This user is an administrator.
This user has a bot.
Email this user.

User talk:Billinghurst

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


Je suis Charlie
"Da mihi basium"
System-users.svgThis user has an alternate account named SDrewthbot.

Your revert[edit]

Hi sysop, you thought it funny to revert my request at Peroxisome ua.png? Whithout any explanation why you did not like my edit? The least courtesy had been a short reasoning. I understand the rules - also valid for sysops! - that when you do not want a speedy-delete, you may change it to a delete discussion. May be that you are sufferung of too much boring time, but sure you looked not carefully enough to understand. Actions like this, reverting instead of helping, cause the widespread animosity against admins.
You may revert this contribution, too. -- sarang사랑 07:38, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

You found a redirect on a file, and then used a template with a link to information about speedy deletes and gave me somecommentary about "outdated". Have you read the policy? [Note that it was linked from edit page to be helpful]. If you have a question about the implementation of the policy then come back and ask, but please don't give me the injured party or unhelpful sysop drivel. Help:Redirect is also good guidance. Redirects are cheap.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:46, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for the detailed reasoning. One or two words at your revert had been helpful. I am still thinking that speedy deletion is justified but I can do it otherwise -- sarang사랑 08:33, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
You have not identified a valid reason to speedy delete.  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:37, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Magellan cross renovation02.jpg[edit]

Commons never had a file with that name. There was a file uploaded to enwiki and cebwiki and then deleted for lack of licensing information. I found it in a cebwiki page, and because it was protected I couldn't edit it to replace the deleted file, so I created a redirect to another file depicting the subject of the article. I subsequently found I could edit the page, and replaced it. I also found that the original file probably depicted the kiosk, and not the cross. Peter James (talk) 08:56, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

@Peter James: okay, it was showing up as used, and we don't delete redirects in use. I have removed the usage at the cebWP.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:50, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

File:-View of J. Couglan & Sons Ship yards in False Creek destroyed by fire- (5456680773).jpg[edit]

I used flickr2commons to upload the flickr image at https://www.flickr.com/photos/vancouver-archives/5456680773/

Once flickr2common had uploaded it under the standardized name flickr2commons supplied "File:-View of J. Couglan & Sons Ship yards in False Creek destroyed by fire- (5456680773).jpg", I would have considered renaming it something more descriptive.

But, having uploaded it, I found it was a duplicate, so I marked it as a duplicate.

I expected a redirect to be preserved, from the deleted new version -- but you deleted it.

May I point out flickr2commons won't allow an image to be uploaded, again, if a file -- or a redirect -- already exists? If the redirect is deleted this protection against uploading duplicates won't work. May I suggest this is a very strong reason to not delete the redirect?

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 03:56, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

<meh> recently uploaded files as duplicates will often just get deleted, just easier and quicker. There is no perfect.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:01, 9 April 2021 (UTC)