User talk:SchroCat

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from User:SchroCat)
Jump to: navigation, search


File:Giovanni Paolo Panini – Ancient Rome.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Giovanni Paolo Panini – Ancient Rome.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Craigboy (talk) 08:12, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Giovanni Paolo Panini – Modern Rome.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Giovanni Paolo Panini – Modern Rome.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Craigboy (talk) 08:14, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Blocked, with dishonest rationale[edit]

Telling a disruptive editor who has bludgeoned others (which was commented upon by others) that they are being disruptive and bludgeoning others is NOT "Intimidation/harassment". A chum of the bludgeoners has blocked me, being utterly dishonest in their blocking rationale. I'm disappointed by the lack of honesty I've seen from two admins here, and I will not be uploading any further images here for that reason. – SchroCat (talk) 16:59, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

The wiki admin system in the commons is even worse than on wiki, even Jimbo says that!Dr. Blofeld (talk) 18:14, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
I've seen crap admiring in my time, but this takes the biscuit! No warnings for his chums about a disruptive second deletion request (only opened because the non was too arrogant to accept the possibility that they are wrong) and no warning to his other chum for bludgeoning people who disagree with him. Any takers on this "neutral" admin closing it the way it should go? Or do you think they'll invite another chum along to do the job for them? – SchroCat (talk) 18:20, 19 July 2015 (UTC)