User talk:Fæ

I may be slow to respond to questions. Despite automatic trimming, my watchlist hovers above 900,000 items, so it really helps if you remember to {{ping}} me on discussions that are not kept on this page. Feel free to email or for LGBT+ user group discussion become a contact on Telegram or Twitter where messages are persistent, for a more reliable off-wiki discussion. Keep in mind I lose track of emails too, especially complex ones I think I'll get back to but may lose track of. Faebot is alive in different places, not tied to any specific kit, so some tasks running on Labs have proven stability and carry on regardless of whether human me is still around. However tasks running from my local desktop may pause when my home machine is off for safety reasons. A few tasks run on a headless Raspberry Pi, which should be more resilient it can continue unattended. --Fæ (talk) 10:56, 21 February 2021 (UTC) Spring migration. Due to deciding to finally abandon Python2 based Pywikibot scripts, it may be that old housekeeping might just stop. With a focus on new projects, moving some of the older tasks to Python3 may either stay on the uncertain volunteer backlog for a very long time or will remain permanently under the watermargin. --Fæ (talk) 12:35, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

If you want to see Python source code that supports some of my projects, go to Github and help yourself. The code is not written with reuse in mind... --Fæ (talk) 15:57, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

If you are concerned that a category gets flooded with automated uploads, check that a template like {{Disambig}}, {{Photographs}}, {{Categorise}}, {{CatDiffuse}} or {{CatCat}} has been applied before complaining. In the case of my batch upload projects, any category marked this way will not be added to new photographs. --Fæ (talk) 16:32, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Absolutely disgusting attacks on yourself

en:Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-07-16/Special report has just been brought to my attention, and I am absolutely dumbfounded that this has been allowed to stand as is on the project. As you are fully aware, I am banned from English Wikipedia for the harmless posting of a harmless comic on my userpage, and now no longer have access to my talk page on that project. I was going to send this to you privately, and also cc it to English Wikipedia Arbcom, but in doing so, it would not be see the light of day, especially given that the many English Wikipedia Arbcom members have for many months now refused to enter into dialogue on various issues, and actively ignore concerns sent to them by many editors, myself included. This Arbcom is probably the worst that I, and others, have ever seen.

I want to make specific comment in relation to the following:

claims that Fæ "has violated or supported the violation of (alleged) sex workers' privacy while complaining about comments about his own amateur pornography which he freely uploaded onto Wikipedia".

A link to en:Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fæ/Evidence#Response_to_Fae.27s_comment_on_me was also provided.

I remember this "case" very clearly, because in explaining to you on IRC, why I did not support your RfA here on Commons, I raised Commons:Deletion requests/File:Prostitutes in the street of Reeperbahn.jpg as one of the reasons as to why I didn't support your RfA at that time. You may remember this conversation? Maybe not. Anyway....

The description of the file in question as it stood at the time of the DR was:

Fæ

This talk page has been nominated for deletion since 19 September 2011. To discuss it, please visit the nomination page. Do not remove this tag until the deletion nomination is closed. Reason for the nomination: Although it's perfectly possible that these people are actually sex workers, there is no evidence in the photo or the linked source that they are. Since the photo was taken in 2005, at least some of them will still be living people today - and at least some of them are identifiable. I guess we could rename the photograph to not include prostitutes in the name - but then it would be an out of scope personal photo with no likely educational use anyway. On any other project, describing particular living people as prostitutes without a RS stating such would not only be instantly removed, but probably suppressed. It's in violation of the Board's BLP resolution and of Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_people and should thus be deleted. Show further instructions If this template was added because you clicked "Mark for deletion" in the left menu (right when using Vector 2022 skin), please make sure that all necessary pages have been created. If they haven't been created after a few minutes, or if you added this template manually, you should complete these steps: Visit the deletion requests subpage and place the following code: {{subst:delete2|image=File:Prostitutes_in_the_street_of_Reeperbahn.jpg|reason=Although it's perfectly possible that these people are actually sex workers, there is no evidence in the photo or the linked source that they are. Since the photo was taken in 2005, at least some of them will still be living people today - and at least some of them are identifiable. I guess we could rename the photograph to not include prostitutes in the name - but then it would be an out of scope personal photo with no likely educational use anyway. On any other project, describing particular living people as prostitutes without a RS stating such would not only be instantly removed, but probably suppressed. It's in violation of the Board's BLP resolution and of Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_people and should thus be deleted.}} ~~~~ Go to the deletion requests log and place the following code at the bottom: {{subst:delete3|pg=File:Prostitutes_in_the_street_of_Reeperbahn.jpg}} Notify the item's uploader or the creator of the page by placing the following code on the user's talk page: {{subst:idw|User talk:Fæ|File:Prostitutes_in_the_street_of_Reeperbahn.jpg}} ~~~~ Additionally, you may want to check for Wikimedia projects that use this item and then remove or, if possible, replace with a superior item. For mass deletions: If you want to nominate several related images, please make a mass request by manually adding {{delete|reason=write reason|subpage=write name|year=2024|month=May|day=16}} to each image page and then following the steps hereinbefore. (Help on mass requests.) Note: This template is for requests that may require discussion in order to be deleted. For speedy deletions, you can use {{speedydelete|reason}}. In other languages   DescriptionFæ Prostitutes are standing in the front of the building who reside there for sex in the street of Reeperbahn in district of St Pauli, Hamburg, Germany. Date 28 April 2005, 07:45:33 Source originally posted to Flickr as Name of file removed Author name removed Permission (Reusing this file) This image, which was originally posted to Flickr, was uploaded to Commons using Flickr upload bot on 23 July 2008, 22:55 by Otolemur crassicaudatus. On that date, it was confirmed to be licensed under the terms of the license indicated. Category:Prostitution at the Reeperbahn Category:Prostitutes

After editing by yourself, the description was changed to:

Fæ

This talk page has been nominated for deletion since 19 September 2011. To discuss it, please visit the nomination page. Do not remove this tag until the deletion nomination is closed. Reason for the nomination: Although it's perfectly possible that these people are actually sex workers, there is no evidence in the photo or the linked source that they are. Since the photo was taken in 2005, at least some of them will still be living people today - and at least some of them are identifiable. I guess we could rename the photograph to not include prostitutes in the name - but then it would be an out of scope personal photo with no likely educational use anyway. On any other project, describing particular living people as prostitutes without a RS stating such would not only be instantly removed, but probably suppressed. It's in violation of the Board's BLP resolution and of Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_people and should thus be deleted. Show further instructions If this template was added because you clicked "Mark for deletion" in the left menu (right when using Vector 2022 skin), please make sure that all necessary pages have been created. If they haven't been created after a few minutes, or if you added this template manually, you should complete these steps: Visit the deletion requests subpage and place the following code: {{subst:delete2|image=File:Prostitutes_in_the_street_of_Reeperbahn.jpg|reason=Although it's perfectly possible that these people are actually sex workers, there is no evidence in the photo or the linked source that they are. Since the photo was taken in 2005, at least some of them will still be living people today - and at least some of them are identifiable. I guess we could rename the photograph to not include prostitutes in the name - but then it would be an out of scope personal photo with no likely educational use anyway. On any other project, describing particular living people as prostitutes without a RS stating such would not only be instantly removed, but probably suppressed. It's in violation of the Board's BLP resolution and of Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_people and should thus be deleted.}} ~~~~ Go to the deletion requests log and place the following code at the bottom: {{subst:delete3|pg=File:Prostitutes_in_the_street_of_Reeperbahn.jpg}} Notify the item's uploader or the creator of the page by placing the following code on the user's talk page: {{subst:idw|User talk:Fæ|File:Prostitutes_in_the_street_of_Reeperbahn.jpg}} ~~~~ Additionally, you may want to check for Wikimedia projects that use this item and then remove or, if possible, replace with a superior item. For mass deletions: If you want to nominate several related images, please make a mass request by manually adding {{delete|reason=write reason|subpage=write name|year=2024|month=May|day=16}} to each image page and then following the steps hereinbefore. (Help on mass requests.) Note: This template is for requests that may require discussion in order to be deleted. For speedy deletions, you can use {{speedydelete|reason}}. In other languages   DescriptionFæ Street of Reeperbahn in district of St Pauli, Hamburg, Germany. Date 28 April 2005, 07:45:33 Source http://linkremoved (my note You also removed the title of the image as named on flick) Author name removed Permission (Reusing this file) This image, which was originally posted to Flickr, was uploaded to Commons using Flickr upload bot on 23 July 2008, 22:55 by Otolemur crassicaudatus. On that date, it was confirmed to be licensed under the terms of the license indicated. Category:Reeperbahn

The edits by yourself demonstrate that you had nothing but respect for the issues that were raised, but after my discussion with you on IRC, it was obvious that you were not aware of one the issues. That being that the Reeperbahn is a red-light district in Hamburg, that is renowned for its prostitution and debauchery. After you were made aware of this, which you weren't previously (which is obvious by your comments on the DR stating that it was a "high street") you agreed with me that in that case it should have been deleted (as it was).

In relation to Cohen's (one of your harassers) comments that the photo was left in the English Wikipedia article is irrelevant; you have never edited that article before, nor did you insert the photo, nor did you even look at the article (which you mentioned to me at the time of our IRC discussion). His comments in relation to the article are simply included to make you guilty for it's usage on English Wikipedia; which you obviously are not.

Since then, I have been aware of numerous cases where you have dealt with privacy discussions, and have argued for deletion of those files. Commons:Deletion requests/File:Skinheads in Brighton, England-2006.jpg is but one such example.

Yet somehow, it is portrayed that you are only worried about images which either are or aren't of yourself, yadda yadda yadda. Sorry but that is absolute bollocks.

The Signpost "Special Report" is nothing but a total hatchet job and a pisspoor attempt at character assassination, and I sincerely hope that you will make the twits on English Wikipedia who are buying into such rubbish aware of this. russavia (talk) 01:10, 18 July 2012 (UTC)