User talk:Lycaon

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


Copyright status: File:Bottle-tree(flowers).jpg[edit]

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | slovenščina | svenska | українська | ಕನ್ನಡ | ತುಳು | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Bottle-tree(flowers).jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the OTRS system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Yours sincerely, JuTa 22:14, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Lula - foto oficial05012007 edit.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg
File:Lula - foto oficial05012007 edit.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 | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

~nmaia d 15:30, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Unblock[edit]

Unblock request declined

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators has reviewed and declined this request. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not override the decision without discussion.

Request reason: "per this recent conversation"
Decline reason: "Yann below is correct and is the only policy-based comment here; our requirement is an acknowledgement of the issue and a credible commitment to discontinue. Disruption occurred (at least) over a period of almost two years (Biopics account blocked 09.2015; Z440Xeon account blocked 06.2017) and the use of at least five accounts over such a period--a blatant and contemptuous disregard for our policies, to say nothing of fairness (vote stacking)--suggests a defect not expected to be remedied with such a meagre passage of time. "Blocked by a rogue admin after having done many constructive uploads and edits. Can not even edit own talk page" takes no responsibility, indicates no understanding, and provides no commitment. Эlcobbola talk 19:04, 24 September 2018 (UTC)"
Administrators: This template should be removed when the block has expired.
(Block log)
(unblock)
(Change local status for a global block)
(contribs)

Deutsch | English | Español | Suomi | Français | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Македонски | Plattdüütsch | Português | Русский | Simple English | Svenska | 中文(臺灣) | +/−

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment As far as I know Biopics get blocked for two reasons.
1. He tagged another user's file for OTRS permissions. This, in fact, not fully wrong as FredD's uploads had many issues that we had pointed out many times that he ignored. It was corrected only recently.
2. Biopics may felt neglected as his voice get silenced. He posted a "retired" message on his talk and made some disturbing courtesy deletion requests on his own works. Then INC blocked him.
The second behavior is not acceptable. The first one should be in a more collaborative way. If Biopics is willing to accept community expectations I'm very happy to welcome him back. He is a great contributor with great knowledge in biology. Jee 02:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
I join Jeee's welcome message. Biopics can count on our goodwill and he knows that we will be attentive to his work. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:07, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

There is also a history of sockpuppet voting and other disruption (block log). @Túrelio, Yann, Steinsplitter: My opinion is that this was all a long time ago, and we should give Lycaon another chance. However, you dealt with this user firsthand, so you might have a different perspective. Guanaco (talk) 19:59, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I would like to see a rationale for unblocking: acknowledgement of past issues, commitment for the future, etc. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:19, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Apologies if I chip in where admins are at work, and I admit ignorance of all details at stake. Personally I would love to see User:Lycaon back in action, and delighted if he has an interest in returning. Experienced his contributions and interactions as way positive, commons and the world being the beneficiaries of his work so far. Energy, interest and contributions go to waste if this user is excluded. JMK (talk) 06:15, 13 November 2018 (UTC)