (talk) 10:04, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Excellent. Thank you! I've added de: as well. Hopefully some kind native de: speaker can improve it a bit, my translation is not the greatest. ++Lar: t/c 14:14, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Request for confirmed user status

Hi Lar. I would like to request to be granted confirmed user status for oneself Billinghurst (talk · contributions). I promise not to abuse the privilege. It will help me to do some moves to better align Wikisource-linked files, and some of the cleanup work that I do at WP. Thanks for your consideration. -- billinghurst (talk) 00:58, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey Billinghurst. I don't think you need the right. You're autoconfirmed anyway, so this right would be redundant. Best regards, — Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 01:07, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Ah yes, I was confusing my movefile, with move. I see that it is a sysop privilege. I will work out whether I really wish to pursue that or not. I was just looking for the easy way to undertake this tight section tidy.-- billinghurst (talk) 03:10, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Happy to grant it but not seeing the need, as K says. ++Lar: t/c 04:11, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Oversight

Your thoughts and comments are welcome here: [8]. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 01:34, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Your Signature

To make it easier for people to reach your talk page, would you be so kind and add a link with the title "talk" to your signature. Limiting the link to a small "t" letter isn't really convenient. Alternatively you could just use the default signature, this would really make it easier. I'm asking this of you not because you are a user or an administrator, but a bureaucrat. Thanks. -- User:Docu at 18:44, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing your concern to my attention. I'll take it under advisement, although I don't see it as all that confusing.Feel free to change yours first, as it's a lot farther away from the default than mine is. Are you sure you aren't just making this request as a way to make a point ? ++Lar: t/c 18:50, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Info: pages

I've done a quick bash at a simplified one - check the VP.. Any thoughts welcome of course!--Nilfanion (talk) 20:01, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

A reminder to me, that I need to actually go off and do this fixup. ++Lar: t/c 15:35, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Ruine Berghof.JPG

Dear Lar! Me at placing Ruine Berghof.JPG, a mistake (in the first version of the file) posted picture mate, he would not like to have in the wiki. All other information and the latest version of the file is correct. Is it possible to remove the photo of my friend with the specified file? --Kolchak1923 (talk) 20:07, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

That appears to be a red link. Did you mean File:Ruine Berghof.JPG ? Do you want the entire file deleted? We can't edit images to remove just one person easily. Do you want one version deleted? If this is an oversight issue and you'd prefer not to answer publicly to limit the details revealed, you can write commons-oversight@lists.wikimedia.org with more detail. ++Lar: t/c 20:17, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much, but Rama is all well done.--Kolchak1923 (talk) 20:35, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Great to hear it. Best. ++Lar: t/c 20:41, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] discussion about you

FYI. See discussion about you at User_talk:Docu#Help:Gadget-ImageAnnotator. --Jarekt (talk) 14:49, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Very odd. I've asked for a fuller explanation of what this is about there. ++Lar: t/c 15:34, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Import request

Hello, as a steward, are you able to import this page from file upload and move it to User:The Evil IP address/graphic credits then? It has been argued here that making images unclickable might break licenses, which is why I'd like to create such a page like fr.wikipedia so that this fits them. Of course, I'd put the page up in the VP before linking it in the footer like on fr.wikipedia to see if the community supports this as well. Thank you. --The Evil IP address (talk) 12:58, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Why does it need to be imported? Can't you just copy the source and in your initial edit summary note that it came from fr:Wikipédia:Crédits graphiques? I'm not opposed to this idea or bringing the file over, I'm just not sure I seee the need for an import. Would you translate it to en? Or set up multiple language versions? ++Lar: t/c 13:27, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Well, since a lot of such pages have been imported, I would say we should do it here as well. The only reason that I can't do it is that fr.wikipedia isn't in Special:Import. I would probably make only one page, but translating the captions where the license information is using {{LangSwitch}}, since I think that's easier than having to create an own page for localization. --The Evil IP address (talk) 16:47, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Those pages all came from wikis that aren't on the exclusion list, though, right? Let me ask Cary's opinion... I think really, the way to go is to just copy it and put the link/souce in the edit summary (and on the talk) ++Lar: t/c 02:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
I've now mentioned the French wikipedia page in the introduction. This might make it more clear, as people might miss my edit summary. I've also used {{mld}} instead of {{LangSwitch}}. This template is able to find out the user's browser language, which might be better here as reusers of these images might often be unregistered and then their fallback would always be English. If you're interested, you can see a draft here. --The Evil IP address (talk) 10:22, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
An absolutely splendid piece of work, well done indeed. I spotted a minor grammar nit, which I fixed. I strongly support moving this forward into general use. What next? ++Lar: t/c 16:03, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] ping

@Lar, has there been any conclusion/decision in the "case" uploads of User:Herr stahlhoefer in regard to notifying re-users of his copyviolating images? In fact, it seems there was only one clear case of re-use[9]. Just by chance, it was the first file in his cv-list. --Túrelio (talk) 13:41, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure. I think I lost track of where things stand (and where they are being discussed). Notification of other entities seems a very big job, so perhaps no one has taken it on? ++Lar: t/c 14:20, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm refering to the email I sent you quite some days ago. From my side there was intentionally no public discussion about that, in order not to wake sleeping dogs. --Túrelio (talk) 14:30, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Ah, thanks for the nudge. Answered via email. ++Lar: t/c 16:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] 100 Years' War

There's a w:100 Years' War which is a problem for many users. Many users are annoyed/frustrated/at wits' end due to a very large number of long arguments centering around a small number of users, over similar issues again and again on page after page, that are very disrupting. They are nominally mostly about copyright; see how Nilfanion describes it. Please see my comment here (tagged 13:35, 28 November 2009 (UTC)) followed by an understating long reply from Nilfanion and the follow-up there and on the page Nilfanion created. Someone in authority needs to take the time to get a grasp on the situation (and I don't think that'll be easy) and take some decisive action. Are you up for it? I've got a hunch the problem is bigger than a single user, but I'm not sure. Should I ask Bastique, or do you think there's a regular admin up for the task? Please, please help! Pretty please?--Elvey (talk) 04:59, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Nilfanion seems to have made a good start at trying to organise what the dispute is about. There isn't a formal dispute resolution process here at Commons beyond the various noticeboards. I think getting Bastique's view on this will help, as I don't see resolving this as something any one admin can do. It will take multiple admins working together I suspect. I hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 15:32, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes, thanks. Notified Bastique. I recall Nilfanion said somewhere (I can't find it) that he wanted someone else to assist with enforcement; which is mainly why I come to you and Bastique. --Elvey (talk) 18:19, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
If this is an enforcement matter I can certainly help. but I may not have the time or depth of knowledge of background to help (a great deal) in determining what the right outcome is. And that is key before we have any enforcement of anything! Goes without saying that you know that, but I said it anyway, for the benefit of any talk page watchers I may have. I think Nilf's approach is good as I said there. Best. ++Lar: t/c 20:03, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Lar"