User talk:Alexis Jazz

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

Civility barnstar 2.svg This page may contain some profanity. If you are PC Principal you probably shouldn't edit here. Try going here instead. 🖕


Adminpedia-image.png

Some YouTube channels with Creative Commons content that Commons isn't using much from:

Why don't you take some screenshots, import whole videos with video2commons, etc? Don't forget to tag your uploads with {{licensereview}}! If you need help, just ask me! (or the folks at the helpdesk or village pump)

[edit]

Thank you for your insight. I was positive it was allowed under fair use but was removed from Wikipedia as well so I wanted to see what was going on. Based on reading your page information I might have an idea of what's going on now. #HorribleAdmins

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fazart (talk • contribs) 18:31, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Fazart (talk) 18:32, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

@Fazart: we have some severe problems (the confusion between Wikipedia local uploads and Commons being just a minor one), but you uploaded the logo to the wrong place. I uploaded it to w:File:PHP-Fusion logo.png (notice the w:!) where it most probably will stay. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 18:35, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
@Alexis Jazz: Thank you for your help! I'll be sure to identify the correct prefix in the future. Appreciated!
Fazart (talk) 18:47, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
@Fazart: actually, it doesn't really work like that. If I want to link a page that only exists on Commons while on Wikipedia, I need to use the c: prefix, like c:Commons:Everipedia, c:Commons:Do disrupt Commons to illustrate a point and c:Commons:Assuming worst case copyright (if you want to read my essays, you should do so before they're gone..)
Next time, use the upload form on Wikipedia. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 18:56, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Alvanhholmes Corner[edit]

Apparently you deleted two files without notice to me. Is that customary?Why?

One file you deleted is from an 1880 source the Harlean Society, Visitation of London, if that isn't copyright free, then what is, could you please explain?

This file:

This is a picture of the Farrer Coat of Arms, from the Visitation of London. Farrar CoA is same sans the Gorget

This source: https://archive.org/details/visitationoflond01stge/page/n9 if that isn't public domain, then what is?

Can you please explain why the source is not copyright free?

You, and I believe it is you, have deleted almost all of the files that I uploaded, sans explanation except for The Lord Farrer letter, then you simply cut off the conversation and deleted the file. The requirements for publishing are not clear.

This requirement is confusing: I found it on the Internet — I'm not sure I believe this work is freely licensed or legally in the public domain. I understand that if I do not add the necessary licensing information in a timely fashion, the file may be deleted.

If something, like Harlean society publications, which are over 138 years old, they don't have licensing, so how is it they aren't in the public domain.? I don't understand and no one explains. If there is no explanation how am I to know, and not make the same mistake again.?

There seems to be a mindset that users like me, have the same level of knowledge or understanding as users like you. We don't. When we ask questions we need clear understandable answers. Not ignored or treated off handedly.

More confounding is that these beautiful colored Coats of Aerms, and more I am sure, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Coats_of_Arms_of_the_Crown_of_Castile apparently are acceptable. Why? How? Certainly the person(s) who posted them on commons did not draw them all themselves. So why are they acceptable and the Coat of Arms from an 1880 publication not?

Thank you Alvanhholmes (talk) 16:45, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

@Alvanhholmes: I guarantee you that I have deleted absolutely nothing.
Because I'm not an administrator. I can't.
I have nominated one of your files (File:Westwood - Letter from Lord Farrer 1930.jpg) for deletion. The file was about to be deleted without discussion. By nominating it for deletion, I forced Commons to delay deletion and give you a chance to defend and explain why it is in the public domain.
Three of your files have been deleted: File:Farrar's Island today.jpg, File:Farrar's Island Marker K199.jpg and File:Farrar's Island Marker.jpg. According to the administrator who deleted them, the last photo was taken from http://www.waymarking.com/waymarks/WM4RYP_Farrars_Island. If this is correct, I ask you again to read "I found it on the Internet".
I fairly often mentor new users. Unfortunately due to circumstances I don't have the time to do that now. That's why I gave you links to the Village Pump and other places. There are usually several people who are willing to show you the way. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 17:10, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

I owe you an apology. I didn't know that you didn't delete the file, nor am I knowledgeable about the command structure of wiki and of who has rights. I thought it was you who deleted my images. But I am more than p.o.'d that admin is so high handed that they delete photos without advising the party concerned.

As regards the Farrar coat of arms. I was editing the file John Farrar the Elder when I noticed that there was a no wiki notice in front of the file, then after you mentioned that it wasn't deleted I checked it again and it was back. I don't understand what happened.

I sm very puzzled as to how some images, which are clearly from the internet, such as the Battle of Guilford Courthouse, of which there are two sources on the internet are OK. I checked the site The Battle of Guilford Courthouse and some of the images are from the government, but others aren't. How do they do it.

There are also the images for other Coat of Arms some of them colorful and beautiful, but it will take some convincing that they were all produced by the uploading user. So I am wondering, is there a double standard? or Have some users found a work around? I will no longer use found on the internet. I suppose the only acceptable sources are self (first checking that there is no other image like it on the internet) or US Government.

If self, or from a friend or relative who shared it with me, how do I prove that when I uploaded it? Again apologies Alvanhholmes (talk) 20:31, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Huetter Welcome Sign.jpg[edit]

Welp, I tried to split the difference in a manner that would inform the other projects of what is going on but apparently the delinker bot had completely other plans. Wasn't really expecting it to take the first log entry instead of the last one. I'm not entirely sure what to do with this now. Since you were the one who did the modifications to the image so that it would comply with copyright restrictions I thought I would ask your thoughts on the matter. --Majora (talk) 05:58, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

@Majora: I can't order CommonsDelinker around.. but you can. In this case however, only 2 wikis used the image. (you may think 9. no, it was 2) So I'll fix it by hand. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 12:38, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
@Majora: One more thing, can you hide the first revision in such a way the uploader and original size can be seen, but the thumbnail/download is disabled? (I don't know what this is called but have seen it before) - Alexis Jazz ping plz 12:40, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
I know I can issue the bot commands. The manual commands are not deletion based though. The delinker is automatic and the edit summary left on the projects is based on whatever is put into the deletion log. I thought I had control over that by doing it how I did it but apparently I was wrong and it takes the first deletion log rationale, not the last one. Thank you for putting the image back. As for the second thing what you are thinking of is revision deletion. Technically what you requested is doable but the way I closed that DR and processed the image makes it so doing so would massively mess with the logs of those pages even more than they already are. To preserve edits I performed a history split of the original file, splitting off your overwrite into its own separate instance as if you had uploaded it that way to begin with. Instead of just downloading it and uploading it myself which would have put it under my name instead of yours. To reintroduce the original upload would require me to undo the split. Which again, is technically doable but would require a lot of additional steps. I'm honestly not sure this is required provided the original attribution is there (which it is). You could even add an author switch to the licensing template if you wish ({{self|cc-by-sa-4.0|author=Howpper}}) if you want to give that additional attribution to the photographer. I'm not entirely sure if your blurring is enough to constitute its own copyright anyways. --Majora (talk) 21:25, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
@Majora: my main issue is that File:Huetter Welcome Sign - blurred.jpg doesn't have a valid source to point to and was uploaded by me instead of the photographer. Now I don't care too much about it generally speaking, but sooner or later somebody is going to tag that file with "no permission", I may not be around to defend/repair it when that happens and the file will be deleted. I didn't know about the possibility of a history split, but if I understand correctly the only way now to make the original uploader/photographer visible again would be:
But I'm open to suggestions. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 21:38, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Eh...if that is what you are worried about I think it may be overestimating the problem. I made some additional tweaks. Those along with the retouched banner at the top should avoid any speedy related deletion. Any DR would just be closed as kept. And barring all of that I've put it on my watchlist and I'm never really gone for that long without at least checking my watchlist so if it is tagged I can just decline it. Remerging a history split image really messes with the logs of a page. So much so that I'm really not sure it is worth it if the concern is just hypothetical future deletion tagging. --Majora (talk) 21:45, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

@Majora: I've been watching some admin actions lately. And I'm severely disappointed with some of them. Quite a few actually. And no, you are not on the naughty list. But I doubt Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hadi Hajatmand at the Eighth Ammar Film Festival (01).jpg (also a valid file of which the source was deleted, for questionable reasons really) would have been kept without my intervention. Which wasn't exactly a freak accident, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Amrollah Ahmadjoo at the Closing Ceremony of Eighth Ammar Film Folk Festival 01).jpg was initially even tagged speedy. With your tweaks though, it'll probably be fine. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 22:08, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Complaint[edit]

I felt obliged to ask for measures on your handling of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Westwood - Letter from Lord Farrer 1930.jpg, so I did: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems#Alexis_Jazz. Your attitude sucks. Jürgen Eissink (talk) 02:06, 21 November 2018 (UTC).

Luckily not nearly as much as yours. Face-wink.svg - Alexis Jazz ping plz 05:28, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' noticeboard[edit]

Hello, just to let you know, I deleted three of your subpages following this : Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Personal attack pages. To create such pages again would be badly perceived, disturbing toward the community as well as potentially towards all the users quoted in such pages. Please don't do this. Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:18, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

And also avoid intervening in disagreements, when your goal is not to calm the game, please, e.g. [1] Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:23, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
@Christian Ferrer: please undelete the pages I merely created to hold admins (yes, plural) accountable for bad actions and apologize for your actions. I hadn't published the rating system yet, so I'll be slightly more forgiving, but deleting the page was the worst possible offense listed. However, also part of the rating is the option to redeem oneself by undoing a bad action, extra points for a credible apology. So you have a chance. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 07:13, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Please act, talk and edit with restrained. Note that I have absolutely nothing against collecting links of differences and / or links to specific pages which concern one or more users. However pages looking as campains against one of more editors, pages done in a more warlike than constructive spirit (just as a simple example, game scores for actions ?!?, lists of users that you do not like and which is "banned" from your pages) are not welcome in this project. Whatever your primary motivation, the result, these pages can be perceived as attack pages, and therefore can be speedy deleted. No I'm not going to undelete anything here.
Your are an experimented user of this project and I can not believe you are experimented if you do not like this project, so if you are having any difficulty or frustration now, which prevents you from contributing serenely then I'm sorry for that, really. But in no way I apologize for having deleting these pages. Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:33, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
That's too bad really. That's a FTA. You haven't calmed down the situation either. You just poured gasoline on the fire. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 09:07, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Screenshot of CC Video[edit]

Hey Alexis Jazz, I just saw the screenshots you made of Fedor Holz. I haven't seen something like this before so I ask as a precaution: Am I allowed to upload screenshots of World Poker Tour asks players which country is the best.webm and Lynn Gilmartin Previews WPT Montreal at Playground Poker Club.webm to Commons if I give the same license as you gave in Fedor Holz WPT interview 2016 1.jpg? Greetings, M-B (talk) 14:33, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

@M-B: absolutely, but I was already preparing a bunch of screenshots from File:Lynn Gilmartin Previews WPT Montreal at Playground Poker Club.webm. The problem I have is that I don't know who many of the people in the videos are. File:World Poker Tour asks players which country is the best.webm probably has more famous players in it, but I don't know their names. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 14:43, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
I can help you with that. In World Poker Tour asks players which country is the best.webm I mentioned Tony Dunst at 0:23 and Dario Sammartino at 1:19. In Lynn Gilmartin Previews WPT Montreal at Playground Poker Club.webm the presenter Lynn Gilmartin at 0:09 is a poker player by herself and has articles in english and german wikipedia. The winner at 0:27 (the sitting man with the beard) is Ole Schemion. -- M-B (talk) 14:51, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
@M-B: see Commons:Village pump#To all the poker players and the files I just uploaded. Face-smile.svg - Alexis Jazz ping plz 15:21, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Lasvegavegas.com images[edit]

Can I ask why you've tagged many of the images as being admin review needed? The source site (when it was up) was all clearly Creative Commons licensed. For instance, a look at the Wayback Machine page for File:Vivian LaVey at AVN Adult Entertainment Expo 2011 1.jpg found here clearly states at the bottom "All material © LasVegasVegas.com under the creative commons license", which was CC BY-SA 3.0. Tabercil (talk) 06:11, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@Tabercil: not admin review needed, license review needed. They should have been tagged when they were uploaded. Sadly only a handful were. And the longer we wait, the harder it gets to review any of these. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 12:15, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

PD-old-assumed[edit]

Hi, I have swapped this template on File:Theo_van_Gogh_1878.jpg as this was a named studio portrait. As such copyright is not calculated from a death date and the warning template is not helpful. Thanks -- (talk) 18:04, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

@: PD-old-70 is the wrong template. There is no death date.- Alexis Jazz ping plz 18:06, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
However the calculation is still 70 years, just from creation date. Not sure we have an alternate PD-old for this type of usage.
Would you care to take to VPC rather than reverting? -- (talk) 18:12, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
@: {{PD-anon-70-EU}} may apply, but either PD-anon-70-EU should be made more clear or we need another template for this situation. PD-old-70 should not be used unless there is either a death date or it's simply impossible for the author not to have been dead for 70 years. Commons:Assuming worst case copyright had calculations for that. VPC, yes, I'm not sure if I asked the same thing before but sure. For now however, revert is the right answer. PD-old-assumed is correct (though likely not optimal), PD-old-70 isn't. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 18:14, 29 November 2018 (UTC)


Undeleted[edit]

Thanks for your support. Maybe you could also help regarding

where I find the deletion request quite harsh, even if in some of the cases the license in the appendix is not optimal. I am willing to improve this, but the timeframe is a bit dense.Bocardodarapti (talk) 18:03, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Bocardodarapti#Undeleted. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 18:10, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

UploadWizard breakage[edit]

I fixed the AbuseFilter that was preventing authorized users from using UploadWizard to import from Flickr. Kaldari (talk) 23:32, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Warning[edit]

Hi, your continuous stream of subtle and less subtle personal attacks must end here and now. Example: personal attack in caption. Jcb (talk) 11:12, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Your continuous stream of wrongdoings, that's the thing that should stop. Your actions were careless (that's not a personal attack, that's a cold hard fact) and on top you downright refuse to repair any of your damage. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 20:58, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Alexis, Undeletion requests are a place to judge the image for inclusion on Commons, not a place to judge fellow users or admins. You know the correct forums for that and you also know that the bar for demoting an admin is high. Continuous drip drip of negativity is not what this site should be about. I suggest you concentrate on something and someone else. -- Colin (talk) 21:04, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
"I suggest you concentrate on something and someone else." I would, but Jcb keeps getting in the way. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 21:13, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) If Jcb feels that “careless” is an exceedingly negative characterization of a contributor on Commons—seriously?—then I recommend him to take wiki-break for some days. Careless deletions, careless Cat-a-lot, careless image editing, careless postings, and also ignoring things that shouldn’t be ignored – all are usual practices. BTW “Warning” is a dumb heading, on par with “Careless” ☺ Incnis Mrsi (talk) 21:18, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Please see Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Alexis_Jazz - Jcb (talk) 22:06, 8 December 2018 (UTC)