User talk:Achim55

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search


Next sock of User:Pavan Kumar Saarang N R[edit]

Hi, I just blocked the latest sock -- Manjesh665 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploadsblock user. Active here with the same uploads as prior socks. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 23:51, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

SpacemanSpiff, thanks for notifying. The files shew up here. --Achim (talk) 15:55, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi I think I have two more for you ... Pavanreddy96 and Pavan Kumar Kodedela. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:50, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Ellin, thank you! The second one is a false positive due to the age of the account (there are several Pavan Kumars). The first one might fit, but as long as there is no self-promotional behavior like before I won't take any action. Cheers, --Achim (talk) 17:48, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Neither have the same interests and they aren't doing the same nonsense at en.wiki so I don't think these are connected. He did say that he's going to wait 6months to take up en:WP:SO, though he created a sock right after that, but been quiet for a few days now. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 03:59, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Danke und nächste Frage[edit]

tja, wenn Du Dich für Kleinigkeiten bei mir bedankst, dann kommt die nächste Frage, hallo Achim ;)

Bei diesem Bild vermute ich Commons:LL. Die erste Version hatte ich am 18. Januar gelöscht. Auf Flickr wurde es am 8. Februar hochgeladen und am gleichen Tag von einem anderen (?) user auf commons eingefügt. Da ich mich nach einem halben Jahr nicht mehr an den Inhalt des alten Bildes erinnern kann, möchte ich sie einsehen. Wenn ich die alte Version wiederherstelle, bleibt dann die neuere erhalten? Oder erst umbenennen und dann wiederherstellen? Einen schönen Sonntag wünscht Dir noch Hystrix (talk) 09:33, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Moin Hystrix, die Kleinigkeit war mir nur aufgefallen, weil du (wahrscheinlich ohne es zu merken) auf dieser Seite mitgearbeitet hast, auf der JuTa und ich schon Tausende von Kategorien gelöscht oder anderweitig bearbeitet haben. - Zu deiner Frage: Direkt wiederherstellen muss man eigentlich nicht unbedingt, denn wenn du auf Special:Undelete/File:Michel Qissi.jpg unten unter Dateiversionen auf das Datum klickst, siehst du das gelöschte Bild. Und wenn du darüber unter Versionen auf das Datum und dann auf Vorschau zeigen klickst, siehst du den Inhalt der Seite selbst. Gruß, --Achim (talk) 10:26, 2 July 2017 (UTC) PS: Bin nachher offline, wir kriegen Besuch...

Categories[edit]

I have not moved any category. As you can see, the new category was created by the User:Regan1973 who also moved the content from one to another. You should ask him. Greetings.--Aronu (talk) 15:15, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Aronu, you created Category:Aléxandros Papamihaíl and tagged the existing Category:Alexandros Papamichail for deletion. A category move (click Trasladar) would have been the better solution. Best, --Achim (talk) 08:17, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Probleme mit Kategorie[edit]

Hallo Achim 55, könntest Du Dir bitte noch einmal die von Dir angelegte Kategorie Category:Statues in Germany photographed in the 2010s ansehen!? Da ist irgendwie Murks passiert... J.-H. Janßen (talk) 19:49, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Hallo Jan, mal abgesehen davon, dass ich die Kategorie nicht angelegt habe, kann ich den Murks jetzt nicht so recht erkennen. Ich erinnere mich, dass es 2 Vorlagen gab, {{Statuephotoyear-Germany}} und {{Germanystatuephotoyear}}, die beide dasselbe wollten. Da hatte ich in der Kat die eine durch die andere ersetzt. Gruß, --Achim (talk) 08:29, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
PS: Ach, jetzt sehe ich, dass die Kategorie sich selbst kategorisiert, war es das, was du gemeint hast? --Achim (talk) 08:29, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
Ja, genau das war es. Es hat mich ein wenig verwirrt, obwohl ich natürlich weiß, wie schnell solche Irrtümer beim Anlegen von neuen Kategorien entstehen können. Mein Hinweis war auch nicht persönlich gemeint! --J.-H. Janßen (talk) 09:22, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
Hm, Dietmar hat das Template angelegt, da wird er es sicherlich anpassen können. --Achim (talk) 12:02, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
Äh, nein. Das Template gehört da gar nicht hin. Es ist nur für einzelne Jahre gedacht, nicht für eine Dekade. --XRay talk 12:37, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
Jan & Dietmar, dann ist ja alles klar. ✓ Done. Gruß, --Achim (talk) 16:10, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Question...[edit]

How many different models of camera does a person have to own before you conclude the number is suspicious? I first read this argument for justifying suspicion about five years ago, and the person advocating suspicion there had a low number.

I got my first digital camera in 2008, a Kodak. I think I have owned four Kodak cameras, since then, several Canon, several Fuji, several Panasonic. I have a Staples near me, and, for years, their open box cameras were ridiculously cheap -- like $50 CAD. I am sure if you had a robot check all my uploads they would be from more than a dozen different cameras.

Some people swap cameras; or justify the purchase of a superior camera, by giving their old camera away.

So, what is the number you think justifies suspicion? Geo Swan (talk) 23:59, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Geo Swan, I say it again: It is not our job to do investigations on who in fact did shoot an image on Pixabay and who didn't. Skeeze himself did not upload to Commons as far as I know. At least some of "his" images are from other sources, so regardless of the real ownership OTRS is required. We don't know if he "abuses" Pixabay by uploading images made by others or not, there is no proof. Therefore COM:PRP has to be applied. --Achim (talk) 07:07, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Okay thanks for the reply.
I don't think you addressed my general point. At what number should someone's use of multiple cameras trigger certainty they are a copyright violator?
I've been incorrectly accused of being a copyright violator over my decade here, multiple times. Some of those have been occasions when I was duped by someone else's flickr-washing.
But the rest of those occasions were instances of my uploading photos -- or text -- that were my original works, that I had uploaded elsewhere. Of course I am entitled to upload my own creative works to multiple sites. Most people who incorrectly stated or implied I was a copyright violator later acknowledged being mistaken. Still, it is not pleasant.
So, I return to my original question. "How many different models of camera does a person have to own before you conclude the number is suspicious?" Geo Swan (talk) 20:05, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Geo Swan, I said "in my opinion" and "unlikely", therefore I won't tell you a number, I don't like to look onto each of skeeze's 11000 images. He used at least these eight. Let's have a look on his homepage on pixabay:
They can be found easily by TinEye. And a surprise: https://pixabay.com/en/pretzels-fresh-german-bavarian-2346517/ is not from https://pixabay.com/da/kringle-sesam-fr%C3%B8-mad-br%C3%B8d-german-1209345/, because https://pixabay.com/da/users/Free-Photos-242387/ seems to be a second account of his. It's midnight, have to go to bed now...--Achim (talk) 22:03, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
  • OKay, I am going to urge caution, in general, for considering 8 cameras, or a dozen cameras, as a remarkable reason to suspect copyright violations. I know eight cameras, spread over a bunch of years, is not a remarkable number of cameras, for a busy photographers, as I have used more than that.

    Forgive me for slightly adjusting the indentation here. Your user talk page, your rules. You don't have to follow convention here. But I figured your non-standard indentation was merely due to rushing, not a genuine formatting decision. Geo Swan (talk) 23:50, 16 July 2017 (UTC)


Code issues in User:Achim55/common.js[edit]

Hi Achim55, I am a bored bot (this is kind of a computer program) that is watching the recent changes and tapping buttons like I did now.

Curious about the reason? Possibly not but I will tell you anyway:

  1. You edited User:Achim55/common.js. Glad to see you coding in javascript! Have you ever considered becoming a MediaWiki hacker?
  2. Though, that change appears to introduce 1 new jshint issue -- the page's status is now having warnings. Note that invalid or ambiguous code often has unwanted side effects like breaking other tools for you. If you cannot find out how to fix it, I suggest blanking the page for now.
  3. To help you understanding where the issues are, I have aggregated a report here and now. If you have questions, don't hesitate to ask users experienced in javascript writing for help. But do not ask the bot's operators (chronically overwrought) unless you suspect an error of mine. If you prefer not getting spammed by me, you can opt-out reports by adding {{ValidationOptOut|type=all}} to your user page. Good luck at Wikimedia Commons and happy hacking!
  1. ISSUE: line 21 character 43: Missing semicolon. - Evidence: importScript('User:Achim55/BingImages.js')

Your CommonsMaintenanceBot (talk) at 19:52, 18 July 2017 (UTC).